Trump's FDA Pick, Backed by Opioid Industry Dollars, Called Disgraceful Choice
'Just what we need,' said Sen. Bernie Sanders. 'An FDA commissioner who has taken millions of dollars from drug companies. This is a disgrace.'
Dr. Scott Gottlieb, President Donald Trump's nominee to the lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), drew fire on Wednesday for the millions of dollars he has received from Big Pharma, including the U.S. opioid industry, which he would be charged with regulating.
Though Trump has said he wants to lower drug prices and claims to be concerned about opioid abuse, launching a commission last month to investigate the national epidemic, members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Wednesday argued that his nomination of Gottlieb belied that rhetoric.
Pointing to recently released financial disclosure documents which show that the former physician and resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute has received millions of dollars in compensation from more than 20 biopharma and health companies, ranking Democrat Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) said Trump's nominee had "unprecedented financial entanglements with the industries he would regulate."
Similarly, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said: "The worry here is that there will be industry-supported reforms that will find a voice inside of the agency because of your connection to the industry."
"It seems like it would be a big gift to the drug industry," Murphy continued, "being able to use their political donations in order to ultimately put a group of friendlies on a process or commission that decides approval, rather than having that process sheltered from the political process."
Reporting on the disclosures on Tuesday, the Intercept's Lee Fang noted that since the beginning of 2016, "firms involved in the manufacture and distribution of opioids" alone gave Gottlieb $45,000 in payments and speaking fees--some of which are the very same companies being charged with worsening the opioid epidemic in places like West Virginia.
Dr. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, warned against Gottlieb's confirmation, saying this week that "[o]ur country is in desperate need of an FDA commissioner who will take on the opioid lobby, not one who has a track record of working for it."
During Wednesday's hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also questioned why Trump, who has expressed support for allowing lower-cost pharmaceuticals to be imported from Canada, would nominate a commissioner who has voiced opposition to drug importation.
"I find it amazing that Trump says something during the campaign and then appoints people who have radically different ideas," said Sanders, who in February called on the president to "make good on his campaign promises" and support his recently-introduced importation legislation.
In a series of tweets, Sanders further highlighted Trump's pattern of "nominating people who hold the exact opposite views of what he campaigned on."
Another issue that has raised concern is Gottlieb's stance on deregulating the pharmaceutical process, which he partially outlined on a Forbes' op-ed published last year.
During a press call ahead of Wednesday's hearing, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, said that Gottlieb "is entangled in an unprecedented web of close financial and business ties to the pharmaceutical industry and was no doubt chosen [by Trump] because he is well-suited to carry out the president's reckless, ill-informed vision for deregulating the FDA's review and approval process for prescription medications, including opioids."
Carome continued:
In exchange for getting medications to the market faster, he believes that the FDA must be willing to accept a greater degree of uncertainty about the drugs' safety and efficacy at the time of approval.
He also has questioned the FDA's use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) to ensure safe drug use, challenging the FDA's authority to impose requirements for such plans on pharma companies. The FDA currently relies on REMS plans as one tool to try to ensure the safe use of many medications.
Dr. Gottlieb's appointment would further accelerate a decades-long trend in which agency leadership too often makes decisions that are aligned more with the interests of industry than those of patients.
What's more, The Hill reported that despite having numerous industry ties, Gottlieb on Wednesday "would not commit" to Murray's request to recuse himself for two years "from FDA matters that directly impact the more than two dozen companies he's tied." Last month he agreed to recuse himself and divest his financial interests for one year.
Regardless of these mounting conflicts and concerns, the New York Times observed that Gottlieb appears "to be headed for confirmation unless some damaging new information turns up."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just two days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Dr. Scott Gottlieb, President Donald Trump's nominee to the lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), drew fire on Wednesday for the millions of dollars he has received from Big Pharma, including the U.S. opioid industry, which he would be charged with regulating.
Though Trump has said he wants to lower drug prices and claims to be concerned about opioid abuse, launching a commission last month to investigate the national epidemic, members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Wednesday argued that his nomination of Gottlieb belied that rhetoric.
Pointing to recently released financial disclosure documents which show that the former physician and resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute has received millions of dollars in compensation from more than 20 biopharma and health companies, ranking Democrat Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) said Trump's nominee had "unprecedented financial entanglements with the industries he would regulate."
Similarly, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said: "The worry here is that there will be industry-supported reforms that will find a voice inside of the agency because of your connection to the industry."
"It seems like it would be a big gift to the drug industry," Murphy continued, "being able to use their political donations in order to ultimately put a group of friendlies on a process or commission that decides approval, rather than having that process sheltered from the political process."
Reporting on the disclosures on Tuesday, the Intercept's Lee Fang noted that since the beginning of 2016, "firms involved in the manufacture and distribution of opioids" alone gave Gottlieb $45,000 in payments and speaking fees--some of which are the very same companies being charged with worsening the opioid epidemic in places like West Virginia.
Dr. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, warned against Gottlieb's confirmation, saying this week that "[o]ur country is in desperate need of an FDA commissioner who will take on the opioid lobby, not one who has a track record of working for it."
During Wednesday's hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also questioned why Trump, who has expressed support for allowing lower-cost pharmaceuticals to be imported from Canada, would nominate a commissioner who has voiced opposition to drug importation.
"I find it amazing that Trump says something during the campaign and then appoints people who have radically different ideas," said Sanders, who in February called on the president to "make good on his campaign promises" and support his recently-introduced importation legislation.
In a series of tweets, Sanders further highlighted Trump's pattern of "nominating people who hold the exact opposite views of what he campaigned on."
Another issue that has raised concern is Gottlieb's stance on deregulating the pharmaceutical process, which he partially outlined on a Forbes' op-ed published last year.
During a press call ahead of Wednesday's hearing, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, said that Gottlieb "is entangled in an unprecedented web of close financial and business ties to the pharmaceutical industry and was no doubt chosen [by Trump] because he is well-suited to carry out the president's reckless, ill-informed vision for deregulating the FDA's review and approval process for prescription medications, including opioids."
Carome continued:
In exchange for getting medications to the market faster, he believes that the FDA must be willing to accept a greater degree of uncertainty about the drugs' safety and efficacy at the time of approval.
He also has questioned the FDA's use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) to ensure safe drug use, challenging the FDA's authority to impose requirements for such plans on pharma companies. The FDA currently relies on REMS plans as one tool to try to ensure the safe use of many medications.
Dr. Gottlieb's appointment would further accelerate a decades-long trend in which agency leadership too often makes decisions that are aligned more with the interests of industry than those of patients.
What's more, The Hill reported that despite having numerous industry ties, Gottlieb on Wednesday "would not commit" to Murray's request to recuse himself for two years "from FDA matters that directly impact the more than two dozen companies he's tied." Last month he agreed to recuse himself and divest his financial interests for one year.
Regardless of these mounting conflicts and concerns, the New York Times observed that Gottlieb appears "to be headed for confirmation unless some damaging new information turns up."
Dr. Scott Gottlieb, President Donald Trump's nominee to the lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), drew fire on Wednesday for the millions of dollars he has received from Big Pharma, including the U.S. opioid industry, which he would be charged with regulating.
Though Trump has said he wants to lower drug prices and claims to be concerned about opioid abuse, launching a commission last month to investigate the national epidemic, members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Wednesday argued that his nomination of Gottlieb belied that rhetoric.
Pointing to recently released financial disclosure documents which show that the former physician and resident fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute has received millions of dollars in compensation from more than 20 biopharma and health companies, ranking Democrat Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) said Trump's nominee had "unprecedented financial entanglements with the industries he would regulate."
Similarly, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said: "The worry here is that there will be industry-supported reforms that will find a voice inside of the agency because of your connection to the industry."
"It seems like it would be a big gift to the drug industry," Murphy continued, "being able to use their political donations in order to ultimately put a group of friendlies on a process or commission that decides approval, rather than having that process sheltered from the political process."
Reporting on the disclosures on Tuesday, the Intercept's Lee Fang noted that since the beginning of 2016, "firms involved in the manufacture and distribution of opioids" alone gave Gottlieb $45,000 in payments and speaking fees--some of which are the very same companies being charged with worsening the opioid epidemic in places like West Virginia.
Dr. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, warned against Gottlieb's confirmation, saying this week that "[o]ur country is in desperate need of an FDA commissioner who will take on the opioid lobby, not one who has a track record of working for it."
During Wednesday's hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also questioned why Trump, who has expressed support for allowing lower-cost pharmaceuticals to be imported from Canada, would nominate a commissioner who has voiced opposition to drug importation.
"I find it amazing that Trump says something during the campaign and then appoints people who have radically different ideas," said Sanders, who in February called on the president to "make good on his campaign promises" and support his recently-introduced importation legislation.
In a series of tweets, Sanders further highlighted Trump's pattern of "nominating people who hold the exact opposite views of what he campaigned on."
Another issue that has raised concern is Gottlieb's stance on deregulating the pharmaceutical process, which he partially outlined on a Forbes' op-ed published last year.
During a press call ahead of Wednesday's hearing, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, said that Gottlieb "is entangled in an unprecedented web of close financial and business ties to the pharmaceutical industry and was no doubt chosen [by Trump] because he is well-suited to carry out the president's reckless, ill-informed vision for deregulating the FDA's review and approval process for prescription medications, including opioids."
Carome continued:
In exchange for getting medications to the market faster, he believes that the FDA must be willing to accept a greater degree of uncertainty about the drugs' safety and efficacy at the time of approval.
He also has questioned the FDA's use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) to ensure safe drug use, challenging the FDA's authority to impose requirements for such plans on pharma companies. The FDA currently relies on REMS plans as one tool to try to ensure the safe use of many medications.
Dr. Gottlieb's appointment would further accelerate a decades-long trend in which agency leadership too often makes decisions that are aligned more with the interests of industry than those of patients.
What's more, The Hill reported that despite having numerous industry ties, Gottlieb on Wednesday "would not commit" to Murray's request to recuse himself for two years "from FDA matters that directly impact the more than two dozen companies he's tied." Last month he agreed to recuse himself and divest his financial interests for one year.
Regardless of these mounting conflicts and concerns, the New York Times observed that Gottlieb appears "to be headed for confirmation unless some damaging new information turns up."

