|
Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (11/16/2008 8:55:56 PM)
|
quote:
The US Senate Finance Committee charges that Stanford University failed to properly monitor alleged conflicts of interest involving Alan Schatzberg, who chairs the psychiatry department at Stanford University and who owns about $6 million in stock in Corcept Therapeutics, which participates in a National Institutes of Health study he oversees. ... In the past, The San Jose Mercury News writes that Schatzberg insisted he is not directly involved in recruiting or testing patents, and discloses his financial interest in paper and talks. However, in remarks and a letter to Stanford published on 23 June in the Congressional Record, Grassley noted that Stanford requires that Schatzberg disclose stock valued at more than $100,000. Yet Stanford didn’t require him to report profit of $109,000 by selling some Corcept shares in 2005, inform the school that his remaining 2.7 million shares are now worth about $5.8 million. ... There were other examples of incomlete disclosure cited by Grassley, including in 2002, when Schatzberg didn’t report any income from Johnson & Johnson, but the drugmaker reported to Senate investigators that Schatzberg was paid $22,000 that year. And in 2004, Schatzberg reported receiving between $10,000 to $50,000 from Lilly, while the drugamker reported that Schatzberg was paid more than $52,000 that year. Senate Targets Stanford Psychiatrist Over Conflicts Conflicts of Interest at Stanford: the Mifespristone Studies I suspect this kinda thing happens a lot more than we think quote:
an ‘inconclusive’ 2002 study in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry on AstraZeneca’s Seroquel was used to devise guidelines for treating bipolar disorder with antipsychotics. The lead author was Melissa DelBello, a University of Cincinnati professor, who in 2003 received more than $100,000 from AZ, which sells Seroquel and paid her $80,000 in 2004. ... DelBello later reported $100,000 in outside income to the university between 2005 and 2007, although AZ says she was paid $238,000. She collected from other drugmakers, too. ... Whatever the real numbers, there’s another issue - DelBello receives grant money from the National Institutes of Health and, as Grassley noted, “universities are supposed to monitor conflicts of interest when their researchers receive NIH grants.” ... The NIH, however, is apparently loathe to do so. Last month, Norka Ruiz Bravo, the NIH deputy director for extramural research, told The New York Times that “for us to try to manage directly the conflict-of-interest of an N.I.H. investigator would be not only inappropriate but pretty much impossible.” She added that “I think (the system) is working to the extent that people are being honest and I think most people are honest.” ... A University of Cincinnati spokesman, Richard Puff, promised to get back to us, but so far hasn’t. What Conflict? The NIH And A Bucket Of Money If it's truly impossible to try to remove conflicts of interest from the system, then why should I trust anything the system tells me? Because the system works to the extent that people are honest and those who control and operate the system allege they are honest? If they are so honest, then why do so many of them lie about how much money they receive? Those who are found to be dishonest (ie: those who lie about how much money they receive) need to be heavily sanctioned and their punishments need to be publicly announced to set an example for anyone else who would even consider being dishonest.
|
|
|
|