So Haffner tipped off GlaxoSmithKline with a confidential and unpublished journal article regarding safety questions about their blockbuster diabetes drug Avandia. He had already agreed to read it as part of the peer-review process for the New England Journal of Medicine.
Read it he did and what he read wasn't very favourable to GlaxoSmithKline - so he tells them!
The peer-review process is meant to ensure that other scientists will judge a study’s quality before it is made public.
Charles E. Grassley, Republican on the Finance Committee, sent a letter to GlaxoSmithKline in which he asked what action the company took after receiving the 'unpublished article' - As yet know one knows what their excuse is.
Why did Haffner show GlaxoSmithKline? Well, in his own words:
“Why I sent it is a mystery”
“I don’t really understand it. I wasn’t feeling well. It was bad judgment."
GlaxoSmithKline, as you would expect, have played it all down with some wonderful spin.
Nancy Pekarek, of GlaxoSmithKline, said:
Dr. Haffner had sent the article to the company on May 3, more than two weeks before the article was published in the New England Journal. He expressed concerns and questions regarding the methodology of the analysis, and sent the article to GSK for advice from experienced statisticians.
She added “We believe GSK acted appropriately and responsibly in responding to the situation.”
Dr. Haffner has, by his own disclosure, said that he has conducted research and served as a paid speaker for GlaxoSmithKline. Senator Charles E. Grassley said that Dr. Haffner had received $75,000 in consulting and speaking fees from GlaxoSmithKline since 1999.
By releasing this article to GlaxoSmithKline, Haffner gave them time to prepare for the influx of questions that would be forthcoming once the article was 'officially' released.
Steven M. Haffner, MD, received his medical degree from Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York.
You really don't have to be Albert Einstien to see why Haffner was motivated to leak documents to GlaxoSmithKline do you?
Moneytalks folks
Zantac Lawsuit
Researching drug company and regulatory malfeasance for over 16 years
Humanist, humorist
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Glaxo's Money Buys Doctor's Love
Phil Dawdy over at Furious Seasons has a cracking story on GlaxoSmithKline's 'money love' for a particular doctor. It raises questions again about peer reviews and GSK's 'not so' top selling drug, Avandia.
Read the full eye opening truth HERE
Read the full eye opening truth HERE
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Pesky Fiddaman Part II
Oh dear Oh dear! Have the staff at the MHRA nothing better to do with themselves?
There's me thinking they were out busting small online pharmacies - you know, the kind that are a threat to the major pharmaceutical companies... they are supposed to be buried in over one million pieces of paperwork regarding their current sham of an investigation into GlaxoSmithKline too. So what are they doing today people?
Let's see shall we.
18. 30 January 09:22 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
21. 30 January 10:12 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
22. 30 January 10:16 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
23. 30 January 10:19 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
24. 30 January 10:22 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
37. 30 January 14:03 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
38. 30 January 14:05 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
39. 30 January 14:05 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
40. 30 January 14:08 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
41. 30 January 14:09 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
42. 30 January 14:10 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
43. 30 January 14:11 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
44. 30 January 14:12 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
45. 30 January 14:14 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
46. 30 January 14:15 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Busy reading this blog. Now it may be a coincidence but I asked my MP, Gisela Stuart to ask the Dept of Health what the benefir of Seroxat was... The MHRA can't/won't answer you see. Maybe that is what is eating at the MHRA who seem to access my blog via this page here.
Oh, incidently - The Department of Health have been looking in today too.
25. 30 January 10:27 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
29. 30 January 12:04 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
31. 30 January 12:04 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
Maybe they are researching what the benefit of Seroxat is?
They won't find the answer on here. They won't get the answer off the MHRA either!
Still awaiting your response to my emails Mr Kent Woods - you can't tell me you haven't had time now can you?
Good day to you all.
Fid
There's me thinking they were out busting small online pharmacies - you know, the kind that are a threat to the major pharmaceutical companies... they are supposed to be buried in over one million pieces of paperwork regarding their current sham of an investigation into GlaxoSmithKline too. So what are they doing today people?
Let's see shall we.
18. 30 January 09:22 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
21. 30 January 10:12 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
22. 30 January 10:16 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
23. 30 January 10:19 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
24. 30 January 10:22 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
37. 30 January 14:03 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
38. 30 January 14:05 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
39. 30 January 14:05 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
40. 30 January 14:08 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
41. 30 January 14:09 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
42. 30 January 14:10 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
43. 30 January 14:11 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
44. 30 January 14:12 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
45. 30 January 14:14 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
46. 30 January 14:15 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Busy reading this blog. Now it may be a coincidence but I asked my MP, Gisela Stuart to ask the Dept of Health what the benefir of Seroxat was... The MHRA can't/won't answer you see. Maybe that is what is eating at the MHRA who seem to access my blog via this page here.
Oh, incidently - The Department of Health have been looking in today too.
25. 30 January 10:27 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
29. 30 January 12:04 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
31. 30 January 12:04 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Fiskerton Ferry, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom
Maybe they are researching what the benefit of Seroxat is?
They won't find the answer on here. They won't get the answer off the MHRA either!
Still awaiting your response to my emails Mr Kent Woods - you can't tell me you haven't had time now can you?
Good day to you all.
Fid
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
MHRA 'That pesky Fiddaman has been at it again'
24. 29 January 09:32 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
25. 29 January 09:33 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
26. 29 January 09:34 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
27. 29 January 09:34 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
28. 29 January 09:37 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
29. 29 January 10:40 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
30. 29 January 10:43 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
37. 29 January 13:47 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
38. 29 January 13:52 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
39. 29 January 13:54 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
40. 29 January 13:55 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
41. 29 January 13:55 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
42. 29 January 13:56 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
43. 29 January 13:57 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
44. 29 January 13:57 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Exponential-e Customer Allocation is the server the MHRA use.
Maybe they are looking in at the recent post HERE that clearly shows that they not only have ties to Pharma but they have ties to the Ghost writers too!
Shouldn't you be putting all your efforts into ending your sham of an investigation into GSK Kent? No wonder it's taken you four years if you and your staff are too busy browsing blogs.
TUTT TUTT
Looks like The Guardian have taken an interest too Kent - care to comment?
33. 29 January 12:31 GUARDIAN UNLIMITED, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Fid
25. 29 January 09:33 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
26. 29 January 09:34 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
27. 29 January 09:34 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
28. 29 January 09:37 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
29. 29 January 10:40 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
30. 29 January 10:43 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
37. 29 January 13:47 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
38. 29 January 13:52 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
39. 29 January 13:54 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
40. 29 January 13:55 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
41. 29 January 13:55 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
42. 29 January 13:56 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
43. 29 January 13:57 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
44. 29 January 13:57 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Exponential-e Customer Allocation is the server the MHRA use.
Maybe they are looking in at the recent post HERE that clearly shows that they not only have ties to Pharma but they have ties to the Ghost writers too!
Shouldn't you be putting all your efforts into ending your sham of an investigation into GSK Kent? No wonder it's taken you four years if you and your staff are too busy browsing blogs.
TUTT TUTT
Looks like The Guardian have taken an interest too Kent - care to comment?
33. 29 January 12:31 GUARDIAN UNLIMITED, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Fid
Sunday, January 27, 2008
MHRA 'No Comment'
A while ago I wrote to the MHRA to ask them if they would like to comment on the recent report in The New England Journal of Medicine which said the makers of popular antidepressants published only 14 percent of their unconvincing clinical results.
I provided them with 28 newspaper stories from around the world.
Here's the email I got back from them:
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA
Information Centre
To: fiddaman64
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008
5:10 PM
Subject: RE: Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA.
We have no comment to make on the links referred to in your email. You might be interested to check the link below:
http://www.instituteofclinicalresearch.org/id621EMWA.asp
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point
-----
No comment? Why?... and why on earth send me a link to a ICR/EMWA Joint Symposium?
ICR is the Institute of Clinical Research, EMWA is the European Medical Writers Association, their blurb being:
The European Medical Writers Association was founded in 1989 by a small group of professional biomedical communicators with academic, industrial and journalistic affiliations. Their aim was to provide a forum to promote standards of excellence in medical writing by furthering the professional development of members and increasing awareness of medical writing throughout Europe.
This is all very confusing to me, I was merely asking the MHRA to comment on the recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine and they respond by sending me a link to some sort of seminar full of psychiatrists and ghost writers!
Now with some help from a colleague of mine we have found an interesting thread of discussion on the British Medical Journal (BMJ) Website. The thread is entitled 'Ghost writers need to be more visible'. Interesting because two names pop up - Wager and Jacob.
So who are Wager and Jacob?
They are involved in EMWA (sponsors of the symposium the MHRA referred me to) and their involvement in the actual meeting as hosts and moderators. As hosts you would expect a modicum of transparency. It seems Wager and Jacob are about as transparent as the MHRA if this particular response is to be believed (See 'Poachers & Gamekeepers HERE)
The response, by John Stone, reads:
I am getting ever more confused:-
Challenged by me just over two years ago in Rapid Responses Adam Jacobs was unwilling to name a single article which he had co-authored and also defended practices which make my hair stand on end [1]. He remains shy about declaring which pharmaceutical companies he works for but in Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons he noted: "AJ's company regularly provides services to a variety of pharmaceutical companies, some of which make vaccines, including SmithKline Beecham and Aventis-Pasteur' [2]. There is no client information on his website [3].
Stone continues...
...Liz Wager lists as clients on her website Fujisawa, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Ortho-Biotech and the Royal Brompton Hospital [4] but not here. She is also a member of the BMJ Ethics Committee [5].
The Nordic-Cochrane study, just published Gøtzsche et al 'Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials' is full of citations of Jacobs and Wager, and lists intriguingly 'Liz Wagner' as academic editor [6].
"Elizabeth Wager is a medical writer and trainer for a variety of organizations, including pharmaceutical companies. She is a coauthor of the European Medical Writers Association guidelines for medical writers and Good Publication Practice for pharmaceutical companies, and occasionally receives payment for speaking about or providing training on publication ethics." [7]
Now let's see Jacob's position on the study of clinical trial data and publishing - just so you can all paint your own picture of him.
The thread is entitled 'In defence of medical writers' . This particular sentence grabbed my attention - ... In my own experience of writing papers on behalf of investigators, the named authors always have access to the summary tables and graphs, which is far more important than access to the raw data.
You getting the picture people?
The summary tables and graphs are far more important than access to the raw data?
Far more important to earn a fast buck rather than safeguard human health you mean?
Do I really need to remind Jacob's of the Paxil Study 329? Do I really need to throw names around such as Prof. Martin Keller? Read about him here
Most readers of this blog will already know about Paxil Study 329 - most will already know of Prof. Martin Keller.
I do hope word gets around to Messrs Wager & Jacobs - I do hope that they visit this blog.
I have some questions for them.
1. Exactly what is the EMWA?
2. Why is the EMWA 'supported' by the MHRA?
3. Do you believe scientific fraud is a good thing?
4. Jacobs thinks authors should not have to verify results, is this the position of EMWA as well?
Dr Aubrey Blumsohn has a great article entitled ' Who is the beast? The merger of medical journals and ghostwriters'
He writes: With publication last week of a strange article about the Gillberg affair by the British Medical Journal (BMJ), the dumbing-down is increasingly obvious (read the article and the responses - or at least those which were allowed). The upshot of this BMJ commissioned piece is that researchers faced with questions over the integrity of their data analysis should simply destroy that data. Great advice! News today adds to the concerns. The BMJ have apparently (yet again) declined to publish a paper (about ghostwriting and data misrepresentation of Paxil study 329) involving one of their advertisers (GSK) because "they feel they don't have the resources for the legal work required to check it all". That seems to have become a regular excuse.
I'm still scratching my head at the MHRA for sending me the link. Did they want me to attend the symposium?
It all smacks of one big game for the boys and it's high time this game was put to an end.
Fid
**This article will be sent to the MHRA.
I don't expect them to make any sort of comment on this either!
I provided them with 28 newspaper stories from around the world.
Here's the email I got back from them:
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA
Information Centre
To: fiddaman64
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008
5:10 PM
Subject: RE: Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA.
We have no comment to make on the links referred to in your email. You might be interested to check the link below:
http://www.instituteofclinicalresearch.org/id621EMWA.asp
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point
-----
No comment? Why?... and why on earth send me a link to a ICR/EMWA Joint Symposium?
ICR is the Institute of Clinical Research, EMWA is the European Medical Writers Association, their blurb being:
The European Medical Writers Association was founded in 1989 by a small group of professional biomedical communicators with academic, industrial and journalistic affiliations. Their aim was to provide a forum to promote standards of excellence in medical writing by furthering the professional development of members and increasing awareness of medical writing throughout Europe.
This is all very confusing to me, I was merely asking the MHRA to comment on the recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine and they respond by sending me a link to some sort of seminar full of psychiatrists and ghost writers!
Now with some help from a colleague of mine we have found an interesting thread of discussion on the British Medical Journal (BMJ) Website. The thread is entitled 'Ghost writers need to be more visible'. Interesting because two names pop up - Wager and Jacob.
So who are Wager and Jacob?
They are involved in EMWA (sponsors of the symposium the MHRA referred me to) and their involvement in the actual meeting as hosts and moderators. As hosts you would expect a modicum of transparency. It seems Wager and Jacob are about as transparent as the MHRA if this particular response is to be believed (See 'Poachers & Gamekeepers HERE)
The response, by John Stone, reads:
I am getting ever more confused:-
Challenged by me just over two years ago in Rapid Responses Adam Jacobs was unwilling to name a single article which he had co-authored and also defended practices which make my hair stand on end [1]. He remains shy about declaring which pharmaceutical companies he works for but in Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons he noted: "AJ's company regularly provides services to a variety of pharmaceutical companies, some of which make vaccines, including SmithKline Beecham and Aventis-Pasteur' [2]. There is no client information on his website [3].
Stone continues...
...Liz Wager lists as clients on her website Fujisawa, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Ortho-Biotech and the Royal Brompton Hospital [4] but not here. She is also a member of the BMJ Ethics Committee [5].
The Nordic-Cochrane study, just published Gøtzsche et al 'Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials' is full of citations of Jacobs and Wager, and lists intriguingly 'Liz Wagner' as academic editor [6].
"Elizabeth Wager is a medical writer and trainer for a variety of organizations, including pharmaceutical companies. She is a coauthor of the European Medical Writers Association guidelines for medical writers and Good Publication Practice for pharmaceutical companies, and occasionally receives payment for speaking about or providing training on publication ethics." [7]
Now let's see Jacob's position on the study of clinical trial data and publishing - just so you can all paint your own picture of him.
The thread is entitled 'In defence of medical writers' . This particular sentence grabbed my attention - ... In my own experience of writing papers on behalf of investigators, the named authors always have access to the summary tables and graphs, which is far more important than access to the raw data.
You getting the picture people?
The summary tables and graphs are far more important than access to the raw data?
Far more important to earn a fast buck rather than safeguard human health you mean?
Do I really need to remind Jacob's of the Paxil Study 329? Do I really need to throw names around such as Prof. Martin Keller? Read about him here
Most readers of this blog will already know about Paxil Study 329 - most will already know of Prof. Martin Keller.
I do hope word gets around to Messrs Wager & Jacobs - I do hope that they visit this blog.
I have some questions for them.
1. Exactly what is the EMWA?
2. Why is the EMWA 'supported' by the MHRA?
3. Do you believe scientific fraud is a good thing?
4. Jacobs thinks authors should not have to verify results, is this the position of EMWA as well?
Dr Aubrey Blumsohn has a great article entitled ' Who is the beast? The merger of medical journals and ghostwriters'
He writes: With publication last week of a strange article about the Gillberg affair by the British Medical Journal (BMJ), the dumbing-down is increasingly obvious (read the article and the responses - or at least those which were allowed). The upshot of this BMJ commissioned piece is that researchers faced with questions over the integrity of their data analysis should simply destroy that data. Great advice! News today adds to the concerns. The BMJ have apparently (yet again) declined to publish a paper (about ghostwriting and data misrepresentation of Paxil study 329) involving one of their advertisers (GSK) because "they feel they don't have the resources for the legal work required to check it all". That seems to have become a regular excuse.
I'm still scratching my head at the MHRA for sending me the link. Did they want me to attend the symposium?
It all smacks of one big game for the boys and it's high time this game was put to an end.
Fid
**This article will be sent to the MHRA.
I don't expect them to make any sort of comment on this either!
Seroxat Withdrawal
Well that is GlaxoSmithKline's take on withdrawal... or 'discontinuation' as they like to label it.
Now, here's what people taking the drug have reported:
- Intense insomnia
- Extraordinarily vivid dreams
- Extreme confusion during waking hours
- Intense fear of losing your sanity
- Steady feeling of existing outside of reality as you know it (referred to as depersonalization at times)
- Memory and concentration problems
- Panic Attacks (even if you never had one before)
- Severe mood swings, esp.heightened irritability/anger.
- Suicidal thoughts
- Homicidal thoughts
- An unconventional dizziness/vertigo
- The feeling of shocks, similar to electric ones, running the length of your body
- An unsteady gait
- Slurred speech
- Headaches
- Profuse sweating, esp. at night
- Muscle cramps
- Blurred vision
- Breaking out in tears.
- Hypersensitivity to motion, sounds, smells.
- Decreased appetite
- Nausea
- Abdominal cramping, diarrhea
- Loss of appetite
- Chills/hot flashes
And what have the MHRA done about these reports?
NOTHING!
Drug used by Ledger linked to six deaths in UK
Although not GSK or Seroxat, this story deserves a mention, if only to show the MHRA up for yet again failing to act to patient reporting.
Source: Sunday Herald
A COMMONLY PRESCRIBED sleeping drug which actor Heath Ledger had admitted taking has been linked to six deaths in the UK.
Figures obtained by the Sunday Herald have revealed that six fatal suspected adverse drug reactions to zolpidem have been reported to Britain's medicines watchdog since 2001.
Almost 200 further incidents of adverse reactions, ranging from psychiatric and cardiac disorders to "injuries" and eye disorders have also been reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Ledger was found dead by his housekeeper at his New York apartment last Tuesday. Pills were found near his body and Ledger recently admitted taking the prescription drug Ambien - the trade name of zolpidem in America - to combat insomnia.
Results of a postmortem examination last week on the 28-year-old actor, who had won acclaim in films such as Brokeback Mountain, are inconclusive, but there has been speculation he died from an accidental overdose of sleeping pills.
This prompted movie star Jack Nicholson to say the tragedy could be a warning about the dangers of certain sleeping pills. Nicholson said he had taken Ambien and it had serious side effects.
During a promotional visit to London for his latest film he said: "I warn people about Ambien. I almost drove off a cliff once. I don't take sleeping pills but somebody said, take this, it's mild'.
"I got a call in the middle of the night, kind of an emergency, and I almost drove off a cliff 50 yards from my house. I live up in the mountains in Aspen. It's something to warn people about."
The figures from the MHRA show the incidents recorded under its "yellow card" scheme, which doctors use to alert the agency to patients suffering side-effects to a drug. Health professionals and patients report reactions on a voluntary basis - companies are legally obliged to do so - and it is designed to act as an early warning system to flag up any previously unrecognised problems.
A total of 197 suspected adverse drug reactions have been reported to date in connection with zolpidem - which is marketed as Stilnoct in the UK - the majority of which were categorised as psychiatric disorders.
Six cases of deaths linked to a suspected adverse reaction to the drug were also recorded - three involving psychiatric disorders, with the rest categorised as general disorders, injuries and vascular disorders.
Last year research by Australia's Federal Health Department linked zolpidem to a series of incidents of strange behaviour, including a woman who painted her front door while still asleep.
Problems involving zolpidem have emerged in America, where some people have been injured by cars driven by people under the influence of the drug.
A spokesman for the MHRA said the safety of zolpidem has been "carefully monitored" and product information had been updated to include warnings of psychiatric adverse effects.
A spokesman for Sanofi Aventis, which makes Stilnoct, said it could not comment on the MHRA figures, but said when taken as prescribed, the drug was "generally well tolerated".
Incompetent people do not know that they are incompetent.
Over to you Mr Kent Woods!
Source: Sunday Herald
A COMMONLY PRESCRIBED sleeping drug which actor Heath Ledger had admitted taking has been linked to six deaths in the UK.
Figures obtained by the Sunday Herald have revealed that six fatal suspected adverse drug reactions to zolpidem have been reported to Britain's medicines watchdog since 2001.
Almost 200 further incidents of adverse reactions, ranging from psychiatric and cardiac disorders to "injuries" and eye disorders have also been reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Ledger was found dead by his housekeeper at his New York apartment last Tuesday. Pills were found near his body and Ledger recently admitted taking the prescription drug Ambien - the trade name of zolpidem in America - to combat insomnia.
Results of a postmortem examination last week on the 28-year-old actor, who had won acclaim in films such as Brokeback Mountain, are inconclusive, but there has been speculation he died from an accidental overdose of sleeping pills.
This prompted movie star Jack Nicholson to say the tragedy could be a warning about the dangers of certain sleeping pills. Nicholson said he had taken Ambien and it had serious side effects.
During a promotional visit to London for his latest film he said: "I warn people about Ambien. I almost drove off a cliff once. I don't take sleeping pills but somebody said, take this, it's mild'.
"I got a call in the middle of the night, kind of an emergency, and I almost drove off a cliff 50 yards from my house. I live up in the mountains in Aspen. It's something to warn people about."
The figures from the MHRA show the incidents recorded under its "yellow card" scheme, which doctors use to alert the agency to patients suffering side-effects to a drug. Health professionals and patients report reactions on a voluntary basis - companies are legally obliged to do so - and it is designed to act as an early warning system to flag up any previously unrecognised problems.
A total of 197 suspected adverse drug reactions have been reported to date in connection with zolpidem - which is marketed as Stilnoct in the UK - the majority of which were categorised as psychiatric disorders.
Six cases of deaths linked to a suspected adverse reaction to the drug were also recorded - three involving psychiatric disorders, with the rest categorised as general disorders, injuries and vascular disorders.
Last year research by Australia's Federal Health Department linked zolpidem to a series of incidents of strange behaviour, including a woman who painted her front door while still asleep.
Problems involving zolpidem have emerged in America, where some people have been injured by cars driven by people under the influence of the drug.
A spokesman for the MHRA said the safety of zolpidem has been "carefully monitored" and product information had been updated to include warnings of psychiatric adverse effects.
A spokesman for Sanofi Aventis, which makes Stilnoct, said it could not comment on the MHRA figures, but said when taken as prescribed, the drug was "generally well tolerated".
Incompetent people do not know that they are incompetent.
Over to you Mr Kent Woods!
Friday, January 25, 2008
GlaxoSmithKline, David Healy & Shelley Joffre
On the 1st November 2007 Panorama reporter Shelley Jofre discussed her investigations into the effects of psychiatric drugs and questioned how much faith we should put in the medicines we take. This took place at Coventry University here in the UK and is available via a podcast.
Very interesting podcast it is too, where you will learn much about what Shelley Jofre and David Healy have saw with their own eyes but for legal reasons are not allowed to disclose. Who told them not to? GlaxoSmithKline did!
Shelley became intrigued with Seroxat when she read a small piece in a newspaper in the year 2000, the article was about patients complaints with Seroxat - almost 8 years ago people! Even back then people were complaining that it was difficult to withdraw from and were suggesting that it was addictive.
She goes on to tell the audience that the filming of the first Panorama Seroxat 'Special' Secrets of Seroxat took 8 months to finish. She states that the first programme pretty much relied on the testimony of one man who was Dr David Healy and what was unique about his position was tha he, through a series of legal actions in the United States, had actually been given access to GlaxoSmithKlines 'secret archives', a wealth of confidential material.
All the results of trials they had run before Seroxat had been licensed were in huge vaults and Healy, through American litigation, was granted 3 days to look through the records.
The rest, as you all know is history. Healy's evidence at the Tobin v. GlaxoSmithKline trial , No. 00-CV-0025 (D. Wyo. June 6, 2001) was pretty damning for Glaxo. It resulted in GlaxoSmithKline being found 80% guilty of causing the deaths of Donald Schell's wife, daughter and granddaughter.
David Healy could only relay to Shelley Jofre what he had relayed in the United States courtroom. What he spoke about in court opened Shelley's eyes. Glaxo were of course in a position to argue that it was the illness that had caused Schell to murder his wife, daughter and granddaughter but Healy had found that that Glaxo had done tests on normal, healthy people, even their own employees. These tests seperate out the effects of the illness from the effects of the drug, ie; if you're not depressed why would you then become suicidal or have homicidal thoughts if given a course of Seroxat?
What Healy had found in the healthy volunteer studies was that it was making some people have suicidal thoughts and become aggressive and also the some of the healthy volunteers were having trouble when withdrawing from Seroxat. Compelling evidence I'm sure you'll agree.
Shelley also mentions her 3 interviews with Glaxo mouthpiece, Alistair Benbow. One thing I never spotted before, and kudos to Shelley's observation skills here, was the second programme where Benbow (obviously briefed by Glaxo's lawyers and PR Team) was seen to have a more laid back approach. Head tilted to one side, his collar open, speaking in a sympathetic voice. Watching the video again I can see exactly what she means.
Shelley also speaks of the MHRA - It's a fascinating interview and one that no doubt I will play over and over. The woman deserves honours of the highest order for cracking open GSK... as does David Healy
The podcast can be downloaded here
Fid
Very interesting podcast it is too, where you will learn much about what Shelley Jofre and David Healy have saw with their own eyes but for legal reasons are not allowed to disclose. Who told them not to? GlaxoSmithKline did!
Shelley became intrigued with Seroxat when she read a small piece in a newspaper in the year 2000, the article was about patients complaints with Seroxat - almost 8 years ago people! Even back then people were complaining that it was difficult to withdraw from and were suggesting that it was addictive.
She goes on to tell the audience that the filming of the first Panorama Seroxat 'Special' Secrets of Seroxat took 8 months to finish. She states that the first programme pretty much relied on the testimony of one man who was Dr David Healy and what was unique about his position was tha he, through a series of legal actions in the United States, had actually been given access to GlaxoSmithKlines 'secret archives', a wealth of confidential material.
All the results of trials they had run before Seroxat had been licensed were in huge vaults and Healy, through American litigation, was granted 3 days to look through the records.
The rest, as you all know is history. Healy's evidence at the Tobin v. GlaxoSmithKline trial , No. 00-CV-0025 (D. Wyo. June 6, 2001) was pretty damning for Glaxo. It resulted in GlaxoSmithKline being found 80% guilty of causing the deaths of Donald Schell's wife, daughter and granddaughter.
David Healy could only relay to Shelley Jofre what he had relayed in the United States courtroom. What he spoke about in court opened Shelley's eyes. Glaxo were of course in a position to argue that it was the illness that had caused Schell to murder his wife, daughter and granddaughter but Healy had found that that Glaxo had done tests on normal, healthy people, even their own employees. These tests seperate out the effects of the illness from the effects of the drug, ie; if you're not depressed why would you then become suicidal or have homicidal thoughts if given a course of Seroxat?
What Healy had found in the healthy volunteer studies was that it was making some people have suicidal thoughts and become aggressive and also the some of the healthy volunteers were having trouble when withdrawing from Seroxat. Compelling evidence I'm sure you'll agree.
Shelley also mentions her 3 interviews with Glaxo mouthpiece, Alistair Benbow. One thing I never spotted before, and kudos to Shelley's observation skills here, was the second programme where Benbow (obviously briefed by Glaxo's lawyers and PR Team) was seen to have a more laid back approach. Head tilted to one side, his collar open, speaking in a sympathetic voice. Watching the video again I can see exactly what she means.
Shelley also speaks of the MHRA - It's a fascinating interview and one that no doubt I will play over and over. The woman deserves honours of the highest order for cracking open GSK... as does David Healy
The podcast can be downloaded here
Fid
F.D.A. Requiring Suicide Studies in Drug Trials
By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: January 24, 2008
Source: The New York Times
After decades of inattention to the possible psychiatric side effects of experimental medicines, the Food and Drug Administration is now requiring drug makers to study closely whether patients become suicidal during clinical trials.
The new rules represent one of the most profound changes of the past 16 years to regulations governing drug development. But since the F.D.A.’s oversight of experimental medicines is done in secret, the agency’s shift has not been announced publicly.
The drug industry, however, is keenly aware of the change. Makers of drugs to treat obesity, urinary incontinence, epilepsy, smoking cessation, depression and many other conditions are being asked for the first time by the drug agency to put a comprehensive suicide assessment into their clinical trials.
In recent months, the agency has sent letters — it would not say how many — to drug makers requiring that they use such a scale. Merck, Sanofi-Aventis and Eli Lilly are all using a detailed suicide assessment in clinical trials being conducted now.
A MUST READ STORY - HERE
Too little too late if you ask me.
- For years there have been denials from both the medicines regulator and Pharma.
- More and more deaths (suicides) have occurred
- Public outcry
- Pharma suppressing data
- Regulators not asking for raw data
..and now, some 15 or so years after the launch of Seroxat in the UK, patients are having to go to trial to get some form of justice. See here, here, here, here, here and here.
The FDA's equivalent in the UK are called the MHRA or The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Despite emails and yellow card reports sent to them from worried patients, they have failed to act, failed to protect, failed in every department. To employ former members of GlaxoSmithKline and to use these two members as spokespersons to defend Seroxat is like sticking two fingers up to the British public. WE ARE THE MHRA AND WE CAN DO AS WE PLEASE.
Your time is running out Prof. Woods (MHRA CEO) - No closing down of small Internet Viagra sites is going to save you.
Collectively you are all an utter disgrace.
Fid
Published: January 24, 2008
Source: The New York Times
After decades of inattention to the possible psychiatric side effects of experimental medicines, the Food and Drug Administration is now requiring drug makers to study closely whether patients become suicidal during clinical trials.
The new rules represent one of the most profound changes of the past 16 years to regulations governing drug development. But since the F.D.A.’s oversight of experimental medicines is done in secret, the agency’s shift has not been announced publicly.
The drug industry, however, is keenly aware of the change. Makers of drugs to treat obesity, urinary incontinence, epilepsy, smoking cessation, depression and many other conditions are being asked for the first time by the drug agency to put a comprehensive suicide assessment into their clinical trials.
In recent months, the agency has sent letters — it would not say how many — to drug makers requiring that they use such a scale. Merck, Sanofi-Aventis and Eli Lilly are all using a detailed suicide assessment in clinical trials being conducted now.
A MUST READ STORY - HERE
Too little too late if you ask me.
- For years there have been denials from both the medicines regulator and Pharma.
- More and more deaths (suicides) have occurred
- Public outcry
- Pharma suppressing data
- Regulators not asking for raw data
..and now, some 15 or so years after the launch of Seroxat in the UK, patients are having to go to trial to get some form of justice. See here, here, here, here, here and here.
The FDA's equivalent in the UK are called the MHRA or The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Despite emails and yellow card reports sent to them from worried patients, they have failed to act, failed to protect, failed in every department. To employ former members of GlaxoSmithKline and to use these two members as spokespersons to defend Seroxat is like sticking two fingers up to the British public. WE ARE THE MHRA AND WE CAN DO AS WE PLEASE.
Your time is running out Prof. Woods (MHRA CEO) - No closing down of small Internet Viagra sites is going to save you.
Collectively you are all an utter disgrace.
Fid
Heath Ledger Death Update: Six Pharmaceuticals Found - Antidepressants, Sleep Meds and More
Source: Newstarget.com
Thursday, January 24, 2008 by: Mike Adams
In a surprising turn of events, the mainstream media has begun to ask the question, "What killed Heath Ledger?" According to the Associated Press, authorities have now stated they found six different prescription drugs in Ledger's apartment. Those drugs reportedly include Zoloft (a mind-altering antidepressant drug) and Ambien (a sleep drug with bizarre side effects) as well as an antihistamine drug that has not yet been named. Reports also state there were over-the-counter prescription drugs found at the scene, and that three of the pharmaceuticals found in Ledger's apartment were prescribed in Europe (the others were prescribed in the United States).
Rumors have been circling that a $20 bill found in Ledger's apartment contained cocaine residue, but this has been proven false, according to the Associated Press. The $20 bill in question was tested by law enforcement authorities and no cocaine residue was found. (This seems strange, given that ALL dollar bills contain trace levels of cocaine, by the way...) There are conflicting reports from various celebrities commenting on Ledger's history of drug addiction. While it's clear that Ledger had previously sought treatment for a drug addiction, there is not yet any reliable evidence that Ledger was using such drugs in combination with the pharmaceuticals that may have killed him.
The Drudge Report is asking tonight, "What Killed Heath?" It's the first sensible headline we've seen on the topic, and of course it comes from an online, alternative media source (the mainstream media has yet to seriously question the safety of the FDA-approved pharmaceuticals that appear to be involved in Ledger's death).
NewsTarget earlier published a story questioning the journalistic integrity of the mainstream media and asking whether a conflict of interest (mainstream media companies are largely funded by pharmaceutical advertising money) was preventing them from making serious inquiry into the health hazards of pharmaceuticals. Had Ledger's body been found next to a bottle of herbal medicine, there's no doubt the media (and the FDA) would be screaming about the dangers of herbs, but since the drugs that apparently killed Ledger are "approved" by the FDA, there seems to be an astonishing lack of inquisition about those drugs in the mainstream media.
The current media reports are blaming Ledger for his own death and not even asking sensible questions about whether the powerful chemicals found beside his body may have been the cause.
Why cover this celebrity story?In the past, I've railed against excessive media coverage of celebrities like Michael Jackson, and today, NewsTarget readers are asking why we're spending so much time reporting on Heath Ledger. The answer is not that Ledger's death is any more tragic than the deaths of all the other people killed by pharmaceuticals -- all human beings have equal value, and no drug-induced fatality is unimportant -- it's just that the celebrity status of Ledger is bringing so much media attention to this news that we feel compelled to demand that the facts about the dangers of pharmaceuticals be accurately and honestly investigated.
Let's face it: The public pays attention when celebrities marry, divorce or pass away. And unlike the deaths of so many other celebrities who overdosed on cocaine or illegal drugs, the current evidence appears to support the notion that Ledger was killed by the chemical toxicity of FDA-approved drugs. If the final toxicology report supports this, it could bring a tremendous amount of attention to the dangers of medications currently being pushed onto young people by drug companies, doctors, psychiatrists and health authorities.
I truly believe Ledger would be alive, healthy and happy today if he had turned to natural medicine instead of relying on chemical pharmaceuticals. And while his death is a tragic loss of a widely-loved human being, it is hugely important that society pay attention to what might have killed Ledger and take precautions to protect our children, teens and young adults from similar fates in the future. What Ledger's death demonstrates, I believe, is the cost in human lives of the mass-medication of our population.
So we cover the Heath Ledger story not simply because of one individual's celebrity status, but rather because the implications for the welfare of so many other people paying attention to this issue are very large. Ledger's death may, in fact, may be among his most powerful statements to the world: Beware the consequences of pharmaceuticals.
It is a message that Ledger's celebrity status allows him to send even from beyond the grave.
NewsTarget shall continue to bring you updates on this story as new information emerges.
Thursday, January 24, 2008 by: Mike Adams
In a surprising turn of events, the mainstream media has begun to ask the question, "What killed Heath Ledger?" According to the Associated Press, authorities have now stated they found six different prescription drugs in Ledger's apartment. Those drugs reportedly include Zoloft (a mind-altering antidepressant drug) and Ambien (a sleep drug with bizarre side effects) as well as an antihistamine drug that has not yet been named. Reports also state there were over-the-counter prescription drugs found at the scene, and that three of the pharmaceuticals found in Ledger's apartment were prescribed in Europe (the others were prescribed in the United States).
Rumors have been circling that a $20 bill found in Ledger's apartment contained cocaine residue, but this has been proven false, according to the Associated Press. The $20 bill in question was tested by law enforcement authorities and no cocaine residue was found. (This seems strange, given that ALL dollar bills contain trace levels of cocaine, by the way...) There are conflicting reports from various celebrities commenting on Ledger's history of drug addiction. While it's clear that Ledger had previously sought treatment for a drug addiction, there is not yet any reliable evidence that Ledger was using such drugs in combination with the pharmaceuticals that may have killed him.
The Drudge Report is asking tonight, "What Killed Heath?" It's the first sensible headline we've seen on the topic, and of course it comes from an online, alternative media source (the mainstream media has yet to seriously question the safety of the FDA-approved pharmaceuticals that appear to be involved in Ledger's death).
NewsTarget earlier published a story questioning the journalistic integrity of the mainstream media and asking whether a conflict of interest (mainstream media companies are largely funded by pharmaceutical advertising money) was preventing them from making serious inquiry into the health hazards of pharmaceuticals. Had Ledger's body been found next to a bottle of herbal medicine, there's no doubt the media (and the FDA) would be screaming about the dangers of herbs, but since the drugs that apparently killed Ledger are "approved" by the FDA, there seems to be an astonishing lack of inquisition about those drugs in the mainstream media.
The current media reports are blaming Ledger for his own death and not even asking sensible questions about whether the powerful chemicals found beside his body may have been the cause.
Why cover this celebrity story?In the past, I've railed against excessive media coverage of celebrities like Michael Jackson, and today, NewsTarget readers are asking why we're spending so much time reporting on Heath Ledger. The answer is not that Ledger's death is any more tragic than the deaths of all the other people killed by pharmaceuticals -- all human beings have equal value, and no drug-induced fatality is unimportant -- it's just that the celebrity status of Ledger is bringing so much media attention to this news that we feel compelled to demand that the facts about the dangers of pharmaceuticals be accurately and honestly investigated.
Let's face it: The public pays attention when celebrities marry, divorce or pass away. And unlike the deaths of so many other celebrities who overdosed on cocaine or illegal drugs, the current evidence appears to support the notion that Ledger was killed by the chemical toxicity of FDA-approved drugs. If the final toxicology report supports this, it could bring a tremendous amount of attention to the dangers of medications currently being pushed onto young people by drug companies, doctors, psychiatrists and health authorities.
I truly believe Ledger would be alive, healthy and happy today if he had turned to natural medicine instead of relying on chemical pharmaceuticals. And while his death is a tragic loss of a widely-loved human being, it is hugely important that society pay attention to what might have killed Ledger and take precautions to protect our children, teens and young adults from similar fates in the future. What Ledger's death demonstrates, I believe, is the cost in human lives of the mass-medication of our population.
So we cover the Heath Ledger story not simply because of one individual's celebrity status, but rather because the implications for the welfare of so many other people paying attention to this issue are very large. Ledger's death may, in fact, may be among his most powerful statements to the world: Beware the consequences of pharmaceuticals.
It is a message that Ledger's celebrity status allows him to send even from beyond the grave.
NewsTarget shall continue to bring you updates on this story as new information emerges.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Man who threatened to set fire to police officers jailed for four years
Man who threatened to set fire to police officers jailed for four years
...Kenneth Carr, defending, said Tieman was taking the anti-depressant Seroxat at the time.
One of its known side-effects can be to make those who take it more aggressive than they would usually be.
FULL STORY
...Kenneth Carr, defending, said Tieman was taking the anti-depressant Seroxat at the time.
One of its known side-effects can be to make those who take it more aggressive than they would usually be.
FULL STORY
Layoffs to begin in April at GlaxoSmithKline plant
Source: examiner.com
BRISTOL, Tenn. (Map, News) - GlaxoSmithKline company officials say they will begin laying off all 236 workers at its pharmaceutical plant in Bristol, Tennessee, in April.
Layoffs are scheduled to begin April 7 and be completed by October 31, 2009.
Company officials say between 20 and 30 people will be leaving in April and the rest will be phased out depending on volumes.
The company originally announced plans to shutter its 400,000-square-foot plant in 2006, citing declining sales of its signature penicillin drug, Augmentin.
Sales of Augmentin have declined by about 70 percent since 2003, when the company lost patent protection and began facing greater competition from generic brands.
At its peak, the plant employed more than 400 workers.
Nothing to do with the shit yourself thin disaster, Alli then? Or nothing to do with sales of Seroxat/Paxil which have fallen dramatically? Or maybe Avandia is the cause of GSK having to lay off?
BRISTOL, Tenn. (Map, News) - GlaxoSmithKline company officials say they will begin laying off all 236 workers at its pharmaceutical plant in Bristol, Tennessee, in April.
Layoffs are scheduled to begin April 7 and be completed by October 31, 2009.
Company officials say between 20 and 30 people will be leaving in April and the rest will be phased out depending on volumes.
The company originally announced plans to shutter its 400,000-square-foot plant in 2006, citing declining sales of its signature penicillin drug, Augmentin.
Sales of Augmentin have declined by about 70 percent since 2003, when the company lost patent protection and began facing greater competition from generic brands.
At its peak, the plant employed more than 400 workers.
Nothing to do with the shit yourself thin disaster, Alli then? Or nothing to do with sales of Seroxat/Paxil which have fallen dramatically? Or maybe Avandia is the cause of GSK having to lay off?
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Jury Trials In 2008 Expected To Expose SSRI Maker's Dirty Secrets
January 22, 2008 at 15:56:24
by Evelyn Pringle
Jury Trials In 2008 Expected To Expose SSRI Maker's Dirty Secrets
The blockbuster sales figures for the new generation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRI's), which have resulted from their promotion for so many unapproved uses, represents the most profitable off-label marketing coup in the history of modern medicine. Sales total about $21 billion a year, according to IMS Health.
However, in the end these drugs will probably also hold the title for the most lawsuits filed against drug companies for overstating their benefits while concealing their serious side effects from as far back as 20 years ago.
The SSRI's include Prozac by Eli Lilly; Paxil marketed by GlaxoSmithKline, Zoloft by Pfizer, and Celexa and Lexapro from Forest Laboratories. Cymbalta by Eli Lilly and Effexor by Wyeth are often called SSRI's, but they are actually serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI's). Wellbutrin sold by Glaxo is an inhibitor of the neuronal uptake of norepinephrine and dopamine. Several of these antidepressants now have generic counterparts.
In 2008, at least a dozen jury trials are scheduled all over the country for Paxil suicide-related cases, all of which allege that Glaxo failed to warn consumers and doctors about the known risk of suicide associated with the drug. Many of these cases will be tried by Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, the national law firm with the longest track record of handling SSRI cases.
Going into the trials, Baum Hedlund will be armed with the largest collection of internal GSK documents, depositions of GSK employees and experts, as well as the fruits of the firm's investigation of antidepressants and their makers for the past decade and a half.
During litigation, virtually every Paxil-related document obtained by Baum Hedlund was stamped "confidential" by Glaxo and sealed under a court order. However, through a series of legal challenges, the firm was able to unseal many of the documents, in part, by forcing Glaxo to admit that they did not contain trade secrets and should never have been sealed to begin with.
Off-label Promotion and Prescribing Drive Profits
The FDA approves drugs for uses that have been tested for safety and efficacy and includes those uses on the drug's label. The term off-label means prescribing a drug for a use that has not been tested and proven safe and effective or for a different patient group, or at a different dose, or for a longer duration, or in combination with other drugs.
While doctors may legally prescribe a drug for an unapproved use, it is illegal for drug makers to promote off-label prescribing. Over the past 20 years, SSRI's have been prescribed off-label to children as young as infants, the elderly and pregnant women, and for off-label uses that include insomnia, anxiety, shyness, grief, menstrual discomfort, pain, bed wetting, ADHD, dementia, impotence and restless leg syndrome, to name just a few.
To gain FDA approval to legally sell SSRI's to kids, all the drug companies would have to do is provide two clinical studies showing that the drugs work better than a placebo in depressed children, and they can conduct 100 trials to achieve the necessary results. But after 20 years on the market, they still have not been able to give the FDA two positive studies to prove these drugs work with children, with the exception of Prozac.
READ THE FULL 5 PAGE REPORT HERE
Great work by Evelyn Pringle
by Evelyn Pringle
Jury Trials In 2008 Expected To Expose SSRI Maker's Dirty Secrets
The blockbuster sales figures for the new generation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRI's), which have resulted from their promotion for so many unapproved uses, represents the most profitable off-label marketing coup in the history of modern medicine. Sales total about $21 billion a year, according to IMS Health.
However, in the end these drugs will probably also hold the title for the most lawsuits filed against drug companies for overstating their benefits while concealing their serious side effects from as far back as 20 years ago.
The SSRI's include Prozac by Eli Lilly; Paxil marketed by GlaxoSmithKline, Zoloft by Pfizer, and Celexa and Lexapro from Forest Laboratories. Cymbalta by Eli Lilly and Effexor by Wyeth are often called SSRI's, but they are actually serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI's). Wellbutrin sold by Glaxo is an inhibitor of the neuronal uptake of norepinephrine and dopamine. Several of these antidepressants now have generic counterparts.
In 2008, at least a dozen jury trials are scheduled all over the country for Paxil suicide-related cases, all of which allege that Glaxo failed to warn consumers and doctors about the known risk of suicide associated with the drug. Many of these cases will be tried by Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, the national law firm with the longest track record of handling SSRI cases.
Going into the trials, Baum Hedlund will be armed with the largest collection of internal GSK documents, depositions of GSK employees and experts, as well as the fruits of the firm's investigation of antidepressants and their makers for the past decade and a half.
During litigation, virtually every Paxil-related document obtained by Baum Hedlund was stamped "confidential" by Glaxo and sealed under a court order. However, through a series of legal challenges, the firm was able to unseal many of the documents, in part, by forcing Glaxo to admit that they did not contain trade secrets and should never have been sealed to begin with.
Off-label Promotion and Prescribing Drive Profits
The FDA approves drugs for uses that have been tested for safety and efficacy and includes those uses on the drug's label. The term off-label means prescribing a drug for a use that has not been tested and proven safe and effective or for a different patient group, or at a different dose, or for a longer duration, or in combination with other drugs.
While doctors may legally prescribe a drug for an unapproved use, it is illegal for drug makers to promote off-label prescribing. Over the past 20 years, SSRI's have been prescribed off-label to children as young as infants, the elderly and pregnant women, and for off-label uses that include insomnia, anxiety, shyness, grief, menstrual discomfort, pain, bed wetting, ADHD, dementia, impotence and restless leg syndrome, to name just a few.
To gain FDA approval to legally sell SSRI's to kids, all the drug companies would have to do is provide two clinical studies showing that the drugs work better than a placebo in depressed children, and they can conduct 100 trials to achieve the necessary results. But after 20 years on the market, they still have not been able to give the FDA two positive studies to prove these drugs work with children, with the exception of Prozac.
READ THE FULL 5 PAGE REPORT HERE
Great work by Evelyn Pringle
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Save The Children & Paxil Study 329
Mission and Strategy
Save the Children is the leading independent organization creating real and lasting change for children in need in the United States and around the world. It is a member of the International Save the Children Alliance, comprising 28 national Save the Children organizations working in more than 110 countries to ensure the well-being of children.
It seems Save the Children have been looking in at this blog:
22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States
22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States
Maybe by chance via a search engine?
Or maybe because they wanted to check out one of their corporate supporters, none other than GlaxoSmithKline.
I really do start to wonder at the ethics at some of these charities. Here we have a charity for children in need, financially supported by a company who suppressed evidence (Paxil Study 329) that could have saved the lives of children!
Maybe SAVE THE CHILDREN don't know about Paxil Study 329... or maybe they do but prefer to ignore it. A question of morals eh? A bit like the Yorkshire Ripper wanting to help fund the Suffragettes or Dr Harold Shipman wanting to make a donation to Help the Aged or even the Boston Strangler wanting to offer financial support to Sampson Rope!
One question for SAVE THE CHILDREN... How could you?
Anyway, I hope whoever it was who visited this blog from SAVE THE CHILDREN found what they were looking for.
Fid
Save the Children is the leading independent organization creating real and lasting change for children in need in the United States and around the world. It is a member of the International Save the Children Alliance, comprising 28 national Save the Children organizations working in more than 110 countries to ensure the well-being of children.
It seems Save the Children have been looking in at this blog:
22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States
22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States
Maybe by chance via a search engine?
Or maybe because they wanted to check out one of their corporate supporters, none other than GlaxoSmithKline.
I really do start to wonder at the ethics at some of these charities. Here we have a charity for children in need, financially supported by a company who suppressed evidence (Paxil Study 329) that could have saved the lives of children!
Maybe SAVE THE CHILDREN don't know about Paxil Study 329... or maybe they do but prefer to ignore it. A question of morals eh? A bit like the Yorkshire Ripper wanting to help fund the Suffragettes or Dr Harold Shipman wanting to make a donation to Help the Aged or even the Boston Strangler wanting to offer financial support to Sampson Rope!
One question for SAVE THE CHILDREN... How could you?
Anyway, I hope whoever it was who visited this blog from SAVE THE CHILDREN found what they were looking for.
Fid
Antidepressants behind 52 percent of all suicides among women
Incredible data has just been revealed that antidepressant drugs were behind 52 percent of all suicides among women (18-84) in Sweden (2006).
A special report HERE by investigative reporter Janne Larsson
A special report HERE by investigative reporter Janne Larsson
Nofreelunch-UK "me too" Pharma Site
Now doctors are fighting back against Pharma. I just love the logo on their site... do you think they are insinuating something here?
We are the British arm of a international organisation seeking to change the current relationship between the health professions and the pharmaceutical industry. This relationship is based on hospitality and patronage which is unknown and undeclared to the general public. Without action we will continue with the relentless medicalisation of society and further erode our collective sense of well being.
We ask doctors, nurses and other health professionals to take "the pledge" and distance themselves from the pharmaceutical industry . In the UK we are campaigning for complete transparency through a public register of all contact, hospitality and payments received by health professionals from the industry.Most in the profession support a register
http://www.nofreelunch-uk.org/
The Pledge:
"I, __________________, am committed to practicing medicine in the best interest of my patients and on the basis of the best available evidence, rather than on the basis of advertising or promotion. I therefore pledge to accept no money, gifts, or hospitality from the pharmaceutical industry; to seek unbiased sources of information and not rely on information disseminated by drug companies; and to avoid conflicts of interest in my practice, teaching, and/or research."
Withdrawal Symptoms From Paroxetine May Last For A Long Time
Source: Medical News Today
When withdrawal symptoms ensue after discontinuation of a drug, such as paroxetine, it is generally assumed they will last for a few weeks and then they will subside. Many patients do not think so and some of them have also created a website concerned with paroxetine discontinuation effects.
Now researchers at the University of Bologna headed by Prof. G.A. Fava confirm their account in an article published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology.
The aim of this investigation was to explore the prevalence and features of discontinuation syndromes ensuing with gradual tapering of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in optimal clinical conditions in patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia. Twenty-six consecutive outpatients met the DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder and agoraphobia while taking SSRIs. Twenty remitted upon behavioural treatment. Antidepressant drugs were then tapered at the slowest possible pace and with appropriate patient education. Patients were assessed with the Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms (DESS) checklist 2 wk, 1 month and 1 yr after discontinuation. Nine of the 20 patients (45%) experienced a discontinuation syndrome, which subsided within a month in all but three patients who had been taking paroxetine for a long time. Discontinuation syndromes appeared to be fairly common even when performed with slow tapering and during clinical remission. In some cases disturbances persisted for months after discontinuation.
When withdrawal symptoms ensue after discontinuation of a drug, such as paroxetine, it is generally assumed they will last for a few weeks and then they will subside. Many patients do not think so and some of them have also created a website concerned with paroxetine discontinuation effects.
Now researchers at the University of Bologna headed by Prof. G.A. Fava confirm their account in an article published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology.
The aim of this investigation was to explore the prevalence and features of discontinuation syndromes ensuing with gradual tapering of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in optimal clinical conditions in patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia. Twenty-six consecutive outpatients met the DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder and agoraphobia while taking SSRIs. Twenty remitted upon behavioural treatment. Antidepressant drugs were then tapered at the slowest possible pace and with appropriate patient education. Patients were assessed with the Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms (DESS) checklist 2 wk, 1 month and 1 yr after discontinuation. Nine of the 20 patients (45%) experienced a discontinuation syndrome, which subsided within a month in all but three patients who had been taking paroxetine for a long time. Discontinuation syndromes appeared to be fairly common even when performed with slow tapering and during clinical remission. In some cases disturbances persisted for months after discontinuation.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Friday, January 18, 2008
MHRA and Gisela Stuart MP asked to respond to...
... stories concerning recent studies that antidepressants negative data is NOT published.
Check out the time I sent the email.
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Cc: STUART, Gisela
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:56 PM
Subject: Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Dear Sirs, Madam,
Would anyone at the MHRA or within government be prepared to make a statement about the following links on this page?
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/01/for-glaxosmithkline-and-all-other.html
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
Please note: This email will be published on the www
----
They can't say they couldn't access the links from this site because...
4. 18 January 15:58 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
5. 18 January 15:59 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
6. 18 January 16:00 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
7. 18 January 16:20 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
8. 18 January 16:24 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Exponential-e Customer Allocation is the server/ISP used by the MHRA
Fid
Praise the Lord for Websats :)
Check out the time I sent the email.
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Cc: STUART, Gisela
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:56 PM
Subject: Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Dear Sirs, Madam,
Would anyone at the MHRA or within government be prepared to make a statement about the following links on this page?
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/01/for-glaxosmithkline-and-all-other.html
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
Please note: This email will be published on the www
----
They can't say they couldn't access the links from this site because...
4. 18 January 15:58 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
5. 18 January 15:59 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
6. 18 January 16:00 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
7. 18 January 16:20 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
8. 18 January 16:24 Exponential-e Customer Allocation, London, London, City of, United Kingdom
Exponential-e Customer Allocation is the server/ISP used by the MHRA
Fid
Praise the Lord for Websats :)
For GlaxoSmithKline and all other manufacturers of antidepressants...
... your stranglehold on the public is coming to an end.
Antidepressant results skewed, report says
Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Drug Makers Accused Of Withholding Trial Results
Antidepressant Studies Suppressed? (Includes Audio)
US: Antidepressants Under Scrutiny Over Efficacy
One Third of Antidepressant Studies Never Published
Negative or Positive Trial Results?
Antidepressant Makers Accused Of Misleading Docs, Consumers
Antidepressants' benefits may be exaggerated
Antidepressant Studies Exaggerate Their Effectiveness
Pharmaceutical Companies Often Do Not Publish Negative Results From Clinical Trials of Antidepressants, Study Finds
Antidepressants: Beware the File-Drawer Effect
The Drugs Don't Work
Effectiveness of antidepressants exaggerated
Selective Reporting Of Antidepressant Trials Exaggerates Drug Effectiveness, Report Finds
Depressing research not published
Antidepressant Trials Are Selectively Reported, Study
Effectiveness of Antidepressants Greatly Exaggerated
Antidepressants: They’re not as effective as we’re told after researchers suppress the ‘bad’ studies
Report: Studies revealing negative drug results are not printed
Anti-depressant trials with adverse results left off journals, study finds
Drug Companies Cut Corners Again
Efficacy of antidepressants overstated, research finds
A happy face on antidepressants?
Unfavorable drug studies don't get into print
Antidepressant Studies Unpublished
Antidepressants fall short in journal study
Picture of Antidepressants Too Rosy?
Antidepressant results skewed, report says
Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Drug Makers Accused Of Withholding Trial Results
Antidepressant Studies Suppressed? (Includes Audio)
US: Antidepressants Under Scrutiny Over Efficacy
One Third of Antidepressant Studies Never Published
Negative or Positive Trial Results?
Antidepressant Makers Accused Of Misleading Docs, Consumers
Antidepressants' benefits may be exaggerated
Antidepressant Studies Exaggerate Their Effectiveness
Pharmaceutical Companies Often Do Not Publish Negative Results From Clinical Trials of Antidepressants, Study Finds
Antidepressants: Beware the File-Drawer Effect
The Drugs Don't Work
Effectiveness of antidepressants exaggerated
Selective Reporting Of Antidepressant Trials Exaggerates Drug Effectiveness, Report Finds
Depressing research not published
Antidepressant Trials Are Selectively Reported, Study
Effectiveness of Antidepressants Greatly Exaggerated
Antidepressants: They’re not as effective as we’re told after researchers suppress the ‘bad’ studies
Report: Studies revealing negative drug results are not printed
Anti-depressant trials with adverse results left off journals, study finds
Drug Companies Cut Corners Again
Efficacy of antidepressants overstated, research finds
A happy face on antidepressants?
Unfavorable drug studies don't get into print
Antidepressant Studies Unpublished
Antidepressants fall short in journal study
Picture of Antidepressants Too Rosy?
Effectiveness Of Antidepressants Questioned
Well this story has hit the news lately, it don't surprise me.
Interesting article here
...Doctors from the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center compared the results of published studies on antidepressants with the results of unpublished studies. They found that published studies were overwhelmingly favorable, with 94 percent reporting positive effects of the drugs.
...In contrast, 96 percent of unpublished studies found questionable or no benefits to antidepressants.
...Researchers said that this bias is common in medicine -- drug companies are more interested in publishing positive findings, and medical journals prefer to publish research that demonstrates a treatment benefit.
... Paxil and Celexa both had roughly equal amounts of positive and negative findings, while studies on Prozac and Effexor were much more positive than negative.
I bet this study was NOT endorsed by GSK, The MHRA or the FDA
Get you finger out of your ass Prof. Kent Woods or move over and let someone else take control!
Interesting article here
...Doctors from the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center compared the results of published studies on antidepressants with the results of unpublished studies. They found that published studies were overwhelmingly favorable, with 94 percent reporting positive effects of the drugs.
...In contrast, 96 percent of unpublished studies found questionable or no benefits to antidepressants.
...Researchers said that this bias is common in medicine -- drug companies are more interested in publishing positive findings, and medical journals prefer to publish research that demonstrates a treatment benefit.
... Paxil and Celexa both had roughly equal amounts of positive and negative findings, while studies on Prozac and Effexor were much more positive than negative.
I bet this study was NOT endorsed by GSK, The MHRA or the FDA
Get you finger out of your ass Prof. Kent Woods or move over and let someone else take control!
Thursday, January 17, 2008
GP From Hereford wins Seroxat Sufferers Dumbass Award!
Now I've known some stubborn imbeciles in my life - Kent Woods of the MHRA springs to mind but this so called Doctor from Hereford, UK really takes the biscuit. To say that he is stuck in the dark ages would be an understatement, to suggest that he is stuck up his own arse would be closer to the mark!
As a patient one expects to at least be heard by the doctor they are speaking with, one expects an understanding when explaining to a doctor whatever it is they happen to be feeling.
One such patient was 'Angie', who phoned her surgery to ask for her usual repeat prescription of Seroxat and also asked if it would be possible to go onto the liquid suspension form. She got the usual nonsensical remarks from the surgery receptionist (Why do these glorified office workers think they have the right make comments on peoples illnesses?) After explaining to the receptionist, although it baffles me why Angie would have to do this!, she was told that a duty doctor would call her back.
About an hour or so later he rang, Angie explained to him that it was difficult reducing and having an accurate dose each day, as she was having to cut the 20mg tablet in half - 10, then try and cut the other half into 5mg, then shave 0.5/1 mg again off that. SHAVE! Yes you read correctly, this poor woman was having to shave her Seroxat tablets - this is not unheard of but I thought we had gone past this stage now - I honestly thought there were doctors qualified enough to realise that any patient of theirs needing to shave a tablet had serious withdrawal problems.
Step forward Dr A Heal - Oh the irony of his surname. He told Angie that he had never heard of anyone reducing by such small amounts, and she was prolonging the agony by reducing in this way. Angie went on to remind him of her withdrawal two years ago, under the supervision of a partner of his, and of how ill she had been, and had learnt that the only way of doing this safely, and lessen the withdrawal effects was to go slowly.
He went on to tell Angie that he was the doctor, and he had had conversations with psychotherapists, who all agree that it is the "usual" to go from 20 mg-15-10-5 then off, and as he knew better than Angie, then she should do as he says!
What a pompus arse! HE is the doctor and his patient should do as HE says!
Well Dr A. Heal of Sarum House Surgery, Castle Street, Hereford let me now tell YOU as a public servant what YOU should listen to.
How dare you suggest that it is the 'usual' to drop from whatever dosage. What scientific paper claims that?
If a patient is suffering withdrawal from Heroin addiction would you tell them it is the 'usual' to drop from a certain dosage to another? There is no 'usual' Dr Heal - surely you should know that each patient that walks through your door has a different pain threshold level!
I pity the patients of Sarum House Surgery if they walk into Dr Heal's office suffering from an addiction/withdrawal.
May I suggest you read up on Seroxat and NOT ask psyhcotherapists!
Psychotherapists work with individuals on a one to one basis - because each individual is different. YOU should take note Dr Heal. Work with your patients on a one to one basis and don't ever assume that they should listen to YOU because YOU are a doctor for crying out loud!
You may have done your training in obstetrics and gynaecology, psychiatry, paediatrics and internal medicine but you left your compassion at the door.
From this end Seroxat Sufferers would like to present you with the Dumbass award - you are in good company.
Please feel free to respond - This site is always open for comments.
DR A. HEAL YOU ARE A DUMBASS!
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
THE FOUR HORSEMEN
PROF KENT WOODS
CEO MHRA
War
Power
War, Violence;
War, Violence;
Head of the MHRA, the bucks stops here. The MHRA have shown a complete lack of disdain where Seroxat sufferers are concerned. Their constant denial that Seroxat is addictive and their flawed yellow card system has shown that the MHRA is a body, funded 100% by Pharmaceutical Companies, that needs to be disbanded immediately. Currently approaching year five in their investigation into GlaxoSmithKline regarding Seroxat. Kent ... or 'War' has brought the attention on himself for failing to adhere to the MHRA's primary role, which is to safeguard and enhance public health through the safe and effective use of medicines and medical devices through a range of regulatory functions.
He earns an attractive salary at the expense of thousands of sufferers.
ACTION
Should resign from his post immediately
----
SIR ALASDAIR BRECKENRIDGE
MHRA Chairman
Pestilence
Power
Persecution, Power of Station
Former employee of GlaxoSmithKline, now Chairman of the MHRA. Famous for being shown up on BBC TV's Panorama by investigative journalist Shelly Jofre. Stuttered his way through questions about Seroxat and the MHRA's failure to act upon the Patient Information Leaflet (PIL). Claims that Seroxat is safe for the adult population, a claim made without actually seeing ALL the raw data. Was known to have a recreational interest in the stock market... The MHRA knew about this but pulled their own law book out and basically said it was okay.
He earns an attractive salary at the expense of others.
ACTION
Should be removed from his position as Chairman of the MHRA and prosecuted for his constant robust denials that Seroxat is safe in adults. His claim has cost lives.
----
ALISTAIR BENBOW
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
Death
Power
Death of all kinds and causes
The runt of the litter, Alistair Benbow has been GlaxoSmithKline's mouthpiece regarding Seroxat. Has appeared on BBC TV's Panorama and openly stated that Seroxat is safe for adults, has criticised the work of Prof. David Healy and said 'he felt sorry for those who suffered with Seroxat side effects'. Utterly refuted that GSK were sitting on any kind of data, despite Paxil Study 329 now being in the public domain. Claimed that the words 'Seroxat is not addictive' was 'poorly misunderstood' - seems crystal clear to me! Has gone on record stating the side effects of Seroxat are 'things like dizziness, nausea, headache' - he failed to mention suicide, suicidal thoughts, aggression, akathesia, homicidal thoughts, memory loss, electric zaps... plus a host of many others. Has made false claim after false claim thereby patronising all the patients who have suffered at the hands of Seroxat. Refuses to answer personal emails.
He earns an attractive salary at the expense of others.
ACTION
Should have criminal charges brought against him for knowingly causing the death and suffering of thousands of patients. GlaxoSmithKline buy their way out of legal action. Alistair Benbow will ultimately pay the price and face a conviction... he is so blind that he cannot see that GlaxoSmithKline are merely using him as their weapon of defence. Will he face trial? Time will tell.
----
IAN HUDSON
MHRA Head of Drug Licensing.
Famine
Power
Famine, Corruption, Plague, Economic Breakdown
Worked at GSK... then SmithKline Beecham, for 11 years before leaving to take his role up as Head of Licensing at the MHRA. Was used as a defense witness for GSK in the Tobin/Schell case, in which they lost. Was expected to be questioned by the House of Commons Health Select Committee about Seroxat safety and trial data but he failed to show (No charges were made).
Hudson was Worldwide Director of Safety at SmithKline Beecham - he has never once spoke of the dangers of Seroxat in children - it is plainly obvious as Worldwide Safety Director that he would have known about Paxil Study 329 - he failed to speak out to the detrimental effect of thousands of children. Has remained tight lipped - hoping that the big bad monster (Blogs, activists, Shelly Jofre) will go away.
Hudson also earns an attractive salary at the expense of others.
ACTION
Criminal charges should be brought against him for knowingly distributing a drug that could cause death and severe side-effects in minors.
----
THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE
KENT WOODS (War)
ALASDAIR BRECKENRIDGE (Pestilence)
ALISTAIR BENBOW (Death)
IAN HUDSON (Famine)
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Dear MHRA... Is Seroxat addictive?
Read on for the MHRA's position on whether Seroxat is addictive or not.
On the 15th December 2007 I wrote to the MHRA. It was a brief email and asked one simple question.. Is Seroxat addictive?
Basically, I pretty much knew what their answer would be - I just didn't expect to have to go round the houses before they finally acknowledged their position on Seroxat. Only 4 emails but hey what do you expect from them!
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:04 AM
Subject: Dear Sirs
Simple question that merely requires a yes or no answer. This shouldn't take 20 working days to answer.
Is Seroxat addictive?
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 10:15 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA.
The Agency's position, informed by expert advice, on whether Seroxat is addictive has been clearly communicated in the report of the CSM Expert Working Group on the Safety of SSRIs - this report is available on the MHRA website at the below link:
http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=242
Please contact me again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point Information Centre Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Tel: 020 7084 2000
----
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: Dear Sirs
Dear Sir/Madam,
Could you point me to the paragraph where an official MHRA statement has been made as to whether Seroxat is addictive or not.
I have trawled through the paper and cannot see any such statement. Maybe I'm missing something?
As you are aware GlaxoSmithKline have now realeased the European Promotion of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007 in which it states on page 6 (clause 4 - 4.10) "It must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency."
If the MHRA say Seroxat isn't addictive (I don't know whether you have because I can't find any official statement) then do they (MHRA) still stand by this comment?
Basically, this email is a follow-up to my original question of whether the MHRA think Seroxat is addictive.
1. I cannot find any official MHRA statement in the link you sent me, please point me to the paragraph and
2. If the MHRA have stated in the past that Seroxat is not addictive, do they still stand by this, given the European Medicine of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007 clearly states that it must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency?
Meantime, I look forward to you reply
Regards
Mr Robert Fiddaman.
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 11:39 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA. The risk of dependence (addiction) and withdrawal reactions in associations with Seroxat and others SSRIs was covered in Chapter 8 - pages 119-157 and is also covered in the executive summary pages 3-4 of the report.
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point Information Centre Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Tel: 020 7084 2000
----
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: Dear Sirs
Thank you for pointing me to the correct statement. However, you have still failed to answer whether or not this is still the MHRA's position on the subject of addiction/dependency.
Is it?
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Bob Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA. We can confirm that this is the latest MHRA position on the subject of addiction/dependency.
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry PointInformation CentreMedicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyTel: 020 7084 2000
----
So there you have it ladies and gentlemen. The MHRA still stand by a report made some years ago, a report made without raw data being analysed.
You will notice that they... or probably their legal team will not answer yes or no as yes and no are definitive answers.
Now let me draw your attention to the following document on GlaxoSmithKline's webpage.
GSK European Promotion of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007.
Page 6: (Clause 4 - 4.10) "It must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency."
Unless of course you work for the MHRA!
Over to you Kent
On the 15th December 2007 I wrote to the MHRA. It was a brief email and asked one simple question.. Is Seroxat addictive?
Basically, I pretty much knew what their answer would be - I just didn't expect to have to go round the houses before they finally acknowledged their position on Seroxat. Only 4 emails but hey what do you expect from them!
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:04 AM
Subject: Dear Sirs
Simple question that merely requires a yes or no answer. This shouldn't take 20 working days to answer.
Is Seroxat addictive?
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 10:15 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA.
The Agency's position, informed by expert advice, on whether Seroxat is addictive has been clearly communicated in the report of the CSM Expert Working Group on the Safety of SSRIs - this report is available on the MHRA website at the below link:
http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=242
Please contact me again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point Information Centre Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Tel: 020 7084 2000
----
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: Dear Sirs
Dear Sir/Madam,
Could you point me to the paragraph where an official MHRA statement has been made as to whether Seroxat is addictive or not.
I have trawled through the paper and cannot see any such statement. Maybe I'm missing something?
As you are aware GlaxoSmithKline have now realeased the European Promotion of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007 in which it states on page 6 (clause 4 - 4.10) "It must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency."
If the MHRA say Seroxat isn't addictive (I don't know whether you have because I can't find any official statement) then do they (MHRA) still stand by this comment?
Basically, this email is a follow-up to my original question of whether the MHRA think Seroxat is addictive.
1. I cannot find any official MHRA statement in the link you sent me, please point me to the paragraph and
2. If the MHRA have stated in the past that Seroxat is not addictive, do they still stand by this, given the European Medicine of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007 clearly states that it must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency?
Meantime, I look forward to you reply
Regards
Mr Robert Fiddaman.
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 11:39 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Mr Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA. The risk of dependence (addiction) and withdrawal reactions in associations with Seroxat and others SSRIs was covered in Chapter 8 - pages 119-157 and is also covered in the executive summary pages 3-4 of the report.
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry Point Information Centre Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Tel: 020 7084 2000
----
----- Original Message -----
From: fiddaman
To: MHRA Information Centre
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: Dear Sirs
Thank you for pointing me to the correct statement. However, you have still failed to answer whether or not this is still the MHRA's position on the subject of addiction/dependency.
Is it?
Regards
Bob Fiddaman
----
----- Original Message -----
From: MHRA Information Centre
To: fiddaman
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: Dear Sirs
Dear Bob Fiddaman,
Thank you for your recent enquiry to the MHRA. We can confirm that this is the latest MHRA position on the subject of addiction/dependency.
Please contact us again if you need further assistance with this, or any other queries.
Kind Regards,
Central Enquiry PointInformation CentreMedicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyTel: 020 7084 2000
----
So there you have it ladies and gentlemen. The MHRA still stand by a report made some years ago, a report made without raw data being analysed.
You will notice that they... or probably their legal team will not answer yes or no as yes and no are definitive answers.
Now let me draw your attention to the following document on GlaxoSmithKline's webpage.
GSK European Promotion of Medicines Code of Practice 2nd Edition 2007.
Page 6: (Clause 4 - 4.10) "It must not be stated that a product has no side-effects, toxic hazards or risks of addiction or dependency."
Unless of course you work for the MHRA!
Over to you Kent
Monday, January 14, 2008
KENT WOODS CEO of The MHRA 'Ignorance is Bliss'
Well Prof. Kent Woods, CEO of the MHRA has already told me via email that he/MHRA have nothing further to add regarding the safety of Seroxat in adults. I've offered to help the MHRA investigate GlaxoSmithKline, I think they are vast approaching their fifth year now? Their excuse? They have over a million documents to trawl through, pretty much the amount of pages I have trawled through in less than a year Kent! And I am only one, YOU have a whole fucking team of 'experts' behind you!
Well it seems Woods is just a stubborn man, he does not want to be proved wrong, he does not want his image tarnished by the likes of a patient/sufferer with a grievance. Maybe, he just does not like to be told what to do?
I am not the only one astounded by his lack of understanding.
Janne Larsson has also felt the need to write to Kent Woods regarding his lack... or rather the MHRA's lack of due care and attention to the ADHD drug, Strattera. Janne's letter gives updated information about the harmful effects of the ADHD drug Strattera.
Janne tells Kent Woods 'For the years 2004-2006 there have been 31,835 adverse reactions for Strattera reported to the FDA (where Strattera was the primary suspect drug) in 9,250 individual cases (with duplicate reports excluded) [2]. This puts Strattera as number three among most reported psychiatric drugs.'
Janne goes on to tell Kent Woods ' Despite "compelling evidence" for a causal association between Strattera and treatment emergent symptoms of psychosis or mania – no action by the MHRA
Is all this beginning to sound like Déjà vu ?
Here we have a campaigner with hard evidence who is being ignored by the CEO of the MHRA whose promise, on their webpage, is - "…we take any necessary action to protect the public promptly if there is a problem.
I'd just love to know how Kent Woods and the MHRA define the word 'Promptly'
Promptly = four and a half years investigating GSK.
Janne's full letter can be downloaded HERE
The letter should embarrass Woods - then again reality has to dawn on someone before they know they are wrong. Stubbornness is standing in the way of Woods making any decisions, that and the fact that as CEO of the MHRA he has finances to think of - if he were to speak out against Pharma the MHRA could forfeit the funding they receive off them.
Do us ALL a favour Kent - RESIGN
Well it seems Woods is just a stubborn man, he does not want to be proved wrong, he does not want his image tarnished by the likes of a patient/sufferer with a grievance. Maybe, he just does not like to be told what to do?
I am not the only one astounded by his lack of understanding.
Janne Larsson has also felt the need to write to Kent Woods regarding his lack... or rather the MHRA's lack of due care and attention to the ADHD drug, Strattera. Janne's letter gives updated information about the harmful effects of the ADHD drug Strattera.
Janne tells Kent Woods 'For the years 2004-2006 there have been 31,835 adverse reactions for Strattera reported to the FDA (where Strattera was the primary suspect drug) in 9,250 individual cases (with duplicate reports excluded) [2]. This puts Strattera as number three among most reported psychiatric drugs.'
Janne goes on to tell Kent Woods ' Despite "compelling evidence" for a causal association between Strattera and treatment emergent symptoms of psychosis or mania – no action by the MHRA
Is all this beginning to sound like Déjà vu ?
Here we have a campaigner with hard evidence who is being ignored by the CEO of the MHRA whose promise, on their webpage, is - "…we take any necessary action to protect the public promptly if there is a problem.
I'd just love to know how Kent Woods and the MHRA define the word 'Promptly'
Promptly = four and a half years investigating GSK.
Janne's full letter can be downloaded HERE
The letter should embarrass Woods - then again reality has to dawn on someone before they know they are wrong. Stubbornness is standing in the way of Woods making any decisions, that and the fact that as CEO of the MHRA he has finances to think of - if he were to speak out against Pharma the MHRA could forfeit the funding they receive off them.
Do us ALL a favour Kent - RESIGN
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Seroxat Withdrawal Book - Author wants stories
Shelly Hart is pissed off.
Another victim of Seroxat withdrawal and all the unhappiness it brings.
She is standing up to be counted.
She wrote me:
I need stories (good or bad although I haven't heard a good one yet) of Paxil withdrawal, attempted suicides coming off paxil, deaths of loved ones discontinuing paxil, etc. This book will be about Paxil as an addiction. Gsk must be accountable. I have the resources to get the book out there, I just need the people to come forward. Of course it can be anonymous and they can approve the final edit of their story. In the meantime, I'm looking for any information I can about the history of GSK and figuring a way to write it up without being sued. By having a book of personal stories, the word is out there, people are aware, they are aware that we will not stay quiet, and hopefully we can save some lives.
I admire people with balls, so if you want to email Shelly your stories please don't hesitate to contact her HERE
...Or pass her email address on to people you know who have suffered at the hands of GlaxoSmithKline's money earner.
hart.shelly@yahoo.com
You owe it to yourselves and to those less fortunate (those who actually have faith in the MHRA, FDA and GSK)
Fid
Another victim of Seroxat withdrawal and all the unhappiness it brings.
She is standing up to be counted.
She wrote me:
I need stories (good or bad although I haven't heard a good one yet) of Paxil withdrawal, attempted suicides coming off paxil, deaths of loved ones discontinuing paxil, etc. This book will be about Paxil as an addiction. Gsk must be accountable. I have the resources to get the book out there, I just need the people to come forward. Of course it can be anonymous and they can approve the final edit of their story. In the meantime, I'm looking for any information I can about the history of GSK and figuring a way to write it up without being sued. By having a book of personal stories, the word is out there, people are aware, they are aware that we will not stay quiet, and hopefully we can save some lives.
I admire people with balls, so if you want to email Shelly your stories please don't hesitate to contact her HERE
...Or pass her email address on to people you know who have suffered at the hands of GlaxoSmithKline's money earner.
hart.shelly@yahoo.com
You owe it to yourselves and to those less fortunate (those who actually have faith in the MHRA, FDA and GSK)
Fid
Saturday, January 05, 2008
My Mom
My beautiful mother died yesterday. She was 79.
I won't be posting for a while.
Times like this I wish I has a God to believe in.
Fid
I won't be posting for a while.
Times like this I wish I has a God to believe in.
Fid
Friday, January 04, 2008
Lets focus on the MHRA
I have a series of posts for you all concerning Kent Woods and his bunch of merry men over at MHRA HQ. I'm going to start with something simple that will put you all in the picture of just how the MHRA work. What are their motives etc.
Here is the blurb for a book written by Jim Wright, a book entitled 'The Fate of a Good Man'
It will highlight for you all just how far the MHRA will go to protect the financial ties they have with Pharma.
Here's the blurb:
The Fate of a Good Man follows the fortunes of Jim Wright, a man who thought that he could help with the health of his community by distributing and selling natural treatments for a variety of conditions. Instead of being seen as a good citizen, someone of value in the community, Jim Wright was investigated, prosecuted and tried by the Medicines and Health products Regulation Agency, a firm within the Government that is totally funded by the pharmaceutical industry and that will go to any lengths to see off the ‘competition’
Jim Wright and his family were raided twice over a three-year period, before eventually being charged on twelve counts. In the trial that ensued at Swansea Crown Court, the prosecuting counsel, hired by the MHRA and not the Crown Prosecution Service, said that Wright was dishonest, a hypocrite and a liar, a man who would do anything to make a quick pound, a man who preyed on vulnerable sick people. The Fate of A Good Man gives Jim Wright’s version of how he was hounded and then put on trial by Big Pharma.
Coming soon: Janne Larsson's gripe with Prof. Kent Woods, CEO of the MHRA
Here is the blurb for a book written by Jim Wright, a book entitled 'The Fate of a Good Man'
It will highlight for you all just how far the MHRA will go to protect the financial ties they have with Pharma.
Here's the blurb:
The Fate of a Good Man follows the fortunes of Jim Wright, a man who thought that he could help with the health of his community by distributing and selling natural treatments for a variety of conditions. Instead of being seen as a good citizen, someone of value in the community, Jim Wright was investigated, prosecuted and tried by the Medicines and Health products Regulation Agency, a firm within the Government that is totally funded by the pharmaceutical industry and that will go to any lengths to see off the ‘competition’
Jim Wright and his family were raided twice over a three-year period, before eventually being charged on twelve counts. In the trial that ensued at Swansea Crown Court, the prosecuting counsel, hired by the MHRA and not the Crown Prosecution Service, said that Wright was dishonest, a hypocrite and a liar, a man who would do anything to make a quick pound, a man who preyed on vulnerable sick people. The Fate of A Good Man gives Jim Wright’s version of how he was hounded and then put on trial by Big Pharma.
Coming soon: Janne Larsson's gripe with Prof. Kent Woods, CEO of the MHRA
Inspirational words from Obama Barrack
Heard his speech from his victory in Iowa yesterday and thought the following words were applicable for those of us who are stonewalled by GSK and the MHRA.
Hope is not blind optimism.
Hope is the thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have the courage to reach for it and to work for it and to fight for it. Hope is the belief that our destiny will not be written for us but by us.
Obama Barrack
Iowa Victroy Speech 03/01/08
Hope is not blind optimism.
Hope is the thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have the courage to reach for it and to work for it and to fight for it. Hope is the belief that our destiny will not be written for us but by us.
Obama Barrack
Iowa Victroy Speech 03/01/08
Thursday, January 03, 2008
COMING SOON...
My recent correspondence with the MHRA regarding whether or not Seroxat is addictive. Also a brilliant open letter to the CEO of the MHRA, Kent Woods, regarding the ADHD drug Strattera. The letter was penned by Janne Larsson and shows just how the MHRA have failed to act on the dangers of yet another mind altering drug.
I'll post both my correspondence and Janne's within the next 24 hours.
May I suggest that Kent Woods do the honourable thing and resign from his position
Fid
I'll post both my correspondence and Janne's within the next 24 hours.
May I suggest that Kent Woods do the honourable thing and resign from his position
Fid
The GlaxoSmithKline Payroll Part II
Judith A. Aberg, M.D., Director of HIV Services, Washington University, St. Louis, MO. Received funding for clinical research from Abbott Laboratories and Agouron; serves on the speakers bureau for Merck and Fujisawa (now Astellas Pharma US). (http://www.thebodypro.com/bios/jaberg.html, accessed 1/24/07) Received grants for educational activities from and/or served as an advisor or consultant to Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, and Roche. (http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/513050, accessed 1/24/07)
----
Martin J. Abrahamson, M.D., Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Acting Chief Medical Officer, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA. Receives research grants from Pfizer Inc.; member of the speaker's bureaus for AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America. (http://www.medscape.com/viewprogram/3942_authors; accessed 7/28/05)
----
Kirkwood F. Adams, M.D., Associate Professor of Medicine and Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. Received research support from Actelion Pharmaceuticals U.S., Inc., Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Myogen, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, NitroMed, Inc., NovaCardia, Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Scios Inc., and Vasogen Inc. Consultant to Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Biosite, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Myogen, Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Pfizer Inc., Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., and Scios Inc. (http://www.medscape.com/viewprogram/4088_authors; accessed 7/28/05)
----
Jasjit S. Ahluwalia, M.D., M.P.H., Professor of Preventive Medicine and Public Health and Professor of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City. Served as consultant to GlaxoSmithKline. (Evans, Jeff. Sustained-Release bupropion boosts smoking cessation in African Americans, Family Practice News, 1/1/03, p.12)
EMAIL
----
Hagop S. Akiskal, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry, Director of the International Mood Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla. Received grant or research support from Eli Lilly. Served as a consultant to Abbott, Janssen Pharmaceutica, and Eli Lilly. Served on the speakers’ bureaus of Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutica, and Eli Lilly. (http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/STANLEY/5thbipconf/introduction.htm; accessed 5/27/05)
EMAIL
----
George S. Alexopoulos, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry at Weill Medical College, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Receives honoraria from Cephalon. (http://www.psychiatrist.com/audiograph/stahl/indexc.htm; accessed 3/4/04) Receives grant/research support from Forest Laboratories and Cephalon; consultant to Forest Laboratories; and member of the speakers bureau for Forest Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen. (Conference disclosure notes; 41st Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, December 2002, San Juan, Puerto Rico; on file with CSPI)
EMAIL
----
Lori Altshuler, M.D., Professor and Director, Mood Disorders Research Program, University of California, Los Angeles. Grants/research support from Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Forest Labs, Glaxo-Wellcome, SmithKlineBeecham, and Solvay. Consultant to Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Forest Labs, Janssen, Parke Davis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Member,speakers bureaus of Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Glaxo-Wellcome, and Solvay. Scientfic Advisory Board for Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, and Forest Labs. (Conference disclosure notes: 41st Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, December 2002, San Juan, Puerto Rico; on file with CSPI; Primary Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2000; 2:217-23)
----
Jean Anderson, M.D., Professor, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Serves on the advisory board, speakers bureau, receives research support from, and holds stock in Pfizer; received honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline and Abbott Laboratories; receives educational program support from GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott Laboratories, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer. (http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=9868, accessed 1/26/07)
----
Janet B. Arrowsmith-Lowe, M.D., F.A.C.P., Partner, Arrowsmith-Lowe Consulting. Works for a consulting company whose clients include Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, and Wyeth. (http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/transcripts/2005-4090T2.htm; accessed 7/8/05)
EMAIL
----
Michael E. Aulton, B.Pharm., Ph.D., M.R.Pharm.S., Professor of Pharmaceutical Technology and Head of Graduate School, De Montfort University, Bedford, UK. Patent advice consultancy with Pfizer from Jan. to Feb. 2002. Receives research grant funding from GlaxoSmithKline, R.P. Scherer, Pfizer and AstraZeneca. (http://www.mca.gov.uk/aboutagency/regframework/csm/csmdoi01.pdf; accessed 7/18/03)
Part I HERE
Source:- Integrity in Science
----
Martin J. Abrahamson, M.D., Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Acting Chief Medical Officer, Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, MA. Receives research grants from Pfizer Inc.; member of the speaker's bureaus for AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America. (http://www.medscape.com/viewprogram/3942_authors; accessed 7/28/05)
----
Kirkwood F. Adams, M.D., Associate Professor of Medicine and Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. Received research support from Actelion Pharmaceuticals U.S., Inc., Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Myogen, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, NitroMed, Inc., NovaCardia, Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Scios Inc., and Vasogen Inc. Consultant to Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Biosite, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Myogen, Inc., Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc., Pfizer Inc., Sanofi-Synthelabo Inc., and Scios Inc. (http://www.medscape.com/viewprogram/4088_authors; accessed 7/28/05)
----
Jasjit S. Ahluwalia, M.D., M.P.H., Professor of Preventive Medicine and Public Health and Professor of Internal Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City. Served as consultant to GlaxoSmithKline. (Evans, Jeff. Sustained-Release bupropion boosts smoking cessation in African Americans, Family Practice News, 1/1/03, p.12)
----
Hagop S. Akiskal, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry, Director of the International Mood Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla. Received grant or research support from Eli Lilly. Served as a consultant to Abbott, Janssen Pharmaceutica, and Eli Lilly. Served on the speakers’ bureaus of Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutica, and Eli Lilly. (http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/STANLEY/5thbipconf/introduction.htm; accessed 5/27/05)
----
George S. Alexopoulos, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry at Weill Medical College, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Receives honoraria from Cephalon. (http://www.psychiatrist.com/audiograph/stahl/indexc.htm; accessed 3/4/04) Receives grant/research support from Forest Laboratories and Cephalon; consultant to Forest Laboratories; and member of the speakers bureau for Forest Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen. (Conference disclosure notes; 41st Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, December 2002, San Juan, Puerto Rico; on file with CSPI)
----
Lori Altshuler, M.D., Professor and Director, Mood Disorders Research Program, University of California, Los Angeles. Grants/research support from Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Forest Labs, Glaxo-Wellcome, SmithKlineBeecham, and Solvay. Consultant to Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Forest Labs, Janssen, Parke Davis, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Member,speakers bureaus of Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, Glaxo-Wellcome, and Solvay. Scientfic Advisory Board for Abbott Laboratories, Eli Lilly, and Forest Labs. (Conference disclosure notes: 41st Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, December 2002, San Juan, Puerto Rico; on file with CSPI; Primary Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2000; 2:217-23)
----
Jean Anderson, M.D., Professor, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Serves on the advisory board, speakers bureau, receives research support from, and holds stock in Pfizer; received honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline and Abbott Laboratories; receives educational program support from GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott Laboratories, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer. (http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=9868, accessed 1/26/07)
----
Janet B. Arrowsmith-Lowe, M.D., F.A.C.P., Partner, Arrowsmith-Lowe Consulting. Works for a consulting company whose clients include Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, and Wyeth. (http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/transcripts/2005-4090T2.htm; accessed 7/8/05)
----
Michael E. Aulton, B.Pharm., Ph.D., M.R.Pharm.S., Professor of Pharmaceutical Technology and Head of Graduate School, De Montfort University, Bedford, UK. Patent advice consultancy with Pfizer from Jan. to Feb. 2002. Receives research grant funding from GlaxoSmithKline, R.P. Scherer, Pfizer and AstraZeneca. (http://www.mca.gov.uk/aboutagency/regframework/csm/csmdoi01.pdf; accessed 7/18/03)
Part I HERE
Source:- Integrity in Science
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
The first 2008 Seroxat Sufferers Dumbass Award goes to...
... Covalence
Geneva-based Covalence tracks the ethical reputation of multinationals by sourcing information from companies, the media and civil society. EthicalQuote allows you to browse CSR rankings and data and it enables us to offer reputation management products to clients among multinationals, investors and institutions.
Lets have a look at the top 10 list of the most ethical Pharmas for 2007
Best EthicalQuote Score
1.GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
2.Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)
3.Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)
4.Abbott (ABT)
5.Novartis (NVS)
6.Roche (RHHBY.PK)
7.Boehringer Ingelheim
8.Astra Zeneca (AZN)
9.Pfizer (PFE)
10.Sanofi Aventis (SNY)
You have got to be kidding right?
GlaxoSmithKline ethical?
Ethical:- Being in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of a profession. See Synonyms at moral.
This is some kind of joke right?
Hang on a minute... I smell a rather large rat
Wanna smell it with me folks?
Well lookey here
Scroll down the page and you will see that the compilers of the 'ethical' list have many clients - one of whom are non other than GlaxoSmithKline!
Covalence - I hereby award you with the prestigious Seroxat Sufferers Dumbass Award
Geneva-based Covalence tracks the ethical reputation of multinationals by sourcing information from companies, the media and civil society. EthicalQuote allows you to browse CSR rankings and data and it enables us to offer reputation management products to clients among multinationals, investors and institutions.
Lets have a look at the top 10 list of the most ethical Pharmas for 2007
Best EthicalQuote Score
1.GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
2.Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)
3.Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)
4.Abbott (ABT)
5.Novartis (NVS)
6.Roche (RHHBY.PK)
7.Boehringer Ingelheim
8.Astra Zeneca (AZN)
9.Pfizer (PFE)
10.Sanofi Aventis (SNY)
You have got to be kidding right?
GlaxoSmithKline ethical?
Ethical:- Being in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of a profession. See Synonyms at moral.
This is some kind of joke right?
Hang on a minute... I smell a rather large rat
Wanna smell it with me folks?
Well lookey here
Scroll down the page and you will see that the compilers of the 'ethical' list have many clients - one of whom are non other than GlaxoSmithKline!
Covalence - I hereby award you with the prestigious Seroxat Sufferers Dumbass Award
COVALENCE...YOU ARE DUMBASSES!
Previous winners
Google Adsense
Mylan Inc
Mr Keith Lyon Meloff
Depressionet Australia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Please contact me if you would like a guest post considered for publication on my blog.