This was bound to happen. US Senator Chuck Grassley has asked the National Institutes of Health to justify a decision earlier this month to award a $2 million research grant to Charles Nemeroff, the University of Miami medical school psychiatry chair, who has been at the center of a far-reaching probe into conflicts of interest involving academic researchers and the pharmaceutical industry.
As reported last week, the recent grant to Nemeroff was made three years after the former Emory University psychiatry department chair was sanctioned for failing to disclose that he had accepted $1.2 million in payments from GlaxoSmithKline (back story). At the time, he was also the primary investigator for a National Institutes of Health study of the Paxil antidepressant, which is sold by the drugmaker.
Those details emerged thanks to a Grassley investigation into undisclosed conflicts over concerns that such relationships may unduly influence medical research and practice. In response, the NIH suspended a $9.3 million, five-year grant that Nemeroff held for a depression study at Emory and the university barred him from applying for NIH funding for two years (back story). Nemeroff left Emory for the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, prompting concern that he would become eligible for new grants since the ban did not extend to his new position.
The probe was later extended to the National Institute of Mental Health after director Tom Insel was found to have assured the University of Miami that Nemeroff would again be eligible for research grants. Despite the controversy, the NIH last year gutted a provision in proposed conflict-of-interest rules that would have required universities to disclose financial ties between academic researchers and industry on publicly accessible web sites.
And so, Grassley is ticked off about the latest grant. "Although NIH has recently revamped its conflict of interest guidelines, this decision risks sending the wrong message to physicians seeking or performing federally funded research," he writes the NIH director Francis Collins in a letter today. "...It’s troubling that NIH continues to provide limited federal dollars to individuals who have previously had grant funding suspended for failure to disclose conflicts of interest and even more troubling that the administration chose not to require full, open, and public disclosure of financial interests on a public website."
Grassley, in fact, goes on to note that Nemeroff remains under investigation by the US Department of Health & Human Services Office of the Inspector General, which is working with the US Department of Justice. The OIG investigation was completed, he addes, but there is no word yet on whether the DOJ will take any action before releasing the OIG report. "So, there has been no final resolution by DOJ or public finding by HHS OIG related to the investigation of Dr. Nemeroff," Grassley fumes, "yet, NIH awarded him another grant."
Consequently, Grassley wants Collins to explain whether his staff was aware Nemeroff is under federal investigation and, if so, why the NIH awarded the grant and whether the issue was discussed with the HHS OIG or the DOJ. And if there was no discussion, why not? He also wants to know about the peer reviewers for the Nemeroff grant and if they were aware of potential conflicts and the federal investigation. And again, if not, why not? And finally, Grassley asks if the the NIH has safeguards and procedures to detect and deny grant applicants who have been convicted of a felony? (here is the letter).
35 Comments
Nothing strange about it. It's the natural course of allowing Industry to Become Government. When we have State Universities on the take for $100 Million in ahhhm, Research Grants from drug companies the entire System extends the Professional Courtesy of turning a blind eye to in house indiscretions and outright crimes.
Public and Private monies have to be separated. So long as Industry is allowed to Buy State Universities, we're going to keep getting Charlies. and NIMHs too.
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2011/05/nimh-violence-initiative-junk-medicine.html
To paraphrase Cicero:
"For what possible use should you keep such a treacherous and savage institution?"
It's great that Grassley's on this, but Charlie's just one guy. And even the US Senate can't keep him out of the till.
What will it take to shut down the NIMH?
You're probably correct and that is a sad state of affairs. Great example NIH is setting for others.
1) Voting against extension of the Violence Against Women Act.
2) Voting to allow detention of US citizens without trial
3) Voting against repeal of "Dont Ask, Don't Tell"
4) Voted in favor of allowing loaded handguns in US National Parks
5) Voted against reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program
6) Voted against ending a filibuster against a bill requiring campaign contribution disclosures
7) Voted against the 2010 healthcare reform bill. (His largest campaign contributors are health insurance companies)
Numeroff may be an ass, but Grassley has done by far more damage.
I'd like to say I'm mystified by your laundry list of gripes with Sen Grassley, but sadly, i'm not. Do you refer to yourself as a Liberal, or are you a Progressive?
1: VAWA was the brain storm of Joe Biden. 2: Detention of Citizens sans Trial: Junk Medicine's been doing it for decades already, what's your beef? Is it OK so long as it's Reimbursable through CMS? 3: Against repeal of don't ask, don't tell. Isn't this in the Military? And don't they have more important things to do with their time? 4: Loaded handguns in National Parks. Last count I took had 22,311 "Infringements" piled on top of the Law "Shall Not Be Infringed". and the major cities with the strictest gun bans have the most gun violence because of it. 5: CHIP, when it's funding mind control poisonings of kids, and violations of their Civil Rights, by mental medicine. 6:Campaign Contribution Disclosures? Didn't that hogwash from McCain already have that problem covered? 7: PPACA?
I've only done 38 posts on PPACA so far, unless this is a Different 2010 healthcare reform bill you're upset about.
Are you even Aware that our National Debt currently exceeds our GDP?
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/search/label/ObamaCare
The pills Nemeroff helped to promote sales of did by far more damage than good...
This is the point. Nemeroff is a danger to society due to his MD status and abuse of the word "ethics". His non disclosures, his promotion of Paxil for money from GSK; people like him should be removed from all things "science and medicine" before more harm happens to innocent patients.
He is just an example of one. (this is my opinion)
Welcome to American science and medicine!
One would think that Tom Insel would be ridden out on a rail, and that Nemeroff would soon be excused by his medical school. But as we know of that poisoner of children Biederman, this will probably not be the case.
How many more dead will it take before we wake up from this terrible nightmare?
The fact is, Senator Grassley is an architect of an overwhelmingly bipartisan effort to rid our government of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of fraud: the modernization of Lincoln's law - the Federal False Claims Act. If you want to find out more about this highly successful law, I suggest you google the Taxpayers Against Fraud organization.
Anyone who opposes efforts to expose healthcare fraud against US government funds is going to find very few friends on Capitol Hill - on either side of the aisle.
Republican = ass
Why waste valuable brain power when it's so much easier to regurgitate political talking points? Not a single explanation is presented as to why Grassley's votes make him an ass. All the enlightened folks support these things after all. In John's world, Grassley's votes indicates he's not only wrong, he must be evil.
So what about the actual issue at hand? Grassley is one of the few that have actually questioned the rampant crony capitalism amongst pharma and state-funded organizations. Shouldn't that make him a hero amongst the "Occupy" types? Or is that only reserved for those with a "D" after their names?
This R bashing is devolving into a bad, summer stock road show of Hamlet. Nixon, for better or worse, is residing wherever in your own mind, you wish him to reside. Nixon is beyond the ability to cause or cover up any recrudescence of Watergate.
National Socialist Healthcare however, with its built in, lethal corruption is as Gene Wilder put it in Young Frankenstein;
"It's Alive!"
And unless it's stopped, it will eat us alive.
http://blog.heritage.org/tag/ppaca/
26 State Attorneys General have taken it to the US Supreme Court citing 10th Amendment grounds.
Have we become so blinded by party that we've forgotten what happened the last time the Country entrenched and we all went to the mat over the 10th Amendment?
Or would you prefer it if I tossed a D and his folly into the Nixon bashing?
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
@ Jeff C
"Shouldn’t that make him a hero amongst the “Occupy” types? Or is that only reserved for those with a “D” after their names?"
D**n Straight!
http://static.thepeoplescube.com/images/Occupy_Puppies_PetStore.jpg
Though I wonder why this particular remark provoked such ire, when this website is filled daily with comments containing extreme statements like the one below, which are not only undocumented, but contradicted by the results of scores of randomized double blind multicenter clinical trials.
"Those labelled with a mental health problem now have a greater chance of dying young than in any other country on the planet, thanks to pharma drugs."
It may well be the the mentally ill in this country die younger than in other countries (I've seen no data on this), but if so, do you think it might have something to do with the cuts in social programs that leave so many living in the street? Can anyone comment on Senator Grassley's voting record on programs for the mentally ill?
No one goes to Grassley for a prescription.
There's a roughly 65 year old woman (e.g, an INDIVIDUAL) living in the Westwood district of LA. She sleeps in a bus shelter every night. She has to sleep sitting up because the bench is designed to keep the homeless (mostly mentally ill) from lying down. She's been doing that for at least the last 2 years.
Whatever Numeroff may have done, I don't think you can pin the fact that this mentally ill woman (and many tens of thousands like her in LA alone) lives outdoors on him.
What Grassley's responsibility for this individual's situation is, I can't judge entirely. He's one of the most powerful members of Congress, and I don't see anything about homelessness issues on his website. Does he consistently vote to support programs for the homeless mentally ill, or does his concern for those with mental disorders extend only to those situations in which he can make political points?
" to support programs for the homeless mentally ill"
John, the 'Programs' and Psychiatric 'Interventions', Psychological BS-ings Are the problem, and the US Veterans Administration admits it.
http://www.mirecc.va.gov/visn3/education.asp
"Algorithms:
A review of existing algorithms, including VA National Guidelines, APA, the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP), and PORT was conducted. After careful consideration, a modified version of TMAP was selected, and named the New Jersey Algorithm.
The sequence includes two trials of atypical antipsychotics followed by a Clozaril trial. If no favorable response is observed, a third atypical neuroleptic is tried, followed by a typical neuroleptic, followed by a combination of antipsychotic medications. The consensus of the internal advisory committee was to provide a flexible algorithm that will allow for minor modifications as new research is disseminated. Though a positive outcome has not been observed with the NJ Algorithm to date, researchers suspect that a larger sample size might generate significant findings in the future."
"A positive outcome has not been observed to date." with all the money the US Government has wasted on the VA NJ Algorithm so far.
As compared with an up to 60% 'Positive Outcome' in undeveloped countries which can't Afford these drugs or Government Funded Programs.
"There’s a roughly 65 year old woman (e.g, an INDIVIDUAL) living in, ..... "
We can all of us cite heart breaking stories of Individuals who got a raw deal from life, but they don't mean that we should enact a policy paying for rubber sidewalks in every city so that no one with a trick knee ever gets hurt again from falling down.
And I personally have NO Problem Pinning the Tail Square onto the Psychiatric Donkey it belongs on for tens of thousands of people living in squalor and misery to support research designed to sell even More, drug peddling, misery Causing, Psychiatric FRAUD.
"I don’t see anything about homelessness issues on his website"
Where in the Constitution is anyone guaranteed a roof over their head and 3 square meals a day? It's the Govt seizure and redistribution of wealth which Creates Homelessness.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/47631154
America LOST 129,000 Millionaires in 2011 because of the uncertainty from the "It's Government's Duty to provide everything for everyone" con job which most of Congress panders for votes with.
Mental Health programs are putting 1 out of every 15 College age Americans onto lifetime SSI/SSDI disability payments costing $1 Million per Psychiatrically Defrauded Victim. That's an additional burden of $71,428.57 apiece for each of the remaining 14 to pay off.
At Some point America's going to have to understand that the most compassionate thing Govt can do for them is to Stop helping them out onto the street with one counterproductive, seize and redistribute, wealth destroying program after another.
John, if Wealth were a finite, closed system: IE there's only so much of it which we must redistribute more fairly, where did the wealth now in existence originally come from?
In light of it ALL, is what Nemeroff is getting money to investigate of any value in addressing the problem(s)?
Is there no one else on the planet capable of doing basic research that delivers immediate improvement?
Plagues, bacteria, viruses that fell millions in a pop are the MANDATE that a government institution is to be concerned with as a health agency. Psychiatry doesn't fall into that mandate - never did and never will.
After milleniums of war, not to have a handle on post-war "issues" is absurd.
Wealth distribution - let me see, 300 grapefruit on the tree, now what? Who do you call, the politician, the psychiatrist, the banker, the thief? They'll all have an opinion, that's a certainty. Will any of them deign to put on the gloves, grab the scissors and start picking? Nope. But they'll sure come up with a reason why the person who watered and nurtured the tree and picked the fruit and figured out the fair barter scheme with the rest of the tribe who have something to trade, also, should in the end get the least amount of fruit - if any at all.
Nemeroff and his Psychiatric Ilk ARE the PROBLEM.
Opinions, Psychiatric or otherwise do Not contravene Rights, and yet our Courts still allow them to get away with it.
Read the Bill of Rights. Real Rights are Negative Rights: Government Shall NOT!!!!
Examine the Ca Welfare and Institutions Code http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=wic&group=05001-06000&file=5325-5337
5325
"Each person, ....... shall have the following rights,"
(2) Modification of normal brain function or normal brain tissue in order to control thoughts, feelings, actions, or behavior.
Now, WHO is it whose actually circling Pluto?
How can a Psychiatric Illness even Exist when the Legislature has Codified into legislatively binding existence the admission that Psychiatry itself is a FRAUD, and they Know it?
If Normal brain Tissue and Normal brain Function are in play, there is NO Illness.
And not Only that it's a FRAUD, but the Chuckheads in Sacramento codified the 'Modification' (read Damage) of Normal Tissue and Normal function into some sort of a Right.
This type of bought and paid for stupidity is where I draw the line.
This is what a Positive Right, like the Right to Government Healthcare which spawned, and continues to nourish Psychiatry, looks like.
It's called FRAUD.
I laughed, ashamed to say, even though it is not funny what they come up with in California. There is some entrenched *idea* out there about mind control that keeps morphing - and ever since Jim Jones and Jonestown, and then SillyCon Valley fiasco, it's best to keep an eye on that State - especially in times of great economic flux.
It's the Food and Drug Administration - food safety and proper manufacturing of medicines/devices. A very focused mission for pubic monies based on common sense. And more than enough problems to solve doing its core mission.
Nemeroff doesn't deserve the privilege of receiving public funding to pursue some speculation that his own rather questionable mind concocted about genetic pre-dispositions to post traumatic disorder. Let him go after some of the *dark money* floating around - I'm sure all he needs to do is change one word in the thesis and then hit both sides for funding.
Genetic Predispositions. More FRAUD
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=384
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020212
We're Still Funding Junk Research into genetic predispositions of depression.
With Suicide being the ultimate manifestation of depression it fails to occur to the people being defrauded into paying the researchers that:
If Depression were Genetically Heritable, it would have Already Suicided itself out of the human gene pool thousands of years ago.
I think the point of their research is about discovering how to get large swaths of similar personality types to commit suicide - like Jim Jones tried with cult programming...
you are correct that a gene pool pre-disposed to suicide is a statistically insignificant number at this point in time - not worth the award of research funding to a person pre-disposed to provide cherry picked data for those paying him.
Cut and pasted from wiki:
Proposed DSM III-R criteria Sadistic personality disorder is: A) A pervasive pattern of cruel, demeaning, and aggressive behavior, beginning by early adulthood, as indicated by the repeated occurrence of at least four of the following: Has used physical cruelty or violence for the purpose of establishing dominance in a relationship (not merely to achieve some non-interpersonal goal, such as striking someone in order to rob him/her). Humiliates or demeans people in the presence of others. Has treated or disciplined someone under his/her control unusually harshly. Is amused by, or takes pleasure in, the psychological or physical suffering of others (including animals). Has lied for the purpose of harming or inflicting pain on others (not merely to achieve some other goal). Gets other people to do what he/she wants by frightening them (through intimidation or even terror). Restricts the autonomy of people with whom he or she has a close relationship, e.g., will not let spouse leave the house unaccompanied. Is fascinated by violence, weapons, injury, or torture. B) The behavior in A has not been directed toward only one person (e.g., spouse, one child) and has not been solely for the purpose of sexual arousal (as in sexual sadism). [edit]Exclusion from DSM-IV This disorder was dropped from DSM-IV for two reasons:[4] because of scientific concerns, such as the relatively low prevalence rate of the disorder in many settings for political reasons - sadistic personalities are most often male and it was felt that any such diagnosis might have the paradoxical effect of legally excusing cruel behaviour. Sexual sadism that "causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning" is still in DSM-IV. [edit]Millon's subtypes Theodore Millon identified four subtypes of sadist. [4][5] Any individual sadist may exhibit none, one or more of the following: explosive sadist - including borderline features tyrannical sadist - including negativistic (passive-aggressive) features enforcing sadist - including compulsive features spineless sadist - including avoidant features.
Yeah, and this piece of Ooogian work is widely regarded as a road map to spiritual salvation, internal peace and invoked as a Clinical Determinant to rule on the mental fitness of others.
Can I get away with the expression "Pot calling the kettle black?" or would that be diagnosable as racist today?
http://psychroaches.blogspot.com/2010/11/rams-cultural-crapulence-in-san.html
And by all means don't miss the Performance Audit Memo at the end.
Frankly, I'm surprised Wiki wasn't sued for Copyright Violation for printing DSM stuff. Maybe the copyright expired.
And so the "idea" that the money can be used to solve the problem, instead, is what? Politcially incorrect?