Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

National Alliance for Mental Health Received 3/4 of its funds from Drug Makers-

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

_http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/health/22nami.html?_r=1_

(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/health/22nami.html?_r=1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Times

Drug Makers Are Advocacy Group’s Biggest Donors

By GARDINER HARRIS

October 21, 2009

 

 

WASHINGTON — A majority of the donations made to the _National Alliance on

Mental Illness_ (http://www.nami.org/) , one of the nation’s most

influential disease advocacy groups, have come from drug makers in recent

years, acco

rding to Congressional investigators.

The alliance, known as NAMI, has long been criticized for coordinating

some of its lobbying efforts with drug makers and for pushing legislation that

also benefits industry.

Last spring, Senator _Charles E. Grassley_

(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/charles_e_grassley\

/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

, Republican of Iowa, sent letters to the alliance and about a dozen other

influential disease and patient advocacy organizations asking about their

ties to drug and device makers. The request was part of his investigation

into the drug industry’s influence on the practice of medicine.

The _mental health_

(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/men\

talhealthanddisorders/index.html?inline=nyt-classifi

er) alliance, which is hugely influential in many state capitols, has

refused for years to disclose specifics of its fund-raising, saying the

details were private.

But according to investigators in Mr. Grassley’s office and documents

obtained by The New York Times, drug makers from 2006 to 2008 contributed

nearly $23 million to the alliance, about three-quarters of its donations.

Even the group’s executive director, Michael Fitzpatrick, said in an

interview that the drug companies’ donations were excessive and that things

would change.

“For at least the years of ’07, ’08 and ’09, the percentage of money

from pharma has been higher than we have wanted it to be,†Mr. Fitzpatrick

said.

He promised that the industry’s share of the organization’s fund-raising

would drop “significantly†next year.

“I understand that NAMI gets painted as being in the pockets of

pharmaceutical companies, and somehow that all we care about is

_pharmaceuticals_

(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/dru\

g

spharmaceuticals/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) ,†Mr. Fitzpatrick

said. “It’s simply not true.â€

Mr. Fitzpatrick said Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny, which he described as

understandable given the attention paid to potential conflicts of interest in

medicine, had led his organization to begin posting on its Web site the names

of companies that donate $5,000 or more. And he predicted that other

patient and disease advocacy groups would be prodded by Mr. Grassley’s

investigation to do the same.

“Everyone I talk to wants to have more balanced fund-raising,†Mr.

Fitzpatrick said.

In a statement, Mr. Grassley praised the alliance for its disclosures. “It’

d be good for the system for other patient groups to do what NAMI has done,

†he said.

Mr. Grassley’s scrutiny has been unnerving for patient and disease

advocacy groups, which are often filled with sincere people who are either

afflicted with serious illnesses themselves or have family members who have

been

affected. Many join the groups in the hope of making sense of their

misfortune by helping to find a cure or raising awareness of a disease’s risks

and

frequency.

Drug makers are natural allies in these pursuits since cures may come out

of corporate laboratories and the industry’s money can help finance public

service campaigns and fund-raising dinners. But industry critics have long

derided some patient organizations as little more than front groups devoted

to lobbying on issues that affect industry profits, and few have come under

more scrutiny for industry ties than the mental health alliance.

For years, the alliance has fought states’ legislative efforts to limit

doctors’ freedom to prescribe drugs, no matter how expensive, to treat mental

illness in patients who rely on government health care programs like

_Medicaid_

(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/med\

icaid/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) . Some of these medicines

routinely top the list of the most expensive drugs that states buy for

their poorest patients.

Mr. Fitzpatrick defended these lobbying efforts, saying they were just one

of many the organization routinely undertook.

The close ties between the alliance and drug makers were on stark display

last week, when the organization held its annual gala at the Andrew W.

Mellon Auditorium on Constitution Avenue in Washington. Tickets were $300 each.

Before a dinner of roasted red bell pepper soup, beef tenderloin and

tilapia, Dr. Stephen H. Feinstein, president of the alliance’s board, thanked

Bristol-Myers Squibb, the pharmaceutical company.

“For the past five years, Bristol-Myers has sponsored this dinner at the

highest level,†Dr. Feinstein said.

He then introduced Dr. Fred Grossman, chief of neuroscience research at

Bristol-Myers, who told the audience that “now, more than ever, our enduring

relationship with NAMI must remain strong.â€

Documents obtained by The New York Times show that drug makers have over

the years given the mental health alliance — along with millions of dollars

in donations — direct advice about how to advocate forcefully for issues

that affect industry profits. The documents show, for example, that the

alliance’s leaders, including Mr. Fitzpatrick, met with AstraZeneca sales

executives on Dec. 16, 2003.

Slides from a presentation delivered by the salesmen show that the company

urged the alliance to resist state efforts to limit access to mental

health drugs.

“Solutions: Play Hard Ball,†one slide was titled. “Hold policy makers

accountable for their decisions in media and in election,†it continued.

The alliance’s own slides concluded by saying, “We appreciate

AstraZeneca’

s strong support of NAMI.â€

Mr. Fitzpatrick said that the alliance frequently had such meetings and

that the organization would fight for better access to mental health drugs “

even if we had no relationship with pharmaceutical companies.â€

Tony Jewell, an AstraZeneca spokesman, said that the company was “

committed to improving health through partnerships with nonprofit

organizationsâ€

and that “includes striving to ensure people can access our medicines through

formularies managed by state Medicaid agencies.â€

 

 

__

 

28,881 petition signatures

_http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html_

(http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html) Video:

_

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...