A solid report on the role and influence of pharmaceutical money in the nation's best medical schools.

Great investigative reporting about a serious matter. The author has gone out of his way to research factual evidence from multiple sources, with helpful context about apparent conflicts of interests at Harvard Medical School.

What are the drawbacks of industry ties? This article lets a lot of people weigh in on the ethics of accepting industry money without fully explaining the consequences of doing so.

clearly the issue presented here is both topical in relationship to our health care system reform and ethics-related. as such it merits greater discussion than is in this article. bravo to the medical students who notice this and bring it to the schools' attention so that the larger discussion and resolution can take place within them.

An informative article, and it could be much more in depth. The featured statistics hint at the tip of what appears to be a very large iceberg of conflicts of interest between some Harvard med school doctors and the pharmaceutical industry.

This brief investigative article exposes: medical educators with close ties to the pharmaceutical industries (and how it is discouraged in the classroom discussion of side effects of some drugs and perhaps even other alternatives), but at the same time the writer exposes the benefits of having these pharmaceutical because they fund research. Though the writer, Duff Wilson, exposes both sides in a fair manner, Wilson goes back to his thesis, nutgraf, which is the fact that there is a dangerous problem when our health is on the hands of special interest groups. I think the story could have been improved by adding more examples of where there are special interest groups running health interest (ex: government agencies, advocacy ... More »

First rate investigation from Duff Wilson. Very important and at the center of so much contention in the highest reaches of power. Could have ferreted out some industry responses though, or at least mentioned that they declined to comment if they were asked. Still, it does a good job seeking balance by interviewing at least one pro-industry funding professor.

Lots of opinions about the relationship between drug companies and medical education, but not many facts.

The report is substantial and excellent, especially considering how complex (far-reaching, with many aspects) the phenomenon of money bias in healthcare is, and how concise the article is.