And Then There Were Two:
Big Pharma's Continuing Intrusion into the Newsroom
The recent New York Times report that Fred Goodwin, host of public radio's The Infinite Mind, had received more than $1.2 million in undisclosed speaking fees from the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline at the same time he was hosting the award-winning radio program sent shock waves through the journalistic, public broadcasting and medical worlds.
While over the years it has been known that pharmaceutical companies have intruded on medicine and science through undisclosed payments to doctors and researchers that have created conflicts of interest, Fred Goodwin was the first case of a drug company's undisclosed payments to a working journalist, the host of a nationally broadcast public radio program, no less. For that reason, the disclosure about Fred Goodwin's speaking fees from GlaxoSmithKiline was a watershed event.
On the heels of the Goodwin matter, comes former New York State Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey, who wrote a February 9, 2009 commentary for Bloomberg News entitled "Ruin Your Health with the Obama Stimulus Plan." In her essay, McCaughey attacked President Obama's proposed stimulus plan as being "dangerous to your health," and she falsely claimed that the stimulus package would allow the government to "monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective ... to reduce costs and 'guide' your doctor's decisions.”
This is not the first time that McCaughey has used a news outlet to undermine proposed innovations to the U.S. medical system. In 1994, McCaughey lead the attack on the Clinton administration's health care plan, with an article in the New Republic entitled "No Exit," which, as the title suggested, claimed the Clinton health proposal would lock people into government-run health care, with no right to seek doctors or treatments of their choice. McCaughey's assertions were later shown to be blatantly false, but at the time her article helped derail the Clinton health care plan.
Not surprisingly, in the wake of McCaughey's attack on the Obama stimulus plan's health provisions, Fox News, the Drudge Report and Rush Limbaugh were quick to pick up on McCaughey's report. Fox News went so far as to report that "new rules buried deep inside the [stimulus] bill" would allow the government to engage in "healthcare rationing," set "limits on research" and establish "new rules guiding decisions your doctor can make about your healthcare." Fox News called the supposed healthcare provisions in the stimulus bill "Washington's best kept secret."
As it turns out, none of what McCaughey reported in her Bloomberg News story, nor what was re-reported by other conservative news outlets, is true, as was detailed by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC's "Countdown":
McCaughey is an adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank that includes among its other fellows former Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork and convicted former White House aide "Scooter" Libby. As Olbermann pointed out, it is funded, in part, by pharmaceutical companies and biomedical suppliers.
McCaughey also serves on the board of Cantel Medical, a medical device company, which according to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, paid her with 750 shares of stock options worth approximately $11,250 nine days before she wrote her Bloomberg commentary, and $55,000 for the year ending July 31, 2008 after the company realized record revenues in 2008 of $250 million. McCaughey admits she got the payments, but released a statement denying any conflict of interest. McCaughey was also formerly on the board of Genta, a biotechnological company, whose web site and all information about the company was taken off-line due to an "increase in web traffic" following the report of McCaughey's connection to the company (see below).
In the wake of the Fred Goodwin disclosure, questions have been raised about how to increase the transparency with regard to possible conflicts of interest among journalists and commentators, particularly with regard to funding from pharmaceutical and medical device companies. Journalism as a field continues to rely on self-disclosure, which clearly is not sufficient to identify cases like Goodwin and McCaughey. Since Bloomberg News and others who ran the McCaughey story apparently weren't aware of her financial ties to the medical industry, it needs to be asked what sorts of efforts need to be made in the future to help insure transparency.
(Disclosure: Pharmola.com is published by LCMedia, Inc., formerly Lichtenstein Creative Media, which was the producer of The Infinite Mind.)
Those who design and create releases for the press, which is the print media, is designed to contain information of sufficient importance or interest to the public, historically speaking.
Instead, those who design and release written information to the press are often sponsors of the print media who will issue the press release. Such sponsors often instruct such media outlets with mandated authoritarian nuances, such as the press release that they created will not be altered in any way by the print media that agrees to release the press created by the sponsor of the media outlet.
Of course, the sponsor and creator of such a press release creates such written words in order to promote the sponsor itself, as well as its products. By doing so, they are allowed the freedom to embellish if not fabricate what may be annotated on the release they issue to the press that has now been bought by them, the corporate sponsor.
These well- constructed statements are meticulously composed and customized before they are issued to targeted editors and contacts at mass media publication locations.
The sponsor also has been known to direct the location and time of the release of their press creation that, upon direction from the sponsor, is completely un-reviewed by such a media source.
As this is done, the mass media outlets are again instructed on how to present their completed statements, as well as are given instructions once again not to alter these press releases in any way, as part of the agreement between the print media source and their sponsor.
As a result of this collusion, press releases are presently a form of public relations often utilized for those companies who create what is supposed to be an attempt to express their products as being newsworthy.
Press releases, historically, have been created and released to inform the readers by adding insight and related information for them regarding a particular topic that was typically complete and balanced.
Today, they seem to be more or less an annotative commercial with press compositions generated by corporations in particular, so it seems.
Unfortunately, and presently, press releases are often embellished, biased, and incomplete with deliberate intent in order to benefit the creator of these documents, who again develop them solely to increase awareness and usage of their products that they promote with their business, which they want to be viewed as favorable and with a positive image to the public.
One could suggest that the mass media who receives these press statements from certain corporations are transformed into mass front groups who perhaps coercively offer third party legitimacy for the content of the press release as they release this information to their readers.
The often notable if not intentional flaws at times are numerous within such press releases that reflect reckless disregard with informing readers in such a way, who are the American public. Citizens typically believe that what they are reading from a respected media source is both honest and complete.
An example is an anonymous press release posted on the Medical News Today website (www.medicalnewstoday.com) that is dated in March of 2006. The title: "Cymbalta Safely and Effectively Treats core anxiety symptoms associated with generalized anxiety disorder."
Cymbalta, by the way, is a psychoactive drug often utilized for human affective disorders.
Clearly, this title itself includes words associated with relief or elation, which are subjective and not objective elements which would clearly be more appropriate- with a health care press release in particular.
The first paragraph of this press release repeats the results mentioned in the title of this article, but also states Cymbalta offers relief of painful symptoms associated with anxiety, as well as improved functional impairment- also claimed to be associated with anxiety in this press release.
These conclusions are speculative at best, as these inferences appear to be unexamined by others regarding the benefits claimed to exist with Cymbalta as illustrated in this press release.
Cymbalta was not approved by the FDA for anxiety or any of the symptoms associated with this condition at the time of this press release. In fact, Cymbalta was not filed with the FDA for this speculated new indication for anxiety that was desired by Eli Lilly until May of 2006.
By definition, this press release may possibly be off-label promotion as well as misbranding of Cymbalta that was performed overtly in this manner of the press release, one may speculate.
As one continues to read this press release, testimonials were intentionally created and inserted into this press release that illustrated results they hope are impactful to the reader regarding Cymbalta.
This testimonial was from the lead author, who expanded the claims made initially with utilizing various medical terms, which was followed by this person’s passionate optimism about the great potential of Cymbalta based on this remarkable study.
This study, by the way, was to be addressed in further detail at a National Anxiety meeting some weeks after this press release was announced to the public on this website.
The second testimonial was Eli Lilly's Medical Advisor expressing his elation about what the lead author just stated, followed by how much he was encouraged by these results that will benefit so many others that have these debilitating medical conditions.
Of course, profit forecasts and desired market growth and expansion regarding Cymbalta remarkably were not stated in this press release.
What is not included in this particular press release were any clear statements regarding the disadvantages and adverse if not toxic events associated those who take Cymbalta.
Reactions from Cymbalta users include discontinuation syndrome at times, when the user stops taking this medication, which I understand can be quite devastating for the one experiencing this syndrome.
Furthermore acts of suicide and suicidal ideation have been frequently associated with those who take Cymbalta as well. There have been apparent lack of efficacy suggestions by others who have taken Cymbalta.
Basically, anything that may be considered negative aspects about this drug were not annotated in this particular press release as it should have been for fair balance that is or should be a primary standard in the pharmaceutical industry and health care journalism.
The staff involved with the release and publication of such press releases as this one was annotated and described should perhaps be more informed on what not to accept and what to present regarding these issues addressed.
As with any reporting by the media, objectivity and thorough completeness of the topic discussed in a press release is a necessary requirement with any publishing that is potentially exposed to so many other readers- with issues related to the restoration of their health in particular:
“The public has a lot at stake, and the media has a responsibility always to be aware of the source of information and the conflicts those sources might have when they report the results of clinical research. People who have financial stake in the results of clinical research can well be biased in the way research is conducted, in the way they report it, and what they say about it when interviewed by the media.”
– Arnold Relman, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine
Dan Abshear
Posted by: Dan | March 05, 2009 at 09:58 AM