[lbo-talk] re: Doug Henwood's Critique of Gary Null

[Hari Kumar]

James W:
"It is also very true that negative trials are seldom reported (it in all forms of medicine) and many even shelved before any results are finalized.  It would be easy to make the semantic leap and say this is is not science but that is where things get tricky.  Many people are skeptical of science rightly (and this is the root of quackery) because even clinical trials are intimately influenced by marketing."

Totally correct, and this as you know, lies at the heart of meta-analysis (Attempts to summate many differing trials). However it should be emphasized that the vast number of negative trials that are drawered, are those done by drug companies. 
This is far less of a problem that trials by independent researchers. 

Doug asked re the patenting of potentially useful agents. In history, some drugs were Old Quacks Tales - but carried a 'grain' of truth. Hence aspirin & digitalis. 
The situation is much rarer now I suspect that there are indeed putative 'good agents'. Plus, the explosion of biotechnology using molecular techniques has somewhat changed the situation. However, I do seem to recall that various plants in threatened areas such as the Amazon were being 'snapped' up & 'patented' Cannot recall my source for that. 
H