In August of 2011, the Public Health Service updated its rules to address the kind of financial conflicts of interests that can undermine (or appear to undermine) integrity in research. The new rules, issued under the ungainly title, “Responsibility of Applicants for Promoting Objectivity in Research for which Public Health Service Funding is Sought and Responsible Prospective Contractors,” were issued with a one-year implementation period to give universities and academic medical centers sufficient time to update their local policies and procedures for disclosure, review, and management (to the extent possible) of any conflicts their researchers might have between their significant personal financial interests and their academic and scholarly activities.
The rules were made significantly more strict because a few scoundrels (for examples, click here, and here) have behaved in ways that undermined the public’s trust in scientists and physicians. By accepting hundreds of thousands, even millions, of dollars from private pharmaceutical companies and other for-profit entities while performing studies on drugs and devices manufactured by the same companies, a few bad apples have called into question the integrity of the whole research enterprise. This is a tremendous shame.
Having more than one interest is not bad or wrong; it’s normal. Everyone has an attachment to the things they value, and most people value more than one thing. Professors value their research, but they also want accolades, promotion, academic freedom, good parking spots, and food on their tables. Having multiple interests only becomes a problem when the potential for personal enrichment or glory causes someone (consciously or unconsciously) to behave without integrity and compromise the design, conduct, or reporting of their research. Read More