Tc
Mon, Nov-20-06, 06:15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/-
14/AR2005071402116.html
44 Violated Ethics Rules, NIH Director Tells Panel
Conflict-of-Interest Inquiry Focused on Work Done by 103
Current and Former Employees
By Rick Weiss Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 15,
2005; Page A21
An internal investigation of 103 current and former employees
of the National Institutes of Health has found that 44
violated conflict-of-interest rules and 37 did not, while 22
are still under review, according to interim data supplied by
NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni to a congressional committee.
"We discovered cases of employees who consulted with research
entities without seeking required approval, consulted in
areas that appeared to conflict with their official duties,
or consulted in situations where the main benefit was the
ability of the employer to invoke the name of NIH as an
affiliation," Zerhouni said in a letter to the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Director Elias A. Zerhouni of the National Institutes of
Health wrote a House panel about the interim results of an NIH
probe. (By Dennis Cook -- Associated Press)
Politics Trivia In which year did two members of Congress
admit to sexual relations with pages?
1981 1982 1983 1984
Of the 44 found to have committed violations, the cases of
nine have been referred to the inspector general of the
Department of Health and Human Services for possible criminal
prosecution, according to the letter, released yesterday.
Another 27 may be subject to lesser administrative penalties.
Eight violators are no longer employed by HHS and so are
beyond the reach of administrative actions, according to the
letter, which was described in yesterday's Los Angeles Times.
The investigated employees were not named in the letter.
Zerhouni sent the synopsis last week to Rep. Joe Barton
(R-Tex.), the committee chairman, who had requested an update
in March. The committee has been looking into allegations of
conflict of interest at NIH for nearly two years, and
estimates of the degree of misconduct have varied widely
during that time.
NIH officials previously said that a majority of those under
investigation had been exonerated, but the letter provides a
first glimpse of actual numbers.
In February, amid congressional assertions that abuses were
widespread, Zerhouni banned the kinds of activities questioned
by the investigation -- primarily paid consulting work for
pharmaceutical and biotech companies -- for all of NIH's
17,000 employees.
Nonetheless, the letter to Barton is sensitive because the
details of the rule changes are still in flux. Most notably,
HHSand the department's Office of Government Ethics are still
considering whether to force thousands of employees to divest
all their biotech and drug company stock holdings, as
originally proposed, or to call for more targeted restrictions
in stock ownership.
The department has twice delayed the implementation of the
stock ownership restrictions while reconsidering its initial
plan, criticized by employees as unnecessarily extreme.
"These findings indicate that the ethical problems [at NIH]
are more systemic and severe than previously known," Barton
said in a prepared statement yesterday. "They also demonstrate
the need for NIH to issue the final ethics rule as soon as
possible."
NIH spokesman John Burklow acknowledged that the system of
oversight for conflicts of interest had grown in need of a
"systemic overhaul." But that situation, he suggested, is
largely behind the agency.
"That's why we worked with the department and the Office of
Government Ethics to develop new rules that came out in
February, which will protect the integrity of the science and
at the same time be fair to employees," Burklow said.
In the letter to Barton, Zerhouni reiterated his long-standing
belief that citizens ultimately benefit from "collaborations
and other scientific interactions between NIH personnel and
nongovernmental researchers." He blamed the abuses largely on
a loosening of NIH ethics rules that occurred during the
Clinton administration.
The completed portion of the investigation covered 81
current and former employees suspected of not having
reported their outside activities to NIH officials. The
employees came under suspicion after the House committee
sent letters to 20 pharmaceutical companies asking for lists
of all NIH researchers doing consulting for them. The panel
compared the names on those lists with the names on file at
NIH of those having filed proper disclosures of outside
work. The names of the 81 were on the company lists but were
not in the NIH records.
Most of the 22 remaining employees under review identified
themselves in response to a June 2004 agency-wide directive
from Zerhouni, which asked all employees who had failed to
file disclosures of outside activities to step forward.
Burklow said the agency has completed its investigation of
those 22 but cannot publicly report how many have been
exonerated until the department signs off on the results.
****
TC
14/AR2005071402116.html
44 Violated Ethics Rules, NIH Director Tells Panel
Conflict-of-Interest Inquiry Focused on Work Done by 103
Current and Former Employees
By Rick Weiss Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 15,
2005; Page A21
An internal investigation of 103 current and former employees
of the National Institutes of Health has found that 44
violated conflict-of-interest rules and 37 did not, while 22
are still under review, according to interim data supplied by
NIH Director Elias A. Zerhouni to a congressional committee.
"We discovered cases of employees who consulted with research
entities without seeking required approval, consulted in
areas that appeared to conflict with their official duties,
or consulted in situations where the main benefit was the
ability of the employer to invoke the name of NIH as an
affiliation," Zerhouni said in a letter to the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Director Elias A. Zerhouni of the National Institutes of
Health wrote a House panel about the interim results of an NIH
probe. (By Dennis Cook -- Associated Press)
Politics Trivia In which year did two members of Congress
admit to sexual relations with pages?
1981 1982 1983 1984
Of the 44 found to have committed violations, the cases of
nine have been referred to the inspector general of the
Department of Health and Human Services for possible criminal
prosecution, according to the letter, released yesterday.
Another 27 may be subject to lesser administrative penalties.
Eight violators are no longer employed by HHS and so are
beyond the reach of administrative actions, according to the
letter, which was described in yesterday's Los Angeles Times.
The investigated employees were not named in the letter.
Zerhouni sent the synopsis last week to Rep. Joe Barton
(R-Tex.), the committee chairman, who had requested an update
in March. The committee has been looking into allegations of
conflict of interest at NIH for nearly two years, and
estimates of the degree of misconduct have varied widely
during that time.
NIH officials previously said that a majority of those under
investigation had been exonerated, but the letter provides a
first glimpse of actual numbers.
In February, amid congressional assertions that abuses were
widespread, Zerhouni banned the kinds of activities questioned
by the investigation -- primarily paid consulting work for
pharmaceutical and biotech companies -- for all of NIH's
17,000 employees.
Nonetheless, the letter to Barton is sensitive because the
details of the rule changes are still in flux. Most notably,
HHSand the department's Office of Government Ethics are still
considering whether to force thousands of employees to divest
all their biotech and drug company stock holdings, as
originally proposed, or to call for more targeted restrictions
in stock ownership.
The department has twice delayed the implementation of the
stock ownership restrictions while reconsidering its initial
plan, criticized by employees as unnecessarily extreme.
"These findings indicate that the ethical problems [at NIH]
are more systemic and severe than previously known," Barton
said in a prepared statement yesterday. "They also demonstrate
the need for NIH to issue the final ethics rule as soon as
possible."
NIH spokesman John Burklow acknowledged that the system of
oversight for conflicts of interest had grown in need of a
"systemic overhaul." But that situation, he suggested, is
largely behind the agency.
"That's why we worked with the department and the Office of
Government Ethics to develop new rules that came out in
February, which will protect the integrity of the science and
at the same time be fair to employees," Burklow said.
In the letter to Barton, Zerhouni reiterated his long-standing
belief that citizens ultimately benefit from "collaborations
and other scientific interactions between NIH personnel and
nongovernmental researchers." He blamed the abuses largely on
a loosening of NIH ethics rules that occurred during the
Clinton administration.
The completed portion of the investigation covered 81
current and former employees suspected of not having
reported their outside activities to NIH officials. The
employees came under suspicion after the House committee
sent letters to 20 pharmaceutical companies asking for lists
of all NIH researchers doing consulting for them. The panel
compared the names on those lists with the names on file at
NIH of those having filed proper disclosures of outside
work. The names of the 81 were on the company lists but were
not in the NIH records.
Most of the 22 remaining employees under review identified
themselves in response to a June 2004 agency-wide directive
from Zerhouni, which asked all employees who had failed to
file disclosures of outside activities to step forward.
Burklow said the agency has completed its investigation of
those 22 but cannot publicly report how many have been
exonerated until the department signs off on the results.
****
TC