Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Barbara Holzer, Broadcast Manager
w. (202) 588-7716

Karilyn Gower, Press Officer
w. (202) 588-7779

David Rosen, Press Officer, Regulatory Affairs
w. (202) 588-7742

Symone Sanders, Communications Officer, Global Trade Watch division
w. (202) 454-5108

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog

Follow us on Twitter


May 20, 2014

HHS Response to Public Citizen’s Finding of Agency Misconduct Doesn’t Add Up

Statement of Dr. Michael Carome, Director, Public Citizen’s Health Research Group

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) response to our letter today to the HHS Inspector General can only be viewed as a pitiful and continuing attempt to cover up the unprecedented and unethical HHS/National Institutes of Health (NIH) interference in Office for Human Research Protections’ (OHRP’s) responsibility to ensure that human research is ethical.

In an initial reaction to Public Citizen’s letter to the HHS Inspector General calling for a formal investigation of the NIH’s interference with the OHRP’s investigation of the SUPPORT study, HHS spokesperson Tait Sye, according to media reports, argued that the NIH merely worked to correct “incomplete information” in the first report issued by OHRP and that such communication was not “uncommon.” Sye was quoted as saying, “OHRP regularly works with entities such as NIH … and others to ensure the protection of human subjects in research.”

If such communications are so routine and involve only providing OHRP with more complete information, why was such information redacted from the email provided to Public Citizen in response to our Freedom of Information Act request? We call on HHS to immediately make public all of the records related to this troubling episode, without the redactions.

The HHS response not only lacks credibility, it attempts to cover up the NIH’s disturbing interference — facilitated by high-ranking officials in the HHS Office of the Secretary — which compromised the integrity and independence of OHRP’s investigation of the SUPPORT study and threatens to undermine the protection of human subjects participating in HHS-funded research more broadly. In particular:

  • It is not believable that senior HHS officials, such as the deputy secretary and HHS chief of staff, regularly involve themselves in discussions with senior NIH officials and others about draft OHRP compliance investigation letters.
  • It is not believable that NIH officials, including the NIH director and deputy director, routinely are given opportunities to review and edit draft OHRP compliance investigation letters.
  • It is not believable that NIH scientists, who are co-investigators on NIH-funded multicenter studies, are given opportunities to review draft OHRP compliance investigation letters related to their own studies.

The involvement of NIH and senior HHS officials in OHRP’s ongoing compliance investigation of the SUPPORT study was unprecedented.

The redactions from the emails released to Public Citizen no doubt were intended to prevent embarrassment to HHS and keep secret communications that documented the true nature and scope of NIH’s interference in OHRP’s investigation and the facilitation of this interference by senior HHS officials in the Office of the Secretary.

When the full text of these emails becomes known, the redacted material will clarify and expose the unacceptable and unprecedented role played by top HHS and NIH officials in fending off OHRP’s investigation of unethical research and appropriate enforcement action.


Copyright © 2015 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.

Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation


Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.


To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.