This is complex, this is time consuming. Two days of evidence presented to the jury, judge and layperson (me included).
Cut through the endless amount of questions (they always lead to the truth where GSK are concerned) - and you will see, through Healy's evidence, the reasons why this case is a "Slam Dunk" for Dolin et al and why GSK's hot shot law team bounce up and down crying 'objection' at every given opportunity.
Objection! Because they don't want the jury to know about their previous ghostwritten articles.
Objection! Because they don't want the jury to know about GSK's previous fine of $3billion (yes, that's billion, fine for promoting Paxil off-label to kids.
Objection! Because they don't want the jury to know about the Paxil withdrawal issue because, "it's a case that is on-going against them in the UK) - Forget the case of Paxil withdrawal they've already settled with over 3,000 plaintiffs in the US, right?
Objection! Because they don't want the jury to know they lied about the fact that Paxil was safe for kids.
They even objected to Wendy Dolin's attorneys for wishing the jury had a great weekend, or words to that effect!
What I have witnessed here in Chicago is a law team representing an abhorrent company, the law team being made up of men and women (think about the birth defects Paxil has caused - I mean, their law team has a woman of child bearing years!)
Bayman (King & Spalding) also asked the Judge to reiterate to the jury that they should not "Google" about Paxil or the case in question. Yeah, right, Heaven forbid the jury stumble upon GSK's abhorrent record and/or disregard for human life, right?
I honestly don't know how a team with kids, siblings, wives, husbands or any other family members for that matter, can sit there and defend a drug (Paxil) that has caused so much heartache for families over the years. Are they devoid of any compassion, any empathy, any common sense?
My thoughts are, to some, irrelevant - Am I biased? Maybe? With a whole bunch of lawyers sitting on one side of a courtroom defending a drug that, probably, none of them have taken or, none of their loved ones have taken, I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall.
King & Spalding's main two men, Andrew Baymen and Todd (snigger at a name that befits a child) Davis, seem devoid of any compassion and/or rationale - they don't want to talk about ghostwritten articles, they don't want to talk about the $3 billion dollar fine their defendant got for the illegal promotion of off-label practises of many drugs, including Paxil. They don't want to talk about the withdrawal problems that Paxil can cause, and they don't want to talk about how the company they are defending put children and adolescents at risk when they sent out their work force to promote the safety and efficacy of Paxil.
For these reasons, I am de-humanized from that table (in the courtroom) that represents this truly abhorrent company. A table of psychopaths or people who just want the right to pay their monthly bills? - Psychopaths is a pretty good description, given that they know, and have known of Paxil's severe side effects for many, many years.
Healy's expert opinion leaves me wondering if the jury want/need to hear anything more. He told the jury how...
- In 2006, the FDA knew about the increased suicidal risk on Paxil.
- GSK reported that there was no risk f Paxil induced suicide in 1999.
- GSK showed 6 suicide ttempts on placebo,when the actual figure was 1, in fact it was zero!
- GSK claimed that Paxil did NOT cause suicide and this convinced prescribing Dr's to prescribe Paxil.
Let's just take a look at some evidence aired today...these are from GSK's own internal documents. The public, or those who had or have been prescribed Paxil never got to hear about this...
- 50 year-old female patient who became suicidal on Paxil (GSK's own admission, probable cause!)
- 55 year-old male patient who showed "unrest and agitation" - patient was put on Paxil for 3 days when problems began, Paxil was stopped - patient felt better.
- 59 year-old male - experienced 'restlessness', visual disturbances - Patient recovered one day after Paxil was removed!
- 32 year-old male, on day one of Paxil treatment, developed severe akathisia - patient was confused throughout study.
Healy reminded the jury that GSK's stance was that Paxil, a drug that was used to treat anxiety and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) could not cause adults suicidality yet it actually made, some people develop symptoms that it was, originally, meant to treat! Ergo, take Paxil to help anxiety MDD and suicidal thinking when, in actual fact, Paxil could cause these symptoms. Dr's would then increase the dose thinking that Paxil (at a lower dose) wasn't working.
Many exhibits were aired that further showed how GSK hid the suicide link with Paxil. In fact, it was learned, GSK's own re-analysis of Paxil (2006) showed an increase of 6.7 patients in Paxil adult patents. (the increase 6.7 times the greater likelihood one who takes Paxil will develop suicidality)
Oh, by the way, Stewart Dolin was 57.
Healy told the court that, based on his own clinical experience, Paxil was the most potent and problematic of all the SSRIs on the market. He also informed the jury that, as a clinician himself, he does not prescribe Paxil and added that the hospital where he works does not have Paxil on their list as a possible medication to treat a psychiatric illness.
To back up the evidence, the jury was shown an email to GSK's marketing guru, Barry Brand. The email focused on Paxil's suicide problem.
King & Spalding's, Andrew Bayman, played his 'Jack-in-the Box' routine throughout the day. His sidekick, from King & Spalding, Todd Davis, remained in the wings being as quiet as a mouse - strange because it is "Todd" who has targeted the kids of Wendy Dolin leading up to this litigation. Is Todd married? Does Todd have a regular girlfriend/boyfriend? Does he have children of his own? Is his blinking affliction down to the overuse of a psychotropic medication? Who knows?
That's poor show from me, I shouldn't mock the afflicted...then again, these schmucks have defended the indefensible for years - they've shown no remorse when people have gone on to kill themselves whilst on Paxil - why would they when they are earning vast amounts of money (by the hour) defending GSK?
GSK are King & Spalding's cash cow. They tried, through objection, to hide the truth about Paxil to the jury. They failed on a grand-scale.
Most damning, for today at least, was Healy's claim that he is one of the only people to have read the 'raw data' regarding Paxil and suicide, raw data that leaves him firmly believing Paxil can induce suicidality in adults, something that GSK have, for years, denied.
Healy also spoke how GSK used the term 'emotional lability' when reporting suspected suicidality in clinical trials, a term that would have made, even him, think there was no problem with Paxil. A term that would have made most prescribing doctors think that there was no suicide problem with Paxil!
GSK's table of attorneys look slick. One aging bald-headed guy even approached the judge at the end of today's proceedings to complain that Wendy Dolin's law team had wished the jury a "nice weekend" as they were dismissed.
Objection, objection, objection.
They seem like a stuck record. A team of misfits whose only mission is to blame everything but Paxil opting, instead, to blame the patients for having an 'underlying illness'.
The questioning of Healy by Dolin's attorney's finished today. He will be cross examined by King & Spalding on Monday.
I'll be there. Stewart Dolin will be there in spirit.
More on the past two days events tomorrow night, in particular evidence that shows how a witness called for GSK in this trial showed how another unrelated drug caused two patients akathisia and they 'jumped' to their death.
Stewart Dolin (57) 'jumped' in front of a train because Paxil caused psychosis and akathisia, an adverse drug reaction that is so horrible, death can be seen as a welcome alternative.
Dolin back stories.