How so?
Just that there seems to be alot of manipulation of efficacy data (withheld data, late studies etc.) across the entire pharmaceutical industry. The Vioxx case, of course, comes to mind...Another, in my opinion would be the Vaxgen HIV vacine that was allowed to "skip" some crucial trials. Scientifically, everyone knew the vaccine was going to tank based on the structure of the antigen and that's why NIH gave up on it..but the company was shrewd and went from a small no name company to a recognized company by continuing the work, then got a sweet governent Anthrax contract before the HIV vaxcine results crapped out. Another thing, is that the pharmaceutical companies (smaller ones in particular) are now outsourcing their clinical trials to 3rd world countries to reduce cost...Now tell me, that's not gonna make the problem worse?!...Lastly, I also hear stuf that I keep to myself...
Aside from the above, I am skeptical of the "direct advertizing" going on, which puts patient pressure on physicians to prescribe certain medication, often with razor thin marginal benefits over placebo. If you ever get physician samples, read the statistical data in the package inserts...For some drugs, it's a total waste. But of course so little numbers of drugs have been comming through the pipeline, the industry has to rely on direct advertizing and there's pressure on everyone, physician, insurance, FDA to get more drugs approved. I believe it was the WSJ (two years ago) where I read that industry dividend payouts were 10 times R&D investment for that year. Look at the crap they're marketing..."restless legs syndromes!?!?! For cryin' ouy loud. For the industry, it's still all about "consolidation" and slick marketing for these "amorphous syndromes".
Don't get me wrong, generally speaking, despite its problems, I think the FDA is one of the better governmental organizations.
Now, as for the Barr labs in particular, should anyone trust a company that puts babies in buckets?