Tag Archives: conflicts of interest

University of Miami under fire for hiring psychiatrist who took millions in Pharma funds and was “pharma pimping for Paxil”

Bernard Carroll, former head of psychiatry at Duke University and once Charles Nemeroff’s boss, said parts of Nemeroff’s work involved Paxil, a GlaxoSmithKline antidepressant. “Basically, he was doing basic science pimping for Paxil to produce talking points,” Carroll told The Herald in an e-mail Thursday. “All he ever produced was speculation but that was enough to satisfy Glaxo marketing. . . . I have been exposing his shenanigans for some years.”

Say what? Psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff who failed to report $1.2 mil in Pharma deals lands psych chairmanship at University

Last year Nemeroff, as chair of the Department of Psychiatry at Emory University, was the intense focus of an investigation by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who said he was concerned about the money the psychiatrist received from drug companies while conducting supposedly unbiased research for the National Institutes of Health on drugs made by the companies he was receiving money from.

National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) – A Pharma front group

The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) states it is no wonder that the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), a group that claims to be an advocacy organization for people with “mental illness,” opposed the black box warnings on antidepressants causing suicide for under 18 year olds in 2004, and black box warnings on ADHD drugs causing heart attack, stroke and sudden death in children in 2006, when you look at their biggest source of funding: Pharma.

Shrinks for sale: Psychiatrist makes $22,500 in 3 months doing “educational” drug speeches for Eli Lilly

Lilly last month disclosed its $22 million in payments in the first quarter of this year to the 3,400 doctors who are called the Lilly faculty. The company paid a $1.4 billion penalty as part of its January settlement with the government. That amount was dwarfed by Pfizer’s $2.3 billion settlement on Sept. 2 for similar violations, which also requires disclosing physician speaking fees. Both cases centered on company actions that illegally promoted drugs for “off-label” uses, those not approved by federal officials.