Two years ago, Damian Laber joined the University of Oklahoma School of Community Medicine in Tulsa as a professor and chief of hematology, and he was tasked with building programs at its cancer center (
see this). But his stint is ending prematurely. Last week, the university reprimanded Laber for receiving more than 200 times the annual $100 limit from a company registered as a lobbying principal with the state.Which company? Laber was accused of accepting $27,800 from Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, according to an Ethics Commission report (here it is). At least some of the money was for speaking fees during the fourth quarter of 2010; he joined the university in August 2010. And so, his employment contract is not being renewed. "His employment at the university will end no later than June 30," an OU spokeswoman tells the Associated Press. "The University of Oklahoma takes ethics guidelines very seriously, and it is the policy of the university to abide by all of those guidelines."
In his defense, Laber maintained he was unaware of the $100 annual limit that a state employee can receive from lobbyist principals, or companies that hire lobbyists and provide money to buy things of value to influence state employees and legislators, according to the discipline report released by the state Ethics Commission, the AP writes. He also insisted he was unaware of state ethics rules, and arrived from a state without similar restrictions. As a result, he merely continued his speaking obligations, which he added, began before moving to Oklahoma.
The Ethics Commission report notes that his conduct was not intentional and that Laber stopped making promotional speeches after he was told of the ethics issue. But as we know, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. We have contacted the state Ethics Commission for a copy of the report and will provide a link as soon as we are able.






7 Comments
sadly, in this day and age, a sitting judge on the nation's highest court can claim he 'didn't understand' disclosure forms and get away with it.
And of course Nemeroff needs to go. And and and...
In this case, in particular, the good doctor with the relationship with Novartis may have an undue "preference" for using Novartis assays/diagnostics. This could be perceived as a problem.
A more apt call for dismissals would be against Air Force Generals who award contracts with certain suppliers who may employ their relatives, or who wish to employ the General (or Generals) after retirement.
There would not have seemed to be a problem if Novartis (a Swiss company) had kept their noses out of the Oklahoma State House, and let Oklahomans decide (without the benefit of wisdom from Basel) what laws and policies were useful to Oklahoma. I am not concerned that Dr. Laber may fail to land on his feet...
Seems like the focus for a decade at Novartis was on politics, not science, and, like J&J, manufacturing and pipelines went downhill, fast...
No longer do the locals consider a big pharma in their backyard to be a good neighbor....for a whole slew of reasons....