The Philadelphia Inquirer—a troubled newspaper that recently got dumped by Knight-Ridder, and then was bought by some, well, interesting local characters—ran an excellent article by Thomas Ginsburg last week about the pharmaceutical industry's ties to nonprofit health-related organizations like the American Diabetes Association and NAMI (gasp!).

I don't know too much about the ADA, but I know activists have been complaining for years now about NAMI's ties to big pharma, claiming that the money they get has to compromise the information the organization chooses to dole out to consumers. The folks at Mindfreedom International, in particular, have been very vocal on this subject.

Like most advocates, I wish NAMI didn't have such ties. The world would be a cleaner, purer place. They're certainly unseemly. But I don't necessarily assume that NAMI is ethically compromised in every aspect of their operation. Certainly much of what they do doesn't pertain to psychopharmacology at all.

More troubling is the fact that nonprofit organizations of NAMI's ilk are struggling so much financially, they're apparently forced to rely on funders they'd rather not be associated with. Sometimes looking at small organizations' donor lists can make you feel like you have to take a shower.

Donations tie drug firms and nonprofits