The problem is that the whole frigging bandwagon idea of 'evidence based medicine' is that doctors jolly well should be prescribing medications for patients on the basis of the BEST EVIDENCE.

The parmaceutical companies present themselves as providing 'evidence' or 'information' but given that they cherry pick their data and employ dodgey methodological techniques etc etc etc in order to provide the BEST support for their PRE-EXISTING THEORY rather than being UNBIASED in the search for SCIENTIFIC FACT their efforts consist in MARKETING rather than in INFORMATION.

This filters through into university environments as well where medical company representatives cherry pick their data and write a report that some big-name academic signs his name to (and the thought is the academic gets a publication and the pharma companies get an 'independent' person to endorse their product - win win!!!)

Except for the consumer, of course.

How do you feel knowing that your doctor is more likely to prescribe you x over y in virtue of who brought them dinner last night or what logo on the pen they have been staring at all day or who funded their all expenses trip to greece?

I feel disgusted.

The consumer deserved better...

(And don't give me any ******** of how pharma investment is required for significant advances in medical treatments because the fact is that the MAJORITY of significant advances in medical treatments have come from truely INDEPENDENT researchers who discovered NATURALLY OCCURRING SUBSTANCES were effective and the drug companies spat the dummy because you can't patient a naturally occurring substance - e.g., lithium)....