Letter to the Editor of the New York Times

Dr. Igor Galynker writes to the New York Times about an article that appeared on the front page of the newspaper on May 10, 2007.

To the Editor:

In their article "Psychiatrists, Children and Drug Industry’s Role" the authors highlighted major conflicts of interest in psychiatry: direct industry payments to doctors through speaker fees and industry payments to same doctors for conducting clinical trials that increase their income and speaker fees. Given human nature, it is unreasonable to expect doctor's prescribing practices not to be influenced by conscious and subconscious self-interest.

As we and others have demonstrated, pharmaceutical industry funding of drug trials is associated with outcomes favoring sponsored drugs. This is not true for non-industry studies and studies with mixed sponsorship. Hence, one possible solution to the ethical gridlock: eliminate speaker panels and confine drug company influences to marketing meetings; conduct clinical trials through researchers without prescribing privileges; finance trials through pooled industrial and federal resources. These measures are fairly radical, but don’t we care about our children?

Igor Galynker MD PhD
Associate Chairman for Research
Department of Psychiatry
Beth Israel Medical Center