Let's start with the studies that aren't published. Some companies will tell you that "Our scientists have shown...". My questions are:
1) If their scientists hadn't "shown" that the product worked, would they still have a job tomorrow? I never trust studies that are not run by an independent scientist at a major university or research organization.
2)) If the study was really well designed, how come it was never published? If the study was valid, it should be able to stand up to the rigors of peer review that are required for publication in scientific journals.
But just because a company tells you that their study has been published doesn't mean that it's a valid study. There are "advertising journals" that will publish any study that you submit as long as you pay them enough.
After I first mentioned that fact several years ago, I received an email that I thought would be worth sharing
with you (The names have been changed to protect the not-so-innocent).
"You mentioned that many supplement companies will say they have published research in medical journals when
in fact the information is published in an advertising journal with a medical-sounding name.
I know for a fact that this is true. Let me tell you of a personal experience in 1998. Because of my pharmaceutical and vitamin manufacturing industry background working in a doctors office, I have always had to be somewhat of a "sleuth" to uncover which manufacturers are
truthful. Because of many industry secrets I uncovered during that previous career, I guess I have become a skeptic.
Anyway, in April 1998 an acquaintance of mine here in town participated in a Wellness Expo I organized for my chamber of commerce. She represented XXX encapsulated powders that claim to be concentrated fruits and vegetables.
She claimed her products had been clinically tested and gave me a copy of a reprint to read entitled "American Medical Review, April 1996, Volume 2, Issue #4" that listed 4 articles on the front cover but when you opened it there was only a one page article about XXX. No author, no footnotes, no reference information. Poorly written!
It claimed studies had been done by "an independent laboratory" and "a prominent pathologist" but didn't give names, etc. When I told her this was weak information, she said, "Well, look at the name! It's a medical journal! It must be accurate information!"
So, I called the phone number for this American Medical Review. The receptionist answered the phone "MAK
Enterprises." MAK turned out to be the initials of the publisher Mark YYY.
Through my sleuthing, I actually got to talk to Mark (he thought I was a potential advertiser) and he told me the American Medical Review was an advertising journal. NOT A MEDICAL JOURNAL. If I were looking to publish an article about my company and would agree to his prices and terms, I could publish my proposed article (of course I had made this whole thing up to get him to talk to me).
The sad thing is so many companies intentionally mislead their employees, their independent distributors, their reps, and their consumers all the time, just to make a buck."
Her email says it all!
By the way, you don't have go to the lengths that she did to distinguish between a real scientific journal and an advertising journal.
The National Library of Medicine keeps an online database of all scientific journals in the medical area (where clinical studies would be published) called PubMed. Just Google PubMed. You'll find it.
If the journal isn't listed there, it's probably an advertising journal.
