An article in yesterday’s New York Times focused on the relationship of Harvard Medical School (HMS) to drug companies had some harsh words to say about their influence on medical education and research. The author of the article took the position that the large sums of money provided to HMS professors by drug companies in the forms of research grants, speaking fees, and compensation for sitting on the board, affects the education provided by skewing toward certain classes of medications, such as the anti-cholesterol drugs. The article also highlights a recent failing grade assigned to HMS by “American Medical Student Association [AMSA, a national group that rates how well medical schools monitor and control drug industry money.” Overall, the article serves a powerful and indignant indictment of the practices of a leading medical school concluding with the sentiment that if Harvard doesn’t behave itself, who will?
The Dean of Harvard Medical School, Jeffrey Flier, responded to the article with some equally harsh words which he emailed to HMS faculty and staff. Dean Flier pointed out discrepancies between the information and quotes he provided (and later verified) to the NYT reporter, saying that his words and facts about the HMS conflict of interest policy were misrepresented in the article, effectively pitting journalistic ethics against medical ones. Responding point by point to issues raised in the article, Dean Flier provided some background on the AMSA-awarded F grade, saying that the failing grade was awarded “due to an oversight during a transition in leadership, [in which] HMS did not submit materials to AMSA. AMSA representatives specifically told us that this was the reason for the grade. This was clearly communicated to the reporter on multiple occasions by both me and other staff members, but the fact was not reflected in the article.”
Interesting points brought up by this situation are fodder for gobs of discussion. How much drug company influence is too much? Where does one draw the line and who does the drawing? Secondly, what is the recourse for someone who feels incorrectly represented in an article? And how did this happen? A newspaper as renowned for their superb writing and journalistic integrity just elicited the ire of a seriously important person. How and why? Was is for greater impact?
As a blogger, I obviously have an opinion on this matter (and many, many others). I found the NYT article to be horribly one-sided with hardly an attempt at objectivity. I thought it judgmental and accusatory. It didn’t feel like news, it felt like a nightly news expose. Thoughts?