|
Hundreds of scientists who work for the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) have done work for drug and biotechnology firms or
accepted cash prizes from universities that depend on that same
governmental agency for research funding. Not surprisingly, these
recent disclosures have prompted much outcry from Congress.
In turn, NIH has made promises to fix the problem.
Nevertheless, one Congressman who has reviewed the problem said
some NIH employees came very close or crossed an ethical line that
he believed had been a consistent problem at the agency for years
out of deliberate permissiveness, not confusion.
The agency has been scrambling to rebuild its credibility, amid
concerns drug companies have far more unfair influence than intended.
NIH believes morale among its own staffers to be low and the confidence
of the public undermined, and recent cases reviewed by Congress
haven’t helped.
So far, the House Energy and Commerce Committee has investigated
consulting contracts between major pharmaceutical companies and
NIH scientists. The committee is also looking into a practice by
major universities of handing prizes to NIH scientists via a legitimate
loophole that permits the agency to raise salaries much higher than
those of other senior federal employees. In one particularly egregious
case, one former NIH official received a $40,000 cash prize from
the University of Pittsburgh close to the same time he signed off
on a settlement of a lawsuit from the same school.
During House testimony, a governmental ethics attorney admitted
a leading Bush administration official pushed him to justify the
prize. In another conflict, a pair of leading NIH researchers was
hired as consultants to one company at the same time they worked
for a direct competitor and NIH on similar research.
The researchers said they initially believed their consulting work
didn’t represent a conflict of interest.
NIH says the number of scientists who do consulting for drug or
biotechnology companies ranges from 100 to 200 at a given time.
Because the federal agency very recently began asking scientists
to disclose compensation they receive from outside contracts to
better monitor outside conflicts, NIH is unaware of how much money
is being funneled from biotechnology and drug companies to its scientists.
A former NIH director lifted the cap on outside income made by
its scientists due to the burgeoning growth of drug and biotechnology
firms that created strong competition for top performers. Changes
in ethics standards at NIH were also justified to attract new talent.
NIH also brought into play a murky law allowing agencies to exceed
pay limits mandated by Congress that increased pay for some researchers
as much as $60,000 annually. Leading NIH researchers can earn up
to $300,000 in salaries and much more from consulting. Despite the
fallout, NIH says eliminating outside income would be a mistake.
Top researchers can make $1 million annually in the private sector.
Congress would like to prohibit agreements between NIH researchers
and private drug companies in hopes of lifting the dark cloud overshadowing
the agency. Nevertheless, NIH says prohibiting such contact between
academia and the private sector may not be completely realistic.
The
San Diego Union Tribune June 1, 2004
| 