Reply #15: "She's even alleging a conspiracy theory as to why she can't get funding."

[mzmolly]

"She's even alleging a conspiracy theory as to why she can't get funding.

That should have been your first clue."

Actually, it should clue you in.

Marcia Angell, former head of the NEMJ, has written about this very problem:

http://www.mindfully.org/Health/Academic-Medicine-Sale18may00.htm

In this editorial, I wish to discuss the extent to which academic medicine has become intertwined with the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and the benefits and risks of this state of affairs. Bodenheimer, in his Health Policy Report elsewhere in this issue of the Journal, (5) provides a detailed view of an overlapping issue — the relations between clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry.

The ties between clinical researchers and industry include not only grant support, but also a host of other financial arrangements. Researchers serve as consultants to companies whose products they are studying, join advisory boards and speakers' bureaus, enter into patent and royalty arrangements, agree to be the listed authors of articles ghostwritten by interested companies, promote drugs and devices at company-sponsored symposiums, and allow themselves to be plied with expensive gifts and trips to luxurious settings. Many also have equity interest in the companies.

Although most medical schools have guidelines to regulate financial ties between their faculty members and industry, the rules are generally quite relaxed and are likely to become even more so. For some years, Harvard Medical School prided itself on having unusually strict guidelines. For example, Harvard has prohibited researchers from having more than $20,000 worth of stock in companies whose products they are studying. (6) But now the medical school is in the process of softening its guidelines. Those reviewing the Harvard policy claim that the guidelines need to be modified to prevent the loss of star faculty members to other schools. The executive dean for academic programs was reported to say, "I'm not sure what will come of the proposal. But the impetus is to make sure our faculty has reasonable opportunities." (7)

And, Marcia Angell is certainly no right winger.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-angell-md/health-reform-throwing-go_b_266596.html

Who is going to pay for this research on autism?