… the drug’s manufacturer.”

Yikes!

“No punitive action” will be taken.

Whew!

Wouldn’t want to disrupt the ghostwriting-for-pharma flow.

*********************************

UPDATE: A reader notes: “The poster boy for conflict of interest in psychiatry, Charles Nemeroff, was first author on the article in question.”

Nemeroff! Always Nemeroff! Your name from hence immortal life shall have.

**********************************

Why no punitive action? Because at the time Dwight L. Evans and Laszlo Gyulai put their name on a paper on which they did no work, there were no written rules at U Penn saying you shouldn’t put your name on a paper on which you did no work. A bioethics professor comments: “[S]tudents in grade school are taught the basic ethics of plagiarism.”

Remember: These are the sophisticated experts in whose hands you are placing your mental health.

***********************************

Droll comment thread at CHE:

This reminds me of the Seinfeld episode in which George was being fired by his boss for having sex with the cleaning lady on his desk. George’s paraphrased response: “Was that wrong? I gotta tell you, if I knew that wasn’t allowed here, I never would have done it.”

Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.margaretsoltan.com/wp-trackback.php?p=35030

2 Responses to ““The University of Pennsylvania has concluded that the chairman of its psychiatry department and a colleague let their names be listed among the authors reviewing a medicine in a journal article that was actually written by …”

  1. Bernard Carroll Says:

    “They that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind.” The poster boy for conflict of interest in psychiatry, Charles Nemeroff, was first author on the article in question. Dwight Evans went along for the ride. This incident is another instance of Nemeroff’s corrupted chickens coming home to roost.

  2. Mike S. Says:

    To paraphrase President Obama:
    Some of the worst behavior on wall street leading up to the crash may have been unethical, but it wasn’t illegal.

    How is ghostwriting these article not considered criminally fraudulent commercial speech?

    Pharma and the universities have deep pockets for legal expenditures. That fact, and the matter of establishing standing to sue, strongly suggest that the only player big enough to bring successful suit is the government itself.
    Of course Pharma owns gov’t like every other industry owns gov’t these days, and the Regents are always well connected politically.
    I’m not holding my breath.

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE

Archives

Categories