Editorial:
To what extent should papers submitted from drug companies be published in medical journals?
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia 1999 99:157-159.Do the pharmaceutical companies promote or repress unbiased knowledge? This highly controversial topic is discussed in a recent paper by Nemeroff [1]. His paper has the provocative title ‘The Escalating Pharmaceutical Company Wars: Where is an Academic to Hide?’ He states, ‘The prescription drug market in the United States is very big business, and nowhere is the competition more fierce than in the sale of drugs to treat psychiatric disorders. The competition is especially fierce when three or four drugs are available in the same class, with only minor differences among them. This is the case with both the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and the atypical antipsychotics.’ Nemeroff states that as a consequence of the increasingly competitive marketing, he has faced a new attitude from drug company representatives, who have invited him to give a speech about treatment of mental disorders. He states that ‘it is becoming almost the rule, rather than the exception’ that the pharmaceutical representative encourages him to say something positive about the drug of the company in question, and often also to say something negative about the closest competitive drugs. It is no surprise that he tells us that American academic lecturers feel that their integrity is being threatened…
[1] NEMEROFF CB. The escalating pharmaceutical company wars: where is an academic to hide? CNS Spectrums 1998;3:17,92.
Once upon a time Nemeroff had a conscience? A sense of morality? Who knew?
So, Dr. Nemeroff says he was pressured “…to say something positive about the drug of the company in question, and often also to say something negative about the closest competitive drugs.†Well, that’s exactly what he did. See here.
To follow on Dr. Carroll’s comment, Nemeroff also “tells us that American academic lecturers feel that their integrity is being threatened…” Apparently, based on his huge number of drug company involvements, Nemeroff didn’t consider himself to be among that group.
A Secret Santa sent me Nemeroff’s whole article. It’s more than just hypocrisy.
He was writing that holier than thou article at the same time that Sally Laden of STI was writing a textbook for he and Schatzberg to be given out by GSK drug reps to Primary Care doctors to promote Paxil.
If I were a psychoanalyst, I would be tempted to call it “splitting” – the ability to simultaneously hold dichotomous ideas in the mind with no experience of felt conflict.
Mickey, I’ve only read what you posted here, not the whole article, but my first thought was that it was pure flimflammery. He was either trying to construct his “cover” in case he got caught — or he was thumbing his nose at anyone who might question his drug company activities. Or both.
Maybe you have to use splitting to allow you to be so duplicitous. But I’m guessing his motives were quite conscious.