The CDC left us with a huge mess last year with its Guidelines for prescription of opioid medications to adult non-cancer chronic pain patients.
But, if you look deeper, it wasn’t a simple mess.
It would seem that the agency’s conclusions, supposedly based on sound studies, were decided in advance and preordained. This would then add malfeasance to the stupidity that they have already displayed in spades.
Red Lawhern explains.
In recent months, a rising chorus of complaints has sounded on the March 2016 CDC Guidelines for prescription of opioid medications to adult non-cancer chronic pain patients.
As a wise writer once informed us, “you can get data to say almost anything if you torture them for long enough”. This is precisely what the CDC has done.
Now comes yet another paper in the November 2016 issue of Pain Medicine which goes even further, to demonstrate what may be deliberate malfeasance and bias. The work is titled “Durations of Opioid, Nonopioid Drug, and Behavioral Clinical Trials for Chronic Pain: Adequate or inadequate?”
The finding of this independent assessment is that CDC writers applied a criterion for weeding out studies of opioid effectiveness that they did not apply to non-opioid and behavioral treatments which they recommended in preference to opioids.
CDC eliminated all studies of opioids which lasted less than a year, but failed to apply the same criterion to non-opioid therapies.
the Guidelines seem designed to deliberately confuse an artificially created “absence of proof” for opioid effectiveness, with “proof of absence” for effectiveness.
It appears that the CDC set out to discredit the effectiveness of opioids in long term use — regardless of the available evidence — using a scientifically invalid process called “cherry picking.”
The earlier systematic review of the effectiveness and efficacy of opioids was based upon the best available evidence, and identified dozens of clinical trials and systematic reviews of this topic
earlier reviews concluded that selected, carefully monitored patients might benefit from such therapy [opioid therapy].
However, this conclusion was totally absent from the 2016 guidelines.
In other words, the writers of the CDC standards appear to have biased their report to support a political agenda.
It is time for the CDC to withdraw a fallacious opioid treatment standard which is causing great harm, and to start the project over.
I’m very proud to have my own post referenced as a source for the article:
“CDC Manipulated Data to Deceive” – by Zyp Cyk, in “EDS Info (Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome)”, quoting at length from “Durations of Opioid, Nonopioid Drug and Behavioral Clinical trials for Chronic Pain”