tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post8662361570724056174..comments2024-03-17T09:40:53.611-04:00Comments on Just A Life Sciences Blog...: Legacy Schering-Plough Company Incurs Largest "Single-Case" Medi-Fraud Fine In Massachusetts HistoryUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-64384002332398458442011-12-23T09:04:56.966-05:002011-12-23T09:04:56.966-05:00Right you are. I forgot that Thompson was a legacy...Right you are. I forgot that Thompson was a legacy Schering-Plough board member (and one of only three people -- of 12 -- that was asked to join the "New" Merck board). [The others were Patricia Russo (GM, while in bankruptcy); and C. Robert Kidder, the Chrysler guy. Huh -- both automaking connects -- odd.]<br /><br />In any event, as to Dr. Thompson at Sloan-Kettering, I should note that -- at least in theory -- Merck's <a href="http://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.com/2011/12/merck-adopts-irrevocable-retroactive.html" rel="nofollow">new bylaw provision on indemnity</a> would allow (but not require) the Merck board to pay the expenses of Dr. Thompson's defense -- in the <i>U. of Penn. v. Sloan-Kettering</i> case, <b>if</b> the board were to determine that Merck actually derived benefit from Dr. Thompson's service at Sloan-Kettering (i.e., enhanced customer relations, <b>in Merck's oncology franchises</b>, due to his connections there).<br /><br />I didn't really discuss <a href="http://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.com/2011/12/merck-adopts-irrevocable-retroactive.html" rel="nofollow">that part of the new indemnity</a>, but it is certainly in the bylaws, as amended. <br /><br />I would hope that Merck would not even consider such an action -- but as is often the case, the truth turns out to be far stranger than any fiction we could imagine.<br /><br />Thanks for the clarification -- and have a safe holiday!<br /><br />NamasteCondorhttp://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-31304045726818609872011-12-22T19:46:18.469-05:002011-12-22T19:46:18.469-05:00Sorry I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to in...Sorry I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to infer that Fred was directly involved in the substance of the issue in this article. I was referring to the apparent integrity question about Dr. Thompson--who was selected to join the SGP board (and I believe continues on the MRK board) by Fred very soon after he assumed the throne.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-50616694278483520042011-12-22T00:27:08.554-05:002011-12-22T00:27:08.554-05:00I gather that Celgene is a nominal defendant (in t...I gather that Celgene is a nominal defendant (in the lawsuit against the Sloan-Kettering CEO), and thus Carrie Cox (in her role as a <a href="http://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.com/2009/12/celgene-another-board-seat-for-carrie.html" rel="nofollow">Celgene director</a>) would be connected, at least marginally.<br /><br />If memory serves, though -- Fred Hassan is <b>not</b> on the board of Celgene, and is <b>not</b> on Sloan Kettering's board, either -- as near as I can tell.<br /><br />Is it the long-prior Warburg Pincus funding of Celgene (and Fred's seat at Warburg) to which you refer?<br /><br />I am confused. And -- to be sure -- I may just be missing something obvious.<br /><br />NamasteCondorhttp://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4241416962008169508.post-6808779346507750192011-12-21T21:52:31.781-05:002011-12-21T21:52:31.781-05:00How did you miss reporting on one of Fast Freddy&#...How did you miss reporting on one of Fast Freddy's SGP Board appointments? Seehttp://www.pharmalot.com/2011/12/sloan-kettering-ceo-and-unscrupulous-behavior/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com