<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: alan schatzberg</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'alan schatzberg'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22alan+schatzberg%22&t=%22alan+schatzberg%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:40:23 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Redux</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5158872&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F08%2Fquis-custodiet-ipsos-custodes-redux.html</link>
            <description>Revised HHS Rules for Conflict of Interest Fall Short

This morning NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins announced revisions to the existing 1995 regulations on objectivity in research that is funded by the Public Health Service. The focus is on significant financial interests (SFI) and on financial conflicts of interest (FCOI). The regulations illustrate the 3-way dance involving academic institutions (the grantees), NIH (the grantor) and academic scientists (the investigators). Thanks to Senator Grassley (R-Iowa) and his investigator Paul Thacker, headlined revelations in recent years about unacceptable management of FCOI at places like Stanford (Alan Schatzberg), Emory (Charles Nemeroff) and Harvard (Joseph Biederman) forced these revisions of the NIH regulations.

The general initial react...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5158872</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 23:10:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5158872</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Ghostwritten Book Mysteriously Disappears</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704956&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FPhLfP23_6gY%2F</link>
            <description>File this under The Case of The Missing Book. When last seen, Scientific Therapeutics Information was at the center of an ongoing controversy over an allegedly ghostwritten book - yes, an entire book - that was published in 1999 by the American Psychiatric Association. Funding came from a grant provided by SmithKline Beecham, which is now part of GlaxoSmithKline (back story). 
The listed co-authors were Charles Nemeroff, who chairs the psychiatry department at the University of Miami medical school, and Alan Schatzberg, who until recently chaired the psychiatry department at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Both men were at the center of a long-running probe by the US Senate Finance Committee into undisclosed conflicts of interest among academic researchers. They were also regul...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704956</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:13:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704956</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>...them or your lying eyes?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704589&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fthem-or-your-lying-eyes.html</link>
            <description>…THEM OR YOUR LYING EYES? A few days ago I discussed stonewalling by the American Psychiatric Association over charges that they were partners in a ghostwritten textbook. The issue resonated with many people, including Daniel Carlat, John Nardo, the POGO blog, Alison Bass, Ed Silverman, and others. The APA has not seen its way clear to releasing key documents that might clear up the charges. By stonewalling, the APA just does more damage to its image and credibility. They come across as uninterested in transparency, and they appear to be fighting a rearguard action to defend the indefensible. What kind of key documents could the APA have released? In our letter last January we suggested several, including the contract involving the American Psychiatric Press, the medical communications c...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704589</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 04:18:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704589</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A New Smoking Gun in the APA Textbook Fiasco</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704726&amp;cid=t_188962_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fnew-smoking-gun-in-apa-textbook-fiasco.html</link>
            <description>(Source: The Carlat Psychiatry Blog)</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704726</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:47:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704726</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Like a Bad Penny, the Nemeroff/Schatzberg &quot;Textbook&quot; Problem Returns</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684445&amp;cid=t_188962_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Flike-bad-penny-nemeroffschatzberg.html</link>
            <description>(Source: The Carlat Psychiatry Blog)</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684445</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684445</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who you gonna believe?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4676731&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fwho-you-gonna-believe.html</link>
            <description>WHO YOU GONNA BELIEVE? Ghostwriting Charges and Stonewalling at the American Psychiatric Association The American Psychiatric Association came under a searchlight this past December over allegations of ghostwriting. The story originated with a public letter from Project on Government Oversight (POGO) to the Director of NIH, and it was picked up by Duff Wilson writing in the New York Times. The book was Recognition and Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: A Psychopharmacology Handbook for Primary Care. The named authors were Charles Nemeroff, now chairman of psychiatry at the University of Miami, and Alan Schatzberg, formerly chairman of psychiatry at Stanford University. Both are well known for ethical controversy – see here and here. Soon, these allegations were being dissected in the bl...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4676731</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 04:44:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4676731</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Stanford, Taxpayer-Funded Research &amp; Disclosures</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4343331&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FMzN0NGIvnh4%2F</link>
            <description>In 2008, the US Senate Finance Committee charged that Stanford University failed to properly monitor alleged conflicts of interest involving Alan Schatzberg, the former chair of its psychiatry department, who owned a substantive amount of stock in Corcept Therapeutics, which was studying the development of mifepristone, or RU-486, for treating psychiatric depression. Beyond his stock holdings, Schatzberg was also listed as a co-patent holder for the drug, which is best known for inducing abortion, and he received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to oversee the research.
The allegation was part of a lengthy probe into the wider issue of taxpayer-funded research and undisclosed and unmonitored conflicts involving universities, academic researchers and the pharmaceutical industr...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4343331</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:26:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4343331</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Note to Nemeroff and Schatzberg: Time to Apologize</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4253210&amp;cid=t_188962_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F12%2Fnote-to-nemeroff-and-schatzberg-admit.html</link>
            <description>Two famous psychiatrists ought to understand the defense mechanism called &quot;projection.&quot; People use projection when they feel guilty about something--instead of admitting their guilt, they find somebody else to accuse. This is the key to explaining the latest twists in the scandal involving Charles Nemeroff and Alan Schatzberg.&amp;nbsp;POGO (the Project on Government Oversight) has posted letters from Nemeroff and Schatzberg's attorneys here . Ironically, the two letters are verbatim replicas of each other, and yet are signed by two different attorneys--in other words, at least one of the letters was ghostwritten! Someone should complain to the American Bar Association.&amp;nbsp;At any rate, the letters are not&amp;nbsp;completely&amp;nbsp;devoid of merit.&amp;nbsp;Both POGO and the New York Times appear to h...</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4253210</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:19:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4253210</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Impeachment: it’s about the institution, not the person</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4241687&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F12%2Fimpeachment-its-about-institution-not.html</link>
            <description>IMPEACHMENT: IT’S ABOUT THE INSTITUTION, NOT THE PERSONThe impeachment trial of Judge G. Thomas Porteous of Louisiana this week was a lesson in civic ethics. The lessons of the Porteous trial apply to academic medical centers, professional medical societies, medical journals, and granting agencies like NIH. The Porteous trial is a straightforward case of bribes, kickbacks and corruption involving a Federal judge. The most enlightening arguments came from prosecutor Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, laying out the case for impeachment in the Senate. He gave a lucid presentation of the logic and the historical origins of the impeachment process. The key points are these: impeachment serves to protect the dignity, honor, and credibility of the office more than to punish the wayward office hol...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4241687</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 09:21:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4241687</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nemeroff and Schatzberg's “Textbook” Pushed Paxil</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4230193&amp;cid=t_188962_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F12%2Fnemeroff-and-schatzbergs-textbook.html</link>
            <description>This article was eventually cited by ACCME as being blatantly biased in favor of EMSAM, and the company that produced it promptly went out of business.Not only did Nemeroff and Schatzberg omit data about Paxil's drug interaction dangers, they also neglected to discuss data available in 1999 showing that Paxil caused more sexual dysfunction, more weight gain, and more sedation than other SSRIs.To sum up, in 1999, Nemeroff and Schatzberg published a textbook called &quot;Recognition and Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: A Psychopharmacology Handbook for Primary Care.&quot; It was funded by SmithKline Beecham with a $120,000 &quot;unrestricted educational grant.&quot; Documents posted on the internet hint strongly that the book was ghostwritten by a PR firm hired by the drug company. And an analysis of the boo...</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4230193</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 16:14:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4230193</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>It's a Textbook! It's an Ad! It's Nemeroff/Schatzberg!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4214206&amp;cid=t_188962_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F11%2Fits-textbook-its-ad-its.html</link>
            <description>Drs. Nemeroff and Schatzberg are back in the limelight, once again dragging the good name of psychiatry through the mud. According to today's New York Times, in 1999 SmithKline Beecham, the maker of Paxil, funded and ghost-wrote a textbook for which this ethically-challenged duo took credit.What were they thinking?I imagine the conversation went something like this.N: &quot;Let's write a textbook for primary care doctors.&quot;S: &quot;Sounds good. But I don't have the the time.&quot;N: &quot;Neither do I.&quot;S: &quot;Hmmm.&quot;N: &quot;Hmmm.&quot;S: &quot;So what do we do?&quot; [N grins.] &quot;Wait, you're not seriously considering--&quot;N: &quot;Why not? What are you, suddenly Dr. Holier Than Thou?&quot;S: &quot;All right, don't remind me about Corcept and your 60,000 shares. What's your plan?&quot;N: &quot;Simple. We know that SmithKline Beecham's Paxil is losing market sha...</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4214206</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:28:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4214206</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ghostwriting: From Medical Journals To Entire Books</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4214484&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FKbQkUHfA3xs%2F</link>
            <description>When is a book written independently by an author and when might it be a marketing message under the guise of an unrestricted grant? Take the example of “Recognition and Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: A Psychopharmacology Handbook for Primary Care,” which was published in 1999 with a grant provided by SmithKline Beecham, now part of GlaxoSmithKline.
However, the grant paid for Scientific Therapeutics Information, which is based in Springfield, NJ, to develop an entire content outline and text for the authors. STI, which has been targeted previously by the US Senate Finance Committee over ghostwriting activities (see here). STI also provided drafts directly to the drugmaker for comments and sign-off, as well as status reports and page proofs to the credited authors. John Romankiewi...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4214484</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:12:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4214484</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Professors Of A Feather Flock Together?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3943028&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fgy2YlHI1sNw%2F</link>
            <description>The ongoing probe of undisclosed conflicts of interest by the US Senate Finance Committee uncovered numerous instances involving academics, who simultaneously had ties to drugmakers while also conducting research that was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
And a common thread among many of those who were probed was their work concerning psychiatric drugs, such as antidepressants and antipychotics (look here). So it probably should not come as a surprise that some of these people continue to pop up in various settings where they can hob-knob if they so choose.
For those wishing to keep track of such things, Alan Schatzberg, who last week retired as chair of the psychiatry department at Stanford University (see the goodbye note here), is scheduled to appear during the Grand Rounds ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3943028</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:01:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3943028</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Psychiatry Group Releases A New Code Of Conduct</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3659155&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F8fG5oNlG4M0%2F</link>
            <description>Under scrutiny for relationships with drugmakers, the American Psychiatric Association has issued its long-awaited code of conduct, although specifics are lacking. For now, the APA says financial relationships between developers of continuing medical education programs and research activity and outside organizations must be &amp;#8220;clearly stated;&amp;#8221; APA educational programs must follow ACCME standards (see this) and advertising in APA publications, meetings, or websites does not include endorsements of any particular medicine or drugmaker.
More than some other specialties, psychiatry has been singled out as part of a US Senate Finance Committee probe into financial conflicts of interest among academic psychiatrists who accept federal funding while simultaneously maintaining relationshi...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3659155</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:28:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3659155</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Dr. pangloss as nih institute director</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3398863&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F03%2Fdr-pangloss-as-nih-institute-director.html</link>
            <description>DR. PANGLOSS AS NIH INSTITUTE DIRECTORJAMA is out today with a Commentary by Dr. Thomas Insel, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health. Using indirection, Dr. Insel has risen to the defense of seven academic psychiatrists on whom an ethical searchlight has been trained for the past several years by Senator Grassley and others. With ludicrous optimism and a series of straw man discussions, Dr. Insel makes the case that things are not really as bad as they seemed to be or, if they were, then other specialty physicians were doing much the same things. Dr. Insel needs to recalibrate his ethical compass.Why is an NIH Institute Director issuing this apologia for the corruption of academic psychiatry? Does he not have better things to do, such as ensuring that longstanding NIH regulat...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3398863</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 02:42:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3398863</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley Targets NIMH Funding Of Academics</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3194016&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FrMwmpyevORk%2F</link>
            <description>In his ongoing probe of conflicts of interest involving academic researchers, US Senator Chuck Grassley is now asking the National Institutes of Mental Health director Tom Insel to provide phone records, email and calendar since early 2009, along with correspondence from NIMH staffers in response to Grassley&amp;#8217;s investigations.
For the past two years, Grassley has pursued conflicts in which academic researchers accept funding from the NIH and industry, and instances where their universities have failed to monitor or report payments. According to current NIH regulations, payments above $10,000 should be reported. In his Jan. 20 letter, Grassley cites several examples&amp;#8230;
The psychiatry chair at Emory University, Charles Nemeroff, failed to report hundreds of thousands of dollars in p...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3194016</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:11:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3194016</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>INSTITUTE of MEDICINE REPORT on CONFLICT of INTEREST</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2375958&amp;cid=t_188962_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F04%2Finstitute-of-medicine-report-on.html</link>
            <description>Today we saw a new marker laid down in the arena called Conflict of Interest (COI). The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences issued a report of its Committee on Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education and Practice. The report is comprehensive, even exhaustive, running to 353 pages. Gardner Harris in the New York Times today calls it “scolding,” “stinging,” and “damning.” The recommendations go well beyond any proposed in the recent past by medical schools or by other professional organizations. The NYT quoted David Rothman, president of the Institute on Medicine as a Profession at Columbia University: “With the I.O.M.’s endorsement, issues that were once controversial now are indisputable. Conflicts of interest in medicine are no longer acce...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2375958</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:40:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2375958</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yeah, but…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2013691&amp;cid=t_188962_140_f&amp;fid=35448&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fseemedlikeagoodideathetime.com%2F2008%2F12%2F04%2Fyeah-but%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;#8230;does the average patient even know to check, or what it means?
I&amp;#8217;ll take this very sad example as a &amp;#8220;no&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;I don&amp;#8217;t care at all. I really, truly don&amp;#8217;t,&amp;#8221; said Judith Ursitti of Dover, Mass., whose son, Jack, 8, has autism. &amp;#8220;When I take Jack to a specialist, I research their level of knowledge and how [...] (Source: bipolar chicks blogging)</description>
            <author>bipolar chicks blogging</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2013691</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:33:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2013691</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley: Universities Aren’t Following The Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1871104&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F416746621%2F</link>
            <description>For the past several months, the US Senate Finance Committee has been investigating undisclosed conflicts of interest involving academic researchers who receive NIH grants and pharma funding. At issue is whether universities are fulfilling their requirements to adequately monitor these disclosures in an effort to maintain scientific integrity and objectivity (back story here, here, here, here and here. Nature Medicine spoke with Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the committee, about the probe. This is an excerpt&amp;#8230;
Nature Medicine:What are you hoping to accomplish?
Grassley: NIH gives $24 billion worth of grants&amp;#8230;The law requires the universities to have their researchers report outside income. We found out the law wasn&amp;#8217;t being followed. The universities were not doi...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1871104</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:23:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1871104</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Rules? Emory Fiddled While Nemeroff Earned</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1853828&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F412282361%2F</link>
            <description>For several years, Charles Nemeroff assured Emory University, where he chaired the psychiatry department, that he wouldn&amp;#8217;t accept more than $10,000 in consulting fees from Glaxo, since he was the primary investigator on an NIH-funded grant for research into a Glaxo drug.
Why? Since 1995, an NIH regulation has required scientists to report to their universities any “significant financial interests” they hold in research projects financed by the agency. Those are defined as income or equity interest of $10,000 from a company or 5-percent ownership of its stock. The universities, in turn, are required to tell the NIH whether they were able to manage or eliminate the conflicts in order to avoid bias in the research findings (here are the rules). And anxious Emory officials, who condu...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1853828</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:37:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1853828</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Emory’s Nervous Nemeroff Reacts To A Probe</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1852738&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F410375229%2F</link>
            <description>Why was Charles Nemeroff, the well-known psychiatry department chair at Emory University, anxious about an e-mail from The New York Times in August? Could it be that word had leaked Emory was concerned about an ongoing probe by the Senate Finance Committee into disclosures of NIH and pharma funding to academic researchers? Was Nemeroff next?
By then, the committee was investigating Stanford University&amp;#8217;s Alan Schatzberg, Harvard University&amp;#8217;s Joe Biederman, Brown University&amp;#8217;s Martin Keller, University of Texas&amp;#8217; Karen Wagner and John Rush, and Melissa DelBello at the University of Cincinnati. Yesterday, we noted Nemeroff wrote an angry memo to the associate dean at Emory&amp;#8217;s School of Medicine, who questioned pharma ties to an annual event he runs for psychiatry re...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1852738</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:55:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1852738</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Emory’s Nemeroff Chafes At Funding Questions</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1851212&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F409343727%2F</link>
            <description>The ongoing investigation by the Senate Finance Committee seems to be making some universities a bit, well, sensitive to the activities undertaken by faculty members. You may recall that Chuck Grassley, the commitee&amp;#8217;s ranking Republican, is probing pharma and NIH funding given academic researchers - particularly psychiatrists - and whether any conflicts are properly disclosed.
So far, the committee has singled out Stanford University&amp;#8217;s Alan Schatzberg, Harvard University&amp;#8217;s Joe Biederman, Brown University&amp;#8217;s Martin Keller, University of Texas&amp;#8217; Karen Wagner and John Rush, and Melissa DelBello at the University of Cincinnati. Charles Nemeroff, the well-known psychiatry chairman at Emory University, has not made the list, but the school appears, nonetheless, to be ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1851212</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:19:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1851212</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On The Couch… A Little Weekend Reading</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1837488&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F405499147%2F</link>
            <description>Such a busy pharma world and so little time to keep up, yes? Like you, we always poke around for items of interest, and so we thought we would point out a few you may enjoy from the past week. Think of it as a little bit of catching up. Meanwhile, we hope your weekend is enjoyable and look forward to seeing you again tomorrow&amp;#8230;
The droll Jim Edwards points out that Sanofi-Aventis has become the latest drugmaker to get into the online video game business, or advergames. This one is for the ubiquitous Ambien Cr sleeping pill, and the game is called &amp;#8220;Silence Your Rooster.&amp;#8221; You can check it out here.
By striking a deal to fill certain generics for free as part of a trial with Caterpillar, Wal-Mart is subtly undermining the economic model used so well by pharmacy benefit manage...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1837488</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:34:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1837488</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley Targets Another Academic Over Conflicts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1788922&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F389612650%2F</link>
            <description>This time, the ranking Republican on the US Senate Finance Committee is fingering Karen Wagner, a researcher at the University of Texas who worked on a National Institutes of Health study involving Glaxo&amp;#8217;s Paxil antidepressant, who allegedly did not disclose more than $150,000 in consulting and speaking fees she received from the drugmaker, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Grassley cited Wagner after comparing records from Glaxo and the university. Between 2000 and 2008, she was involved in an NIH study on the use of Paxil to treat teenage depression and another study on teen anxiety, the paper writes. The university&amp;#8217;s legal counsel tells the paper they will look for any discrepancies in Wagner&amp;#8217;s disclosure reports, Wagner did not respond to the paper&amp;#8217;s request...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1788922</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:27:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1788922</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Stanford’s Schatzberg Defends His Record</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1779680&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F386609971%2F</link>
            <description>For the first time since Stanford University last month reassigned his National Institutes of Health grant to another principal investigator (look here), the chair of the school&amp;#8217;s psychiatry department is responding to the episode, which actually began earlier this year when the US Senate Finance Committee named him as an example of federally funded academics with conflicts of interest.
You may recall that Schatzberg, who is also president-elect of the American Psychiatric Association, owns about $6 million in stock in Corcept Therapeutics, which is studying the development of mifepristone for treating psychotic depression. He is also a co-patent holder for the drug and he received an NIH grant to oversee the research.
Stanford insisted he had no role in dealing with patients or anal...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1779680</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:50:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1779680</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley Intensifies Probe Into NIH &amp; Stanford</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1675137&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F352794956%2F</link>
            <description>The Senate Finance Committee is intensifying its investigation into research grants and conflicts of interest are managed by the National Institutes of Health and universities, whose academic researchers receive both NIH funding and have ties to drugmakers. Yesterday, though, Stanford University and its psychiatry department chair, Alan Schatzberg, came under special scrutiny - again.
You may recall Schatzberg owns about $6 million in stock in Corcept Therapeutics, which is studying the development of mifepristone for treating psychotic depression. He is also a co-patent holder for the drug and he received an NIH grant to oversee the research. In response to the charges that Schatzberg failed to properly disclose this tangled web, Stanford issued a statement defending Schatzberg by saying,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1675137</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:47:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1675137</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who’s In Charge? A Stanford Prof &amp; An NIH Grant</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1668704&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F350601005%2F</link>
            <description>Last month, the US Senate Finance Committee charged that Stanford University failed to properly monitor alleged conflicts of interest involving Alan Schatzberg, who chairs the psychiatry department and owns about $6 million in stock in Corcept Therapeutics, which is studying the development of mifepristone, or RU-486, for treating psychotic depression.
In addition to his stock holdings, Schatzberg is also a co-patent holder for the drug, which is best known for inducing abortion, and he received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to oversee the research. In response to the charges that Schatzberg failed to properly disclose this tangled web, Stanford issued a statement defending Schatzberg by saying, among other things, that all conflicts were properly disclosed.
Schatzberg &amp;#8...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1668704</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:40:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1668704</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley Vows To Pressure NIH Over Grants</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1655670&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F345833615%2F</link>
            <description>The ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee wants the National Institutes of Health to revoke grants to academic scientists who fail to report financial conflicts of interest to their institutions, the Iowa Senator tells The Chronicle of Higher Education.
His remarks come after targeting Harvard University, Stanford University and the University of Cincinnati, because some academics underreported their own financial interests in research projects supported by the NIH. Institutions are required by federal regulation to report the existence of those conflicts to the agency. Grassley is seeking info from 20 other institutions about financial conflicts among their scientists, including Brown University&amp;#8217;s Martin Keller, and the American Psychiatric Association.
Since 1995, an N...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1655670</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:01:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1655670</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Grassley Targets Brown’s Keller Over Grants</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1622999&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F335299832%2F</link>
            <description>Among the 30 or so physicians at two dozen universities that the Senate Finance Committee is probing concerning disclosure of grants from drugmakers is Martin Keller, a psychiatrist at Brown University who is a controversial figure for his role in studying Glaxo&amp;#8217;s Paxil antidepressant. The committee, according to sources familiar with the investigation, sent a letter to Brown as part of its investigation. We are awaiting a reply from Brown and will update you shortly.
In recent weeks, the committee has acknowledged focusing on three academic psychiatrists - Harvard University&amp;#8217;s Joe Biederman, Stanford University&amp;#8217;s Alan Schatzberg and the University of Cincinnati&amp;#8217;s Melissa DelBello. Last week, Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the committee, also asked the Am...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1622999</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:09:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1622999</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Academic Funds &amp; Conflicts: Eric Campbell Explains</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1561298&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F324104221%2F</link>
            <description>Last week, the Senate Finance Committee targeted yet another academic for failing to fully disclose potential conflicts involving research funding provided by drugmakers and other financial holdings. The example, which singled out Stanford University&amp;#8217;s Alan Schatzberg, is part of a larger investigation into academics who receive funding from both the NIH and pharma for possible violations of federal regulations. At issue are whether universities and NIH are adequately policing disclosures in an effort to maintain scientific integrity and objectivity. In response to the probe, the NIH disclosed it would tighten oversight, but the story is just beginning. Eric Campbell, an associate professor at the Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1561298</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:36:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1561298</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NIH May Tighten Oversight Of Grant Disclosures</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1543925&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F319993115%2F</link>
            <description>In response to sustained public pressure, the National Institutes of Health is now getting set to tighten its oversight on grants awarded academic researchers, whose institutions are required to report any conflicts of interest. Recent examples uncovered by the Senate Finance Committee, however, have embarrassed the NIH and several universities, most notably Harvard University.
Over the past several months, the committee has disclosed instances where academic researchers at Harvard, Stanford University and the University of Cincinnatti accepted funding from both the NIH and various drugmakers, but failed to fully disclose industry payments. Universities are supposed to monitor researchers and the NIH is supposed to monitor the universities for conflicts involving payments exceeding $10,000...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1543925</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:03:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1543925</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Targets Stanford Psychiatrist Over Conflicts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1543928&amp;cid=t_188962_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F319828349%2F</link>
            <description>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 that participates in a National Institutes of Health study he oversees.
This is the latest such case involving high-profile academics, who receive funding from both the NIH and industry, to be investigated by Chuck Grassley, the ranking committee Republican, for possible violations of federal regulations. At issue are whether universities are adequately policing disclosures in an effort to maintain scientific integrity and objectivity.
Earlier this month, he targeted three Harvard University psychiatrists, including...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1543928</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:34:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1543928</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

