Friday, June 24, 2011

University of Minnesota Academic Health Center

Continues Assault on Dr. Carl Elliott

Our University has been dealing with Carl Elliott’s personal crusade against our psychiatry department (and Drs. Schulz & Olson specifically) for a number of years.  Unfortunately, lost in the marketing around Carl’s books and the articles he authors is the fact that the multiple bodies who have examined this case (and the University’s role in it) have never found a connection between Dan Markingson’s unfortunate suicide and this clinical trial.

I’m unsure how one man’s opinion has been positioned above the findings of the federal government, state reviews, the courts and our own University’s review boards, but such has been the case. And just in the past few months, you can now add our Board of Regents to the list of reviewers who haven’t found any connection between the CAFÉ trial or Seroquel and Dan’s death. I can appreciate the beliefs of Dan’s mother, and I can see where Carl’s interests lie – but the facts simply point a different direction. 

While I would never imply the media coverage has been unfair, I would say that it’s been unfortunate that one man has been given such a voice when the facts prove his logic is unfounded. I understand that fiction is sometimes more interesting than the facts, but it’s been frustrating for our University to see media coverage that borders on editorial or opinion positioned as news online and in some print sources.

Absolutely wrong that a so-called PR professional would write such a thing in his official capacity as a University of Minnesota Academic Health Center representative.

This is inexcusable and unacceptable.

Mr. Paquette owes Dr. Elliott an immediate and sincere apology.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

What exactly doesn't Mr. Paquette understand regarding Dr. Carl Elliott and the U-MN own Bioethics Department? The only thing on Professor Elliott's agenda from the very beginning was the search for the truth; something the U-MN has never considered pertinent. The psychiatry department at the University has a very storied history of clinical trial fraud, falsifying clinical data, hiring professors that have been discredited elsewhere, hiring professors that have long histories of conflict of interest regarding personal financial ties with pharmaceutical companies ...etc...etc. For a Bioethics Professor who just happens to work at this same University to be concerned about the circumstances Mr. Paquette attempts to downplay extends far beyond any ethics or morals that Mr. Paquette can even attempt to understand.