Investigator Exposes Pharma Corruption - Loses Job

[Guest guest]

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/05/15/investigator_exposes_pharma_corr\

uption_loses_job.htm

 

 

May 15, 2004

Investigator Exposes Pharma Corruption - Loses JobPharma

 

An investigator with the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General was

removed from his post and sent home after he talked to the press about his

discovery of a black bank account fed by pharma companies Janssen and Pfizer and

apparently used to pay off FDA officials in charge of approving drugs.

 

The story is reported in the British Medical Journal.

 

 

 

Whistleblower removed from job for talking to the press

Jeanne Lenzer

 

New York (BMJ - original here)

 

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7449/1153

 

A whistleblower who uncovered evidence that major drug companies sought to

influence government officials has been removed from his job and placed on

administrative leave.

 

Allen Jones, an investigator at the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General

(OIG), was escorted out of his workplace on 28 April and told " not to appear on

OIG property " after OIG officials accused him of talking to the press. Reports

of Mr Jones's findings were widely reported in the New York Times, BMJ (7

February, p 306), and elsewhere.

 

His findings showed that the pharmaceutical company Janssen had paid honorariums

to key state officials who held influence over the drugs prescribed in state-run

prisons and mental hospitals.

 

Mr Jones filed a suit on 7 May against his supervisors charging that the OIG's

policy of barring employees from talking to the media was " unconstitutional. " Mr

Jones claims, in the complaint filed in the Middle District Court of

Pennsylvania, that he is being harassed by his superiors and Pennsylvania

governmental institutions in order to " coverup, discourage, and limit any

investigations or oversight into the corrupt practices of large drug companies

and corrupt public officials who have acted with them. "

 

Mr Jones had been earlier removed as lead investigator on the case after being

told by a manager that " drug companies write cheques to politicians on both

sides of the aisle. "

 

In July 2002 Mr Jones was appointed lead investigator when he uncovered evidence

of payments into an off-the-books account. The account, earmarked for

" educational grants " was funded in large part by Pfizer and Janssen

Pharmaceuticals. Payments were made from the account to state employees who

developed formulary guidelines recommending expensive new drugs over older,

cheaper drugs with proved track records.

 

One of the recommended drugs was Janssen's antipsychotic medicine risperidone

(Risperdal)—a drug that has recently been found to have potentially lethal side

effects. The Food and Drug Administration issued a warning letter to Janssen on

27 April saying that Janssen's " Dear Healthcare Provider " letter about

risperidone was " false or misleading " because it failed to disclose or minimised

risks of the drug relating to " serious adverse events including ketoacidosis,

hyperosmolar coma, and death. "

 

Don Bailey, Mr Jones's attorney, said the case is a critical test of the right

to a free press. " If they shut the employee up and they have all the documents

locked up in a drawer there is no free press, " he said.

 

Amy Wasserleben, spokeswoman for the OIG, said they would not comment on Mr

Jones or the corruption allegations. When asked about the status of the

corruption investigation she refused to answer. In response to a question about

whether the state OIG could withhold information of public interest, she said,

" The OIG is specifically exempt from right-to-know laws. "

 

The Pennsylvania formulary is based on the Texas Medication Algorithm Project

that has been exported to about 12 states and was recently commended as a model

programme by President Bush's New Freedom Commission.

 

However, Dr Peter J Weiden, who was a member of the project's expert consensus

panel, charges that the guidelines are based on " opinions, not data " and that

bias due to funding sources undermines the credibility of the guidelines since

" most of the guideline's authors have received support from the pharmaceutical

industry. "

 

 

 

 

 

SBC - Internet access at a great low price.