Sunday, January 15, 2006

Bone wars contd - Eastell resigns Sheffield job

A senior doctor at the centre of a row over the probity of pharmaceutical research has resigned from his NHS post before the outcome of an inquiry into separate allegations.

Professor Richard Eastell has left his job as director of research at the Sheffield Teaching Hospitals Trust following claims of financial irregularities. Eastell had been suspended from his NHS work while the hospital investigated allegations that he was charging the NHS for work that should have been done privately.

In November, The Observer reported on allegations, made by a whistleblower who worked with Eastell at Sheffield University, that a drugs company had been given too much power over medical trial data. Dr Aubrey Blumsohn claimed Eastell had allowed a medical paper to be published by Procter and Gamble under researchers' names, without the researchers being allowed full access to data. The study was looking at the effects of an osteoporosis drug.

Eastell will continue as an honorary consultant at the hospital, and will be employed by Sheffield University. A hospital spokesman said because Eastell had resigned before the inquiry finished, it could not reach a verdict.

Insiders' view: "could not reach a verdict"..........that sounds like a fudge doesn't it. This mess will continue to stink until all the details are exposed.

Observer

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Richard Eastell is as honest as the day is long. I simply do not believe he has done anything wrong. Not all 'whistleblowers' are right - profession enmity and ego can be a powerful motivator.

insider said...

You are say this on the wrong blog.

Go to Aubrey's blog.

insider said...

Go here. Listen and then post!!

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2006/07/procter-research-shenanigans-part-1.html

Aubrey Blumsohn said...

I reposted this anonymous comment on my blog.
www.scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com

Open debate about scientific procedure is always good and to be welcomed.

It is not clear what reason the anonymous poster has to think that a single whistleblower was involved in this other financial irregularity, or whether he/she is referring to me. I have no ego (or "profession enmity" whatever that means), so presumably he is referring to someone else.

Aubrey

Anonymous said...

I'm as honest as the day is long;
The longer the daylight the less I do wrong.