|
CNBC'S MOST SHARED
- Investing in Tech Now
- Warren Buffett Tells CNBC Consumer Sales Remain "Very, Very Soft"
- Software Giants Rush to Cash In on Carbon Counting
- Preparing for Retirement
- What You'll See On My NASCAR Documentary Tonight
- Warren Buffett's Complete Sun Valley CNBC Interview - Transcript and Video
- Microsoft Plays a Game of Bing Pong
- How exactly does Twitter plan on making money?
- Playing by Different Rules
- Nikkei on Track to Break 6-Day Losing Streak
- Social Networking's 'Naked' Truth
- Farrell: Let's Enjoy the Numbers for a Moment
- Call Of Shame - Vote Now
- Schmidt on Social Media, Ads and Hulu
- 15 Stocks to Consider
- Maximum Bob Goes Full Throttle For GM
- Najarian: Options Get Bullish on Cisco
- Sun Valley on Social Media
- Four Hardware Stocks Upgraded by Goldman
- GM CEO Vows Leaner and Better Company To Emerge
- GM CFO Young: No Positive Cash Flow Until 2009
- Consumers' Mood Sours in Early July
- World Has Avoided Economic Disaster, Obama Says
- Less Demand for Fed's Emergency Backstops
- Claims Total Over 15,400 in Fraud by Madoff
- UBS Can't Comply with US Request: Internal Memo
- Cisco Cutting up to 2,000 Jobs, Analyst Says
- Treasury Sold Warrants Below Market Value: Panel
RSS FEED

![]() |
Sidney Taurel |
Meantime, Joe Kernen had just walked off the set after wrapping up "Squawk Box" and as he sauntered by, he shouted, "Hey, Huckman! Did you see Sidney Taurel's op-ed piece in 'The Journal'? He mentions you by name!" Okay, drop everything. I quickly opened the front section to the op-ed page and scanned the piece headlined, "The Media on Drugs" (don't like that turn of phrase, by the way) by none other than the Chairman and CEO of Eli Lilly [LLY
Loading...
()
] , Sidney Taurel. Here's the link. Can't find my name. Turns out Kernen, as is his way, was referring to the Huckman reference as a 'read between the lines' kind of thing. Taurel doesn't name any names.
Taurel is complaining about the media coverage of recent news surrounding his company's experimental bloodthinner which sent his stock into a swoon. First, a report--which CNBC did not break, but did cover--about LLY halting enrollment in two small clinical trials of the drug. And second, about the subsequent embargoed results of a large study of LLY's prasugrel versus Plavix from Bristol-Myers Squibb [BMY
Loading...
()
] and Sanofi-Aventis [SNY
Loading...
()
] . Taurel admonishes the news media to not "trade in leaks and rumors where scientific data are concerned. Wait for real numbers, and take the time to explain statistics and benefit risk analysis, which cannot be conveyed in sound bites alone." And throughout the piece he refers to the "media beast" which he accurately portrays as needing to be fed almost 24/7.
I think Taurel is shooting the messenger. Lilly had to know that the original story about the halted clinical trials was going to break. And, if so, it had a golden opportunity to try to get out in front of it and do some spin control. For example, offer up high-level executives to reporters immediately. Put out a more detailed statement than the one it released. The company might argue that its hands were tied because of the pending embargo on the larger clinical trial results which were soon due to be presented at the American Heart Association meeting and published in "The New England Journal of Medicine."
But I suspect that given the extraordinary circumstances--the news of the two smaller studies being halted and the steep $6 billion decline in LLY's market value because of it--that the company might have been able to convince AHA and/or NEJM to loosen up a little and let its officials discuss at least some of the results in an open forum, pre-embargo.
![]()

I could be wrong, though, as scientific organizations and medical journals are extremely protective of their material because they want the big media bang that occurs when an embargo lifts, especially on a huge, highly-anticipated clinical trial like this one.
If Lilly doesn't cancel, I will be doing a live interview with Mr. Taurel on "Squawk Box" ahead of his company's analyst meeting in New York next week. He and I have enjoyed a good working relationship. He's almost always been accessible and is one of the few big pharma CEOs who doesn't shy away from the camera and is adept at fielding rapid-fire questions on a variety of topics "live" and on the fly. So, I'm looking forward to what I hope will be an enlightening discussion about whether it's the media or Eli Lilly who's "on drugs".
Questions? Comments?







