Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Motion to Proceed
Floor Speech
MAKING EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - November 15, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to follow Senator Baucus on exactly the same subject. I thank him for the period of time now, this year, he has been chairman of the committee, succeeding my chairmanship, because he has been very cooperative in my efforts to finish investigations that carried over with the change of Congress from Republican to Democratic, and also for helping us initiate new, needed investigations.
But I also wish to take some time to comment exactly on what he had made reference to in the very report he has now submitted for the Record. Since he has submitted a copy, I will not ask permission to do that.
It was about 3 years ago--in fact, the exact date was November 18, 2004--I convened a hearing on the worldwide withdrawal of Vioxx, a blockbuster pain medication.
That hearing turned a spotlight on systemic problems at the Food and Drug Administration. We found that the Food and Drug Administration maintained a very cozy relationship with the drug industry and suppressed scientific dissent regarding agency actions on drug safety.
At that Vioxx hearing, we also heard about Merck using its power, its influence, and access to try and discredit an FDA safety expert, Dr. David Graham--a person who is still on the staff at the FDA trying to do the job of being a policeman for safety for the consumers of American pharmaceutical products.
Merck also tried to intimidate a Stanford researcher, Dr. Gurkirpal Singh. The company warned him to stop asking for more safety data on Vioxx, despite the fact he was one of their paid consultants.
What is troubling is that 3 years later, I am here with my colleague, Senator Baucus, to talk about yet another case where pharmaceutical executives use power, use their influence, and use access to intimidate a medical researcher.
In essence, another company wanted to put an end to another scientist who was voicing concerns about the cardiovascular risks associated with a drug.
Now, in this case--similar to Vioxx--we are talking about a diabetes drug, Avandia.
Today, Senator Baucus and I are releasing a staff report showing how executives at GlaxoSmithKline intimidated Dr. John Buse, a medical researcher at the University of North Carolina.
Together, our respective staffs reviewed documents provided by the company and by others, and they found bothersome internal e-mails that reveal how these pharmaceutical executives think. In these e-mails, high-level company officials discussed the possibility of threats--I am talking about threats by pharmaceutical executives--against Dr. Buse of North Carolina University. These threats included the possibility of filing a lawsuit.
Company executives called Dr. Buse an "Avandia Renegade'' and had him sign a retraction letter they wanted to give to financial analysts. These analysts were evaluating the company's products for investors.
So what we have are three cases--starting with Dr. Graham, then Dr. Singh, and now Dr. Buse--where companies intimidated researchers who dared to express concerns about the safety of what they thought were risky drugs. In the case of both Vioxx and Avandia, the drugs actually turned out to carry some very serious risks.
What I am here to say today is that attacks on medical researchers by the pharmaceutical industry must stop. And it has to stop right this minute.
Until this practice ends, I wish to let America's scientists know I am very interested in their concerns. Scientists should feel free to contact my office if a pharmaceutical company threatens their career or attacks their reputation when they raise the alarm about possible dangerous drugs.
They can also anonymously provide information and documents by mail or by fax to the committee. Here is the fax number: 202-228-2131.
That is the warning that I put out, and the invitation that I put out.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source