That is, of course , and absurd conclusion. It’s not even the right question to be asking. If Dr. Nemeroff was being paid to be on the advisory board and speaker’s bureau, and kept the extent of his payment secret, and continued as a primary investigator on projects testing their drugs, that is more than enough to say that he was biased. If he’d been honest about the extent of his involvement with the drug company, he would never have gotten the grant to do the study in the first place. To me, his dishonesty up front renders Emory’s conclusion untenable – actually, inconceivable. But that’s obvious.
Speaking of untenable conclusions. To everyone’s amazement, Dr. Nemeroff was selected as Chairman at the Miller School of Medicine at the University of Miami by the Dean there, Dr. Pascal Goldschmidt. [Nemeroff Accepts Offer at U. Miami] In the process, Dr. Goldsmith contacted Dr. Thomas Insel, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health who said that Dr. Nemeroff could apply for NIMH Grants, and who allowed Dr. Nemeroff to continue serving on NIMH review Boards, even though he had been banned from participating in NIMH Grants by Emory.
Dr. Insel himself had moved to Emory from the NIMH in 1994 to accept the Directorship of Yerkes Primate Center at Emory, along with an appointment to Emory’s Psychiatry Department. In 1997, he left Yerkes to become a Director of a Center at Emory under the Department of Psychiatry. Dr. Nemeroff was Chairman of the Department during both appointments. Then in 2002, Dr. Insel became Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, and Dr. Nemeroff was reported to have been lobbying for that appointment.
A recent story in the Chronicle of Higher Education implied that a quid pro quo relationship existed between me and Dr. Charles Nemeroff, formerly of Emory University. This story suggested incorrectly that Dr. Nemeroff helped me get a position at Emory in 1994, and that I assisted him in securing a position at the University of Miami after he was sanctioned for violations of financial conflict of interest rules at Emory. By switching from Emory to Miami, Dr. Nemeroff escaped a 2 year ban on applying for NIH grants, imposed by Emory. Senator Charles Grassley, a leading voice in the effort to reduce conflict of interest in biomedical research, has asked the Office of the Inspector General at HHS to look into this matter.
Having been one of the most outspoken proponents for developing tougher conflict of interest policies at NIH, the allegations that I would help anyone avoid penalties struck me as surreal. Here are the facts:
* I acknowledge that this description may be viewed as misleading. In fact, Dr. Nemeroff served on the search committee at Emory, and my recruitment as Yerkes Director included an academic appointment in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, then chaired by Dr. Nemeroff, in the Emory University School of Medicine, as well as an academic appointment in the Department of Psychology in the Emory University College of Arts and Sciences. Although my understanding is that Dr. Nemeroff did not play a supportive role in my hiring, I have no way of actually knowing all the facts.
Plausible deniability actually is a legal concept. It refers to lack of evidence proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "more likely so than not" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt" If your opponent lacks incontrovertible proof (evidence) of their allegation, you can "plausibly deny" the allegation even though it may be true.
While my response to Dean Goldschmidt was simply to describe the facts, in retrospect it would have been better to refer the Dean’s specific question about Dr. Nemeroff’s grant eligibility to someone from the NIH Office of Extramural Research, which coordinated the investigation of Emory University. But let’s be clear – my intent in this conversation was to explain a federal policy, not to exploit a policy that would help any investigator avoid penalties.
I realize that my tenure at Emory and a previous association with Dr. Nemeroff will, for some, be “guilt by association.” To avoid such allegations, I recused myself from all matters involving Dr. Nemeroff during the conflict of interest investigation at NIH. While I have had no contact with Dr. Nemeroff for many months, to avoid any possibility of a perception of either positive or negative bias, I will recuse myself from future applications or NIH matters involving Dr. Nemeroff. Note however, that I must comply with the current policy which permits someone to apply for NIH funding unless they have been de-barred.
[…] NIMH Director Tom Insel isn’t exactly free from their taint himself. Consider his recent walk down the road with Charlie Nemeroff, head cheer-leader extraordinaire. Insel, himself, is also on the […]
[…] on his official weblog undated, it is mealy mouthed and it was widely criticized – here and here, for instance – as further evidence of Insel’s […]