A new study has found that iPods can cause malfunction in implantable pacemakers. According to a report, interfering with the telemetry equipment caused the device to misread the heart’s pacing and in one case caused the pacemaker to stop functioning altogether.

The lead author had concluded that iPod interference can lead physicians to misdiagnose actual heart function.

This, of course, raises potential legal issues for the pacemakers and physicians that implant them in the arena of products liability or medical malpractice. Since many iPods are now dropped into breast pockets, right next to heart, the issue going forward will be the need to warn patients about such a practice.

Former CIA Director George Tenet, in a book to be released next week, says that President George Bush wanted trial lawyers to help sell the Iraq war when the evidence for war wasn’t strong enough. This story comes from a passage buried deep within an article starting on the front page of today’s New York Times.

The Times focuses on Tenet’s discussion of how Vice President Dick Cheney was pushing hard for war, when other alternatives existed. Explaining his “slam dunk” comment that the administration has used to justify its rush to war, the article states:

Mr. Tenet says he decided to write the memoir in part because the infamous “slam dunk” episode had come to define his tenure at C.I.A.

He gives a detailed account of the episode, which occurred during an Oval Office meeting in December 2002 when the administration was preparing to make public its case for war against Iraq.

During the meeting, the deputy C.I.A. director, John McLaughlin, unveiled a draft of a proposed public presentation that left the group unimpressed. Mr. Tenet recalls that Mr. Bush suggested that they could “add punch” by bringing in lawyers trained to argue cases before a jury.

“I told the president that strengthening the public presentation was a ‘slam dunk,’ a phrase that was later taken completely out of context,” Mr. Tenet writes. “If I had simply said, ‘I’m sure we can do better,’ I wouldn‘t be writing this chapter — or maybe even this book.”

I find it a bit odd that Bush — well known for trashing trial lawyers every chance he has — would try to turn in that direction for support.

Tenet will be on 60 Minutes this Sunday pitching his book, and it will no doubt be a topic of some discussion all next week as it moves into circulation and gets reviewed.

From Ed Silverman at Pharmalot:

Four big drugmakers are ponying up a combined $8.1 million to create a new center devoted to health and pharma law at Seton Hall University’s law school, which is located in a New Jersey suburb about 30 minutes from Manhattan.

The new Center for Health & Pharmaceutical Law is being funded by Schering-Plough, Sanofi–Aventis, Johnson & Johnson and Bristol-Myers Squibb. The law school claims this will be the only US academic policy center of its kind focusing on legal issues surrounding big pharma.

So, does anyone think Seton Hall’s syllabus will be objective, or perhaps, just a tad slanted toward those that are funding them? According to an assistant dean, as quoted in Newsday, “We would like to do so as a neutral academic institution.” Uh huh. I’m sure that, notwithstanding the 8 million bucks, they wouldn’t hesitate to criticize their benefactors when warranted. [Edit: Excessively snarky comment removed]

Now check out this bit from the Pharmalot piece:

Bristol-Myers Squibb is establishing the chair as part of a resolution of an investigation by the U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie, a Seton Hall alum, who required the drugmaker to sign a Deferred Prosecution Agreement in the wake of an accounting scandal. The DPA expires in June and Christie recently said he’s ‘very happy’ with Bristol’s progress.

The lion’s share of the money, $5M, came from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Perhaps it was just a coincidence that the U.S. Attorney’s alma mater was the one to benefit from this agreement with a big drugmaker? Now that can’t be right, can it?

Addendum: William Childs at TortsProf followed up with a comparison of the Seton Hall pharmaceutical deal with Temple University naming its law school after plaintiff’s attorney James Beasley, founder of the Beasley Firm. He could have added the Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, named after the personal injury attorney, and later Court of Appeals judge, of that name.

Second Addendum – (4/27/07) — The story is covered today at the WSJ Law Blog, and this quote popped off the page for me:

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney told the Law Blog that the fact that Bristol Myers donated to Christie’s alma mater is nothing more than a coincidence. He points that there are only two law school in New Jersey and the other — Rutgers — already had a business ethics endowed chair.

Why did the money have to go to a law school? Are there no other worthy causes to give 9 million bucks to? The explanation looks particularly lame.