Slate's Jack Shafer read all 11,700 words of David Willman's report last Sunday in the L.A. Times on the influence of drug companies at the National Institutes of Health -- a story that apparently took five years to report, write and get in the paper. He calls it brilliant, but a flawed masterpiece. Check out his reasoning here.


Posted by: brad smith at December 10, 2003 03:15 PM"Tainted" is a little much, but the editorial that ran the same day read as much tougher and more critical than the mainbar - given the subject matter, the big story almost seemed subdued in its criticism, and it certainly did not need to be ... the NIH policies regarding conflict of interest are appalling.