The winner takes it all
We all make mistakes from time to time. I have made my fair share, but none of my mistakes have ever won a prize. In 2002 Lundbeck breached the UK industry code of practice in the way it advertised escitalopram (Cipralex). Escitalopram is the son of citalopram (Cipramil). The company claimed that it...
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Caricamento...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Pubblicazione: |
BMJ Publ.
2005
|
| In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Anno: 2005, Volume: 31, Fascicolo: 5, Pagine: 267 |
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Riepilogo: | We all make mistakes from time to time. I have made my fair share, but none of my mistakes have ever won a prize. In 2002 Lundbeck breached the UK industry code of practice in the way it advertised escitalopram (Cipralex). Escitalopram is the son of citalopram (Cipramil). The company claimed that its new drug, escitalopram was more effective than citalopram, even though the two drugs have exactly the same active ingredient.1 The company was found to have breached the industry code, mainly by stating that “Cipralex is significantly more effective than Cipramil in treating depression”. The company also attributed side effects to citalopram in its literature on escitalopram that were not mentioned … |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
| Comprende: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/jme.2004.010116 |