1.Leader of the FDA Steps Down after a Short, Turbulent Tenure - New York Times
2.Friend of Bush, Andrew von Eschenbach - NATURE
The president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization has described Bush's new appointment as head of the FDA as an "excellent choice". (item 1)
And no wonder. Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach is an extreme techophile, who has even predicted that cancer will be wiped out in the U.S. by 2015 thanks to nanotech and similar technical fixes.
Von Eschenbach is known to favour the rapid development and "immediate application" of such "innovative technologies".
A pal of George W. Bush's (item 2), von Eschenbach was largely unknown to the biomedical research community until his previous appointment as director of the National Cancer Institute by Bush.
What impact von Eschenbach has on the currently troubled FDA remains to be seen. "As currently configured," the FDA senior drug safety researcher, Dr. David Graham, recently noted, "the FDA is not able to adequately protect the American public. It's more interested in protecting the interests of industry. It views industry as its client, and the client is someone whose interest you represent. Unfortunately, that is the way the FDA is currently structured."
http://www.newstarget.com/011401.html
Given that, it hardly bodes well that while head of the NCI, von Eschenbach was accused of seeking "to undermine the FDA's drug approval requirements" and of "meeting behind closed doors with a representative of the drug industry to influence drug approval policy and to change the product liability laws" in a direction that did not safeguard the interests of patients.
http://www.medicalconsumers.org/pages/Letter%20To%20FDA--Approval%20of%20Cancer%20Prevention%20Drugs.html
---
1.Leader of the FDA Steps Down after a Short, Turbulent Tenure
By Robert Pear and Andrew Pollack
The New York Times, 24 September 2005
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/092405D.shtml
Washington - Lester M. Crawford, the commissioner of food and drugs, resigned abruptly on Friday, causing further upheaval at an agency that has been in turmoil for more than a year.
Dr. Crawford, who was confirmed just two months ago, on July 18, after serving as acting commissioner for more than a year, did not say why he was stepping down.
Senior officials at the Food and Drug Administration said they were stunned to learn of the resignation in an e-mail message from Dr. Crawford, who also sent a letter to President Bush stating that he was resigning "effective immediately."
A government official said the resignation was related to the fact that Dr. Crawford had not fully disclosed information about his finances to the Senate before his confirmation. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, citing Dr. Crawford's privacy.
Michael O. Leavitt, the secretary of health and human services, accepted the resignation and thanked Dr. Crawford for his service.
Christina Pearson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Leavitt, refused to say whether Bush administration officials had asked for the resignation.
"I can't comment," Ms. Pearson said. "This is a personnel issue."
In recent weeks, consumer advocates and scientists inside and outside the agency had said scientific decisions were being warped by politics.
On Thursday, a commentary in The New England Journal of Medicine titled "A Sad Day for Science at the FDA" said that "recent actions of the FDA leadership have made a mockery of the process of evaluating scientific evidence," disillusioned many scientists, "squandered the public trust and tarnished the agency's image."
Mr. Bush said he intended to name Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, director of the National Cancer Institute, to be acting commissioner of food and drugs.
Dr. Crawford, a veterinarian and expert on food safety, was named deputy commissioner of the agency in early 2002 before his tenure as acting commissioner. In that time the agency has been rocked by disputes over many issues, including the safety of painkillers like Vioxx, the regulation of heart defibrillators and other devices, and delays in deciding whether to allow over-the-counter sales of an emergency contraceptive.
The director of the agency's Office of Women's Health, Dr. Susan F. Wood, resigned three weeks ago to protest delays in approving over-the-counter sales of the morning-after pill Plan B.
Critics, including members of Congress from both parties, say the agency has not provided the public with enough information about the risks of drugs and devices.
"In recent years the FDA has demonstrated a too-cozy relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and an attitude of shielding rather than disclosing information," said Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Senator Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, said the agency had been "politicized and degraded" under Dr. Crawford, whose leadership she described as "tepid and passive."
Before the Senate confirmed Dr. Crawford, a Senate committee looked into accusations that he was having an affair with a woman who worked in his office and that he had wasted government money by taking her on official trips when she was not needed. An anonymous letter also suggested that Dr. Crawford had helped the woman secure a promotion to a higher-paying job.
An inquiry by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services found some contradictions in statements by Dr. Crawford and the woman. Investigators found a close personal relationship between them but no evidence of an extramarital affair.
The committee chairman, Senator Michael B. Enzi, Republican of Wyoming, said at the time that the inspector general had found no merit to the charges leveled at Dr. Crawford. No senator wanted to pursue the issue then.
In his message to colleagues on Friday, Dr. Crawford said that after three and a half years in top positions at the agency, "it is time, at the age of 67, to step aside."
Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, who voted against Dr. Crawford's nomination, said Friday: "The Food and Drug Administration is facing nothing short of a crisis in leadership. The controversy surrounding Vioxx and other pharmaceuticals has exposed weak oversight, conflict of interest and poor management at the FDA."
Ira Loss, senior health analyst at Washington Analysis, which studies federal issues for investors, said he had been told by someone in the White House that Dr. Crawford had been asked to resign for a reason not yet known to the public.
"Something new has arisen that has led to this," Mr. Loss said. It was not the controversy over the morning-after pill, he said, because Dr. Crawford "did what they wanted on Plan B."
Under Dr. Crawford, the agency was buffeted by fierce debates over drug safety.
Critics, including many in Congress, said the agency had tried to stifle one of its own scientists who had found evidence that the use of antidepressants could cause children and teenagers to become more suicidal.
The agency was also criticized as slow to recognize that Vioxx and similar pain medicines could increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Merck withdrew Vioxx from the market a year ago and is facing thousands of lawsuits from people who say they were harmed by the drug.
Under pressure, Dr. Crawford and the agency have started to release more information about potential safety problems of drugs and devices, rather than waiting, as in the past, until they had a fuller picture.
"I think he started to lift the veil on how the FDA does business, which was long overdue," said Peter Pitts, a former associate commissioner under Dr. Crawford.
While many critics say drugs are approved too quickly, the FDA has also come under fire from pharmaceutical companies and some patient advocates for not approving drugs quickly enough.
Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies had generally welcomed Dr. Crawford's appointment, partly because of his long experience at the agency, but also because they wanted a full-time commissioner. Many industry officials say that under an acting commissioner, the agency tends to put off difficult decisions.
The agency has had a full-time commissioner for only about 18 months out of the four and a half years that President Bush has been in office.
The president's first appointee, Dr. Mark B. McClellan, did not take office until November 2002 and then left about 16 months later to run the Medicare program.
It now appears that the agency will be without a permanent commissioner for some time. Experience shows that it is difficult for any nominee to obtain broad support in the Senate, because the agency handles so many volatile issues.
Dr. von Eschenbach has been director of the National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health, since January 2002. Before that, he had a long career as a doctor and executive at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
James C. Greenwood, president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, which represents biotech companies, described Dr. von Eschenbach as an "excellent choice" who would provide strong leadership.
Mr. Greenwood had no comment on Dr. Crawford's resignation. Nor did the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which represents big drug companies.
---
2.[image caption: Friend of Bush, Andrew von Eschenbach]
New NCI director appointed
Laura Bonetta
Bethesda
Nature Medicine 8, 7 (2002)
doi:10.1038/nm0102-7
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v8/n1/full/nm0102-7.html
The new year sees Andrew C. von Eschenbach begin his job as director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the largest institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The head of the $3.8 billion NCI is the only NIH director who is chosen by the president, and George W. Bush has selected von Eschenbach from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in his home state of Texas.
Von Eschenbach was largely unknown to the biomedical research community until his appointment. He is a cancer survivor himself and was the director of the Genitourinary Cancer Center and of a prostate cancer research program at M.D. Anderson and president-elect of the American Cancer Society.
He replaces Richard Klausner who was widely regarded as a visionary leader credited with starting several programs to apply new molecular technologies to the understanding and treatment of cancer. Whereas Klausner's career has included basic research, Von Eschenbach has no background in bench research.
Go to a Print friendly Page
Email this Article to a Friend
Back to the Archive
|
