もうほとんどの人が忘れていると思うけど、去年はこんな問題があった。これについてランセットにレターのやり取りがあった。この問題が提議され、朝日新聞からの反論が出ている。
それについて僕が書いたレターが以下のもの。ランセットにはrejectされたのでここに載せる。レターに対するレターに対するレターじゃ、厳しいかなあと思ってたけどやっぱだめでしたね。形式的にテクニカルに正しくても文脈やインプリケーションを無視した報道は問題でしょうという論旨です。テクニカルに正しければよい、、、という物書きなら、電話帳でも作っていた方がよいと思う。
Sharing information on adverse events.
Kentaro Iwata, MD MSc
Division of Infectious Diseases Therapeutics. Kobe University Graduate School of
Medicine, Kobe, Japan
Omuta rebutted the letter by Yuji et al1, on a report by Asahi Shimbun, stating "It is
highly regrettable that you ran the letter by Koichiro Yuji (snip) which labels a report that
ran in Asahi Shimbun as 'misleading'"2. Omuta wrote "nothing in the article indicates
confusion between adverse event and a complication", and "Asahi Simbun merely
stated that the Declaration of Helsinki was developed as a response to human
experiments carried out by the Nazis--it did not liken the clinical researchers to the
Nazis".
Omuta misinterpreted the word "misleading" as inaccurate. Despite there was no
protocol violation in the trial and there was no obligation in the researchers to report
single adverse event to others outside the trial, the news was covered at the front page
of Asahi Shimbun with the corresponding editorial. There was no need to bring up a
word "Nazis" in the editorial since Declaration of Helsinki is irrelevant to this incidence.
The report and the editorial by Asahi Shimbun were accurate in a superficial sense, but
were still "misleading" by implying something very evil was conducted by researchers.
This kind of deliberate connotation covered with superficial accuracy will not aid in
developing trust between media and medical researchers in Japan, not to mention
patients.
There is no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Yuji K, Narimatsu H, Tanimoto T, Komatsu T, Kami M. Sharing information on
adverse events. Lancet 2011; 377: 1654.
2. Omuta T. Sharing information on adverse events. Lancet 2011; 378: 483.
コメント