Merck's behavior, in my mind, was tantamount to negligent homicide. They were going to kill people and they knew it.

The agency has to be a more collaborative, communicative organization, ... New kinds of internal incentive plans to socialize this behavior are crucial. The agency of 2010 has to provide total transparency. How else can you talk to the Internet generation?

Can our mind evolve to be something other than an extension of our animal needs?

You get into serious trouble when - during a heated exchange - the mind starts to ask questions about your behavior prior to the fight. That's why many times we see a fighter doing quite well in the ring, hitting the other guy almost at will and suddenly, after a couple of rounds of failing to put his rival down or out, he starts to think about the wrong things he did during training.

What a jury is going to get is A, Merck fudged on the details. B, the fudge was in their favor. C, it was on purpose. D, Merck lied about fudging, or at least covered it up. And E, the most prestigious medical journal in the United States of America has called their hand on it and said this is unethical and wrong.

The lawyers have to try to give the jurors on their side the ammunition to sway the other jurors during deliberations. That's the key.