Scandal of scientists who take money for papers ghostwritten by drug companies: Doctors named as authors may not have seen raw data Scientists are accepting large sums of money from drug companies to put their names to articles endorsing new medicines that they have not written - a growing practice that some fear is putting scientific integrity in jeopardy. Ghostwriting has become widespread in such areas of medicine as cardiology and psychiatry, where drugs play a major role in treatment. Senior doctors, inevitably very busy, have become willing to "author" papers written for them by ghostwriters paid by drug companies. Originally, ghostwriting was confined to medical journal supplements sponsored by the industry, but it can now be found in all the major journals in relevant fields. In some cases, it is alleged, the scientists named as authors will not have seen the raw data they are writing about - just tables compiled by company employees. The doctors, who may also give a talk based on the paper to an audience of other doctors at a drug company-sponsored symposium, receive substantial sums of money. Fuller Torrey, executive director of the Stanley Foundation Research Programmes in Bethesda, Maryland, found in a survey that British psychiatrists were being paid around $2,000 (£1,400) a time for symposium talks, plus airfares and hotel accommodation, while Americans got about $3,000. Some payments ran as high as $5,000 or $10,000. "Some of us believe that the present system is approaching a high-class form of professional prostitution," he said. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4351264,00.html
blurring of ethics I wonder if the researcher is having his name added for "editing" and "reviewing" the work? It does sound like it goes one step beyond ethical. The research field is interesting. While some companies do their own lab. reaserch in-house, some provide scholars and schools grants to work on a project. It is usually pretty clear that a drug company wants a drug to combat a particular illness (like the viagara goldmine). It must be very hard for researchers to declare a line of research invalid, knowing it will cut off their funding. With all the "publish or perish" it must be hard to turn down another article. or to turn down a company that might fund your research. All the best!
