Economically, all pharmaceutical companies are at the mercy of their
investors(public or private). Thus, it is an imperative they make a
profit.
If you regard fear of litigation as an ethical imperative, then one
can make the case that pharmaceutical companies have an ethical
obligation to make safe and effective medications to treat disease.
Otherwise, they are only obliged to satisfy the FDA.
If the pharmaceutical company is making FDA approved medications, they
are obligated by the FDA, to make drugs that improve the standard of
care for a set patients, and that appear safe based on a logical set
of clinical trials. Otherwise their drug will not be approved, and
investors get grumpy.
Before clinical testing, they must convince an IND(Investigative New
Drug- panel of medical professionals(FDA again)) that the medication
is safe for human consumption, and has a reasonable chance of success
in clinical trials, However, they have no ethical obligation to
guarantee that indeed this is so.
On an individual level however, all scientists have an ethical
obligation to report the data they get, irrespective of how good or
bad it is. This data is generally reviewed by a group of peers, but
not always before it reaches an IND application.
The assumption when presenting data to an FDA panel is that all of the
data is inclusive, accurate, and open to scrutiny. |
