Although the documents were highly suggestive (as was the lack of waivers for a number of individuals who probably should have gotten them) on their own, they did not constitute proof that NIH had been overlooking conflicts of interest.
The Office of Government Ethics is the agency in charge of setting the ethical standards of executive branch personnel. Every time an agency like NIH issues a 208(b)(3) waiver—except under "all but the most exigent circumstances"—it is required by federal regulations to consult with OGE about the waiver. I put in a FOIA request for records of any such consultations from NIH. Despite producing a number of consultation records, including one with NIH about a different kind of waiver, OGE was unable to substantiate a single instance between 2005 and late 2011 where NIH consulted with OGE regarding a 208(b)(3) waiver as required. When I asked NIH to provide evidence that it was consulting with OGE, NIH refused to do so.
Conclusion
Investigative journalists are familiar with all the techniques my class and I used to write this story. We figured out how to use existing data in new ways, as we did with the Dollars for Docs dataset, to generate leads for story ideas. Then, once we had those leads—the list of grantees and advisory committee members taking money from big pharma—we chased down documents that could help us figure out what was really going on. The answers we got were worth the effort.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.



See what we're tweeting about





2 Comments
Add CommentResearch done with donated money should be publicly owned.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPeople walk for a cure when really, what they get is outrageously expensive, dangerous and ineffective treatments. All 6 of the products listed below are J&J patented, and you can expect to pay higher insurance rates because of these products.
Diabetes -Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation-1970-Rezulin-Artificial pancreases –walk –significant increase in diagnosis since founding of charity.
Cancer-American Cancer Society- 1913-Velcade-Zytiga-walk-significant increase in diagnosis since founding of charity.
Autism-Autism Speaks, Cure Autism Now- 1995-Risperdal-arbaclofen -walk- significant increase in diagnosis since founding of charity.
I commend your professional restraint in hesitating to make accusations. However, there is ample evidence (dozens of books and articles over the last decade) that ethical oversight of research is sloppy, at best, and completely corrupt in many ways and at many levels. In my opinion, and I have been studying and writing about this issue since the 1990s, the problem begins with physicians, many of whom are ethically challenged. Even the honest ones often fail to recognize their conflicts of interest and delude themselves as to their ability to resist influence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt the level of one's own personal physician, I would urge all patients to demand information and care that is not tainted by drug company or device manufacturer money. A good physician will acknowledge that is hard to do, but will at least make an attempt.