We all know there are nuances and subtleties in life. There are also torturous tongue-tied moments when explanations give the impression one is reaching. And that is what Chuck Grassley accuses Emory University of doing in trying to explain away the assorted consulting work reknowned psychiatry professor Charles Nemeroff did on behalf of Glaxo and its drugs, notably the Paxil antidepressant.

Nemeroff, you may recall, is being investigated by the US Senate Finance, where Grassley is the ranking Republican, for alleged conflicts of interest for simultaneously receiving NIH grants and consulting for pharma. He earned more than $2.8 million from various drugmakers between 2000 and 2007, but failed to report at least $1.2 million of this income to the university (back story here and here). At issue is whether universities are adequately policing disclosures in an effort to maintain scientific integrity and objectivity. Emory officials, meanwhile, apparently failed to take action concerning Nemeroff’s activities, even though the university was aware of the issue (see back story).

In a letter yesterday to Emory president Jim Wagner, Grassley reveals that Emory officials insist that Nemeroff’s talks on behalf of Glaxo were not promotional and the professor came up with a novel explanation. “Emory also informed me that Dr. Nemeroff’s promotional talks on behalf of GlaxoSmithKline were not really promotional talks, but were educational and “CME-like.”

In a letter to me, GSK has contradicted that claim and stated that Dr. Nemeroff was paid for product talks,” he wrote. “…Neither anyone on my staff, nor any medical expert that they have contacted, have ever heard of the term ‘CME-like. It appears to be a new term created at Emory University.

CME, of course, refers to continuing medical education talks, which are not supposed to promote a drug. Moreover, the content is also supposed to be independently produced and prepared by an accredited CME outfit. That’s how docs get CME credits to maintain their licenses. However, Grassley wrote that Glaxo informed him previously disclosed Nemeroff speaking on behalf of the drugmaker “contained information for product talks,” and other activities did not identify his talks as “focused on medical education.”

Just so everyone is clear, Grassley finished his letter to Wagner with a warning: “Since I am seeking this information as part of a Congressional inquiry, I want to ensure that Emory and/or Dr. Nemeroff are fully aware of the penalties for making false statements and/or obstructing Congressional investigations. To that end, I am attaching the relevant provisions of law.”Here is the letter and other documents.

An Emory spokesman sent us this: “Emory University has been completely truthful and is well aware of our obligation to do so. We have devoted considerable time and effort to investigating this matter and are soon to announce our findings and response. We have an obligation to be fair and judicious in our resolution of this matter.

In our 17-page, December 5 letter to Senator Grassley, addressing a wide range of questions, we asked that his staff provide us any information that is inconsistent with Dr. Nemeroff’s position with regard to the content of his talks. In response, Senator Grassley provided a letter from GlaxoSmithKline, which we are reviewing. Meanwhile, we recommend that any interested person read in full our letter of December 5, a href=’http://www.pharmalot.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/grassley-to-nih-and-emory.pdf’>which is contained in this link.”

Hat tip to the WSJ Health blog