OB-GYN-L Messages for May, 2004: Re: Ovarian Cancer Payola Scandal

Re: Ovarian Cancer Payola Scandal

From:

Terrence.Jones@kp.org

Wed May 19 13:26:29 2004

It's a 'hanging chad' - vote for or against, depending on perspective. For those in such need, it casts doubt upon the state sponsored medical institution (Where's Wesley Mouch when ya' need him). For those with an eye toward the future - it clearly states that our unique system binds activity that, tho (3rd to last paragraph) "ethical", could represent a (2nd to last Paragraph) "conflict of interest", due to generic oversight responsibility. It is a unique situation that FDA was involved in development of metabonics applications - and we now await Academia for validation. More unique is the direction we are heading, and its implications for early diagnosis, and eventually - preclinical therapy. That the spectral signature of peptides in ovarian might differ from, say, pancreatic cancer, might prompt the inquiring mind to seek established infrastructure to facilitate such investigation in a more timely fashion. That we create a new recipe for Boston Cream Pie, does not obviate the predictable squabbling of the insatiable, for their piece. 'We don't need to see the papers...These aren't the droids We're lookin' for...Move along'. tj

eramirezt@coqui.net (Efrain Ramirez) Sent by: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net 05/18/2004 06:47 PM Please respond to ob-gyn-l

To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net> cc: Subject: Re: Ovarian Cancer Payola Scandal

Is that news?

>>At Tue, 18 May 2004, art fougner, md wrote:
>
>This from Newsday and the LA Times.
>
>art
>
>FDA Chief Launches Internal Inquiry of Payments
>Deals in which medical firms paid government scientists prompt 'outside
>activity' review.
>
>By David Willman
>Times Staff Writer
>
>May 18, 2004
>
>WASHINGTON ? The acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration
>has ordered an agencywide inquiry to determine the extent of biomedical
>company payments to officials at the regulatory agency, it was learned
>Monday.
>
>The inquiry was launched this month as congressional investigators began
>examining millions of dollars in industry payments ? previously blocked
>from public view ? to scientists at the National Institutes of Health.
>
>The newly uncovered deals include consulting payments made to two
>officials ? one at the National Cancer Institute, a unit of the NIH, and
>another at the FDA. Both arrangements were terminated in recent days,
>officials said.
>
>After being assigned in 2002 to collaborate with a Maryland company in
>the development of an ovarian cancer test, the two officials entered
>into paid consulting deals with a Northern California firm that was a
>possible competitor, according to documents and individuals familiar
>with the matter.
>
>The director of the NIH, Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni, said through a
>spokesman late Monday that he would not stand behind one of the
>arrangements, involving the chief of the National Cancer Institute's
>pathology laboratory. The matter "demonstrates the need for systemic
>reform," Zerhouni said through the spokesman, John Burklow.
>
>The consulting arrangement between the laboratory chief, Dr. Lance A.
>Liotta, and Biospect Inc. of South San Francisco ended Friday,
>officials said.
>
>The second of the now-terminated deals involved a senior microbiologist
>at the FDA, Emanuel F. Petricoin, prompting the investigators to
>determine whether other employees could maintain similar arrangements
>with the industry they help regulate. The inquiry is continuing, FDA
>spokesman Lawrence Bachorik said.
>
>"In light of recent questions about possible conflicts of interest
>involving [Department of Health and Human Services] agencies, acting FDA
>Commissioner Dr. Lester Crawford has directed a comprehensive review of
>all current outside activity requests from all FDA employees," Bachorik
>said.
>
>The circumstances surrounding Liotta's and Petricoin's activities for
>both companies are expected to be explored today at a hearing of the
>House Energy and Commerce oversight and investigations subcommittee.
>
>A Los Angeles Times report in December prompted the panel to request the
>records of payments from drug companies to NIH scientists. The article
>documented hundreds of payments, totaling millions of dollars, and
>reported that more than 94% of the agency's top-paid employees were not
>required to publicly disclose outside income.
>
>In late 2002, Liotta and Petricoin were given permission by their
>employers to consult for pay with Biospect, according to federal
>documents and interviews. Liotta received $39,000 through 2003, records
>from the NIH show. Payments to Petricoin were not publicly available
>Monday. Liotta and Petricoin declined via e-mail to comment for this
>article.
>
>The company payments had been shielded from public view because each
>official is exempted from reporting outside income on forms accessible
>under the Freedom of Information Act.
>
>Burklow, the NIH spokesman, acknowledged that officials had become aware
>that Biospect was a possible competitor with Correlogic Systems, the
>Maryland company with which Liotta and Petricoin were collaborating. The
>cofounder of Correlogic Systems, Peter J. Levine, said he hoped to
>advance the progress of his company's cooperative research pact with the
>government.
>
>That relationship "can be very important in furthering our ovarian
>cancer research ? and ultimately saving lives," Levine said. The FDA,
>the National Cancer Institute and Correlogic Systems started working
>together in April 2002.
>
>Documents from the NIH show that as of last year, ethics officials had
>concluded that Liotta's outside consulting work with Biospect was
>unrelated to the official work he was assigned to perform on the NIH's
>behalf with Correlogic Systems.
>
>At the FDA, spokesman Bachorik said that officials "subsequently
>determined that Biospect participates in activities that are
>significantly regulated by the FDA. As a result, consulting with
>Biospect is a prohibited outside activity."
>
>Biospect announced Monday that it had changed its name to Predicant
>Biosciences. The company's chief executive, Deborah J. Neff, did not
>return a call seeking comment.
>
>*
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------->Times researcher Janet Lundblad in Los Angeles contributed to this
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------->--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------->report.
>
>--
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------->http://www.newsday.com/news/health/la-na-nih18may18,0,1257969,print.story?coll=ny-health-headlines
>
>--
>art fougner, md
>ich bin ein New Yorker
>

-- "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."

Niels Bohr (1885 - 1962)

--=_alternative 0064C5D188256E99_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It's a 'hanging chad' - vote for or against, depending on perspective. For those in such need, it casts doubt upon the state sponsored medical institution (Where's Wesley Mouch when ya' need him). For those with an eye toward the future - it clearly states that  our unique system binds activity that, tho (3rd to last paragraph) "ethical", could represent a (2nd to last Paragraph) "conflict of interest", due to generic oversight responsibility. It is a unique situation that FDA was involved in development of metabonics applications - and we now await Academia for validation. More unique is the direction we are heading, and its implications for early diagnosis, and eventually - preclinical therapy. That the spectral signature of peptides in ovarian might differ from, say, pancreatic cancer, might prompt the inquiring mind to seek established infrastructure to facilitate such investigation in a more timely fashion. That we create a new recipe for Boston Cream Pie, does not obviate the predictable squabbling of the insatiable, for their piece. 'We don't need to see the papers...These aren't the droids We're lookin' for...Move along'. tj   <table width0%> <tr valign=top> <td> <td>eramirezt@coqui.net (Efrain Ramirez) Sent by: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net 05/18/2004 06:47 PM Please respond to ob-gyn-l <td>                To:        Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>         cc:                 Subject:        Re: Ovarian Cancer Payola Scandal</table> Is that news? >>At Tue, 18 May 2004, art fougner, md wrote: > >This from Newsday and the LA Times. > >art > >FDA Chief Launches Internal Inquiry of Payments >Deals in which medical firms paid government scientists prompt 'outside >activity' review. > >By David Willman >Times Staff Writer > >May 18, 2004 > >WASHINGTON — The acting commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration >has ordered an agencywide inquiry to determine the extent of biomedical >company payments to officials at the regulatory agency, it was learned >Monday. > >The inquiry was launched this month as congressional investigators began >examining millions of dollars in industry payments — previously blocked >from public view — to scientists at the National Institutes of Health. > >The newly uncovered deals include consulting payments made to two >officials — one at the National Cancer Institute, a unit of the NIH, and >another at the FDA.  Both arrangements were terminated in recent days, >officials said. > >After being assigned in 2002 to collaborate with a Maryland company in >the development of an ovarian cancer test, the two officials entered >into paid consulting deals with a Northern California firm that was a >possible competitor, according to documents and individuals familiar >with the matter. > >The director of the NIH, Dr.  Elias A.  Zerhouni, said through a >spokesman late Monday that he would not stand behind one of the >arrangements, involving the chief of the National Cancer Institute's >pathology laboratory.  The matter "demonstrates the need for systemic >reform," Zerhouni said through the spokesman, John Burklow. > >The consulting arrangement between the laboratory chief, Dr.  Lance A. >Liotta, and Biospect Inc.  of South San Francisco ended Friday, >officials said. > >The second of the now-terminated deals involved a senior microbiologist >at the FDA, Emanuel F.  Petricoin, prompting the investigators to >determine whether other employees could maintain similar arrangements >with the industry they help regulate.  The inquiry is continuing, FDA >spokesman Lawrence Bachorik said. > >"In light of recent questions about possible conflicts of interest >involving [Department of Health and Human Services] agencies, acting FDA >Commissioner Dr.  Lester Crawford has directed a comprehensive review of >all current outside activity requests from all FDA employees," Bachorik >said. > >The circumstances surrounding Liotta's and Petricoin's activities for >both companies are expected to be explored today at a hearing of the >House Energy and Commerce oversight and investigations subcommittee. > >A Los Angeles Times report in December prompted the panel to request the >records of payments from drug companies to NIH scientists.  The article >documented hundreds of payments, totaling millions of dollars, and >reported that more than 94% of the agency's top-paid employees were not >required to publicly disclose outside income. > >In late 2002, Liotta and Petricoin were given permission by their >employers to consult for pay with Biospect, according to federal >documents and interviews.  Liotta received $39,000 through 2003, records >from the NIH show.  Payments to Petricoin were not publicly available >Monday.  Liotta and Petricoin declined via e-mail to comment for this >article. > >The company payments had been shielded from public view because each >official is exempted from reporting outside income on forms accessible >under the Freedom of Information Act. > >Burklow, the NIH spokesman, acknowledged that officials had become aware >that Biospect was a possible competitor with Correlogic Systems, the >Maryland company with which Liotta and Petricoin were collaborating.  The >cofounder of Correlogic Systems, Peter J.  Levine, said he hoped to >advance the progress of his company's cooperative research pact with the >government. > >That relationship "can be very important in furthering our ovarian >cancer research — and ultimately saving lives," Levine said.  The FDA, >the National Cancer Institute and Correlogic Systems started working >together in April 2002. > >Documents from the NIH show that as of last year, ethics officials had >concluded that Liotta's outside consulting work with Biospect was >unrelated to the official work he was assigned to perform on the NIH's >behalf with Correlogic Systems. > >At the FDA, spokesman Bachorik said that officials "subsequently >determined that Biospect participates in activities that are >significantly regulated by the FDA.  As a result, consulting with >Biospect is a prohibited outside activity." > >Biospect announced Monday that it had changed its name to Predicant >Biosciences.  The company's chief executive, Deborah J.  Neff, did not >return a call seeking comment. > >* > >----------------------------------------------------------------------->Times researcher Janet Lundblad in Los Angeles contributed to this >----------------------------------------------------------------------->-----------------------------------------------------------------------= >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >report. > >-- >-----------------------------------------------------------------------> >----------------------------------------------------------------------->http://www.newsday.com/news/health/la-na-nih18may18,0,1257969,print.sto= >-----------------------------------------------------------------------ry?coll=ny-health-headlines > >-- >art fougner, md >ich bin ein New Yorker > -- "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth." Niels Bohr (1885 - 1962)

Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote

use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
	Returns per screen: Require all keywords: