Destaquei a relação das 100 pessoas mais influentes da atualidade pelo Time magazine onde figurava Steven Nissen. Depois do caso Avandia, ele está novamente no foco da mídia e, também de seus "admiradores". Vejam, os comentários abaixo retirado do Heartwire, um boletim do Medscape.
Nissen: A public safety net? Other media coverage surrounding the rosiglitazone saga has focused on Nissen himself. The WSJ chronicled the background to the current study, noting that Nissen first became interested in rosiglitazone after finding that cardiovascular side effects were an issue with a related drug, muraglitazar. After publishing these findings, he received an email from a diabetes expert suggesting that rosiglitazone may have similar issues. Then last year, after seeing signs of cardiovascular problems in the DREAM and ADOPT studies, he started searching for more data, which he found on the FDA and GlaxoSmithKline websites. Cleveland Clinic statistician Kathy Wolski, who helped Nissen with the analysis, describes him in the WSJ article as “a dog with a bone" in his determination to investigate this issue. As Nissen was also involved in the downfall of Vioxx (rofecoxib, Merck), he is gaining somewhat of a reputation as a drug watchdog. An Associated Press report describes Nissen as a “public safety net," adding: "As criticism of the FDA mounts, Nissen, aided by powerful medical journals and government officials, has become a de facto drug regulator." But one blogger on the WSJ site has a less charitable take on Nissen’s actions, noting that his unfavorable studies are focused on drugs and companies that are not supporting large trials with the Cleveland Clinic . “Wake up pharmaceutical companies. . . . If you don’t hire the Cleveland Clinic for your big trials then you face the firing squad from Nissen and company," he jests.