举报人:一个人如何试图阻止一家著名的癌症中心抑制一种有效的治疗方法

IF 0.9 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Ignacio Castuera
{"title":"举报人:一个人如何试图阻止一家著名的癌症中心抑制一种有效的治疗方法","authors":"Ignacio Castuera","doi":"10.1111/ajes.12480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>While working at Sloan Kettering Institute (SKI) in the 1970s, Ralph Moss discovered that the top research scientist there was impressed with the anti-cancer properties of amygdalin, the synthetic form of which is laetrile. At that time, laetrile was a topic of national interest as a low-cost way of treating cancer. It would have been big news if SKI announced that laetrile was effective in animal studies and then conducted human trials of its efficacy. But due to pressure from unknown sources, Moss’s superiors chose to publicly deny the validity of their scientist’s research. Moss and other dissenting staff tried to gain press attention for the cover-up going on at SKI, but their efforts failed. In 1979, the FDA ban on the interstate sale of laetrile was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively ending the common use of it. It has been classified by the cancer establishment as a classic case of “quackery,” meaning that those who claim it has anti-cancer properties are frauds. Thus, this case study shows how easily information about potentially effective cancer treatments can be suppressed by a handful of people in positions of authority. It also shows how politics can change the scientific information available to the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":47133,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","volume":"81 4","pages":"701-720"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Whistleblower: How One Man Tried to Stop a Famous Cancer Center from Suppressing an Effective Treatment\",\"authors\":\"Ignacio Castuera\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajes.12480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>While working at Sloan Kettering Institute (SKI) in the 1970s, Ralph Moss discovered that the top research scientist there was impressed with the anti-cancer properties of amygdalin, the synthetic form of which is laetrile. At that time, laetrile was a topic of national interest as a low-cost way of treating cancer. It would have been big news if SKI announced that laetrile was effective in animal studies and then conducted human trials of its efficacy. But due to pressure from unknown sources, Moss’s superiors chose to publicly deny the validity of their scientist’s research. Moss and other dissenting staff tried to gain press attention for the cover-up going on at SKI, but their efforts failed. In 1979, the FDA ban on the interstate sale of laetrile was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively ending the common use of it. It has been classified by the cancer establishment as a classic case of “quackery,” meaning that those who claim it has anti-cancer properties are frauds. Thus, this case study shows how easily information about potentially effective cancer treatments can be suppressed by a handful of people in positions of authority. It also shows how politics can change the scientific information available to the public.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\",\"volume\":\"81 4\",\"pages\":\"701-720\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12480\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12480","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20世纪70年代,拉尔夫·莫斯(Ralph Moss)在斯隆·凯特林研究所(Sloan Kettering Institute)工作时发现,那里的顶尖研究科学家对苦杏仁苷的抗癌特性印象深刻,苦杏仁苷的合成形式是苦杏仁素。当时,苦杏仁素作为一种低成本的治疗癌症的方法引起了国家的关注。如果SKI宣布苦杏仁素在动物实验中是有效的,然后对其功效进行人体试验,那将是一个大新闻。但由于不明来源的压力,莫斯的上级选择公开否认他们科学家研究的有效性。莫斯和其他持不同意见的员工试图引起媒体对SKI掩盖事实的关注,但他们的努力失败了。1979年,美国最高法院维持了FDA禁止州际销售苦杏仁素的禁令,有效地结束了苦杏仁素的普遍使用。它被癌症机构归类为“江湖骗术”的经典案例,这意味着那些声称它具有抗癌特性的人是骗子。因此,这个案例研究表明,关于潜在有效的癌症治疗方法的信息是多么容易被少数权威人士压制。它还显示了政治是如何改变公众可以获得的科学信息的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Whistleblower: How One Man Tried to Stop a Famous Cancer Center from Suppressing an Effective Treatment

While working at Sloan Kettering Institute (SKI) in the 1970s, Ralph Moss discovered that the top research scientist there was impressed with the anti-cancer properties of amygdalin, the synthetic form of which is laetrile. At that time, laetrile was a topic of national interest as a low-cost way of treating cancer. It would have been big news if SKI announced that laetrile was effective in animal studies and then conducted human trials of its efficacy. But due to pressure from unknown sources, Moss’s superiors chose to publicly deny the validity of their scientist’s research. Moss and other dissenting staff tried to gain press attention for the cover-up going on at SKI, but their efforts failed. In 1979, the FDA ban on the interstate sale of laetrile was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively ending the common use of it. It has been classified by the cancer establishment as a classic case of “quackery,” meaning that those who claim it has anti-cancer properties are frauds. Thus, this case study shows how easily information about potentially effective cancer treatments can be suppressed by a handful of people in positions of authority. It also shows how politics can change the scientific information available to the public.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) was founded in 1941, with support from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, to encourage the development of transdisciplinary solutions to social problems. In the introduction to the first issue, John Dewey observed that “the hostile state of the world and the intellectual division that has been built up in so-called ‘social science,’ are … reflections and expressions of the same fundamental causes.” Dewey commended this journal for its intention to promote “synthesis in the social field.” Dewey wrote those words almost six decades after the social science associations split off from the American Historical Association in pursuit of value-free knowledge derived from specialized disciplines. Since he wrote them, academic or disciplinary specialization has become even more pronounced. Multi-disciplinary work is superficially extolled in major universities, but practices and incentives still favor highly specialized work. The result is that academia has become a bastion of analytic excellence, breaking phenomena into components for intensive investigation, but it contributes little synthetic or holistic understanding that can aid society in finding solutions to contemporary problems. Analytic work remains important, but in response to the current lop-sided emphasis on specialization, the board of AJES has decided to return to its roots by emphasizing a more integrated and practical approach to knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信