Unethical Drug Promotion - A GSK Example

You have to check out Consumers International, a highly informative website that shows how misleading Pharma can be. I think we all know how misleading GSK have been in the past with some of their products. The Ribena farce where they were busted by two 14 year old school children was classic. Two school girls actually found that Ribena wasn't full of Vitamin C, it left GSK red faced [Pardon the pun] and as usual, GSK came out in defence with some classic quotes.

Advertising Aropax on the Delphi Centre webpage also slipped under the radar until yours truly stuck a spanner in the works.

Blatant advertising in the popular Mr. Men children's books was a new gutter level to stoop to for GSK.

I'm sure if they would have had their way with Ofsted so that school children would have been targeted by some popular shy or diet pill - alas Blackburn resigned so we will never know.

Consumers International explains how drug promotion can take on many forms, they write "...we are increasingly seeing more subtle, inconspicuous forms of promotion."

There is a great example of unethical advertising by GSK with their product Flutibact: HERE

Inappropriate indications
Depending on the price, Flutibact is an acceptable option for infected eczema. However, it is NOT appropriate for the other promoted indications: atopic dermatitis and contact dermatitis because unnecessary use of antibiotics promotes the development of resistant bacteria. Promotion of inappropriate indications is in breach of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) code.

Omission of required information
The advertisement does not disclose any adverse effects or precautions. The IFPMA Code states that 'Particular care should be taken that essential information as to pharmaceutical products' safety, for example, contra-indications, precautions and side effects, is appropriately and consistently communicated, subject to the legal, regulatory and medical practices of each nation.'

Claim of remarkable safety
The advertisement asserts that Flutibact is 'remarkably safe'. The IFPMA Code states that 'The word "safe" should not be used without qualification' and 'Claims should not be stronger than scientific evidence warrants, and every effort should be made to avoid ambiguity.' This also contravenes WHO Ethcial Criteria.

Ouch - spanked again hey GSK?

I guess it's now down to the patients to convince the regulators that whatever GSK claims about the safety and efficacy of their wonder drug, Seroxat, is pure bullshit... then again, having took four years to investigate GlaxoSmithKline I am sure that the MHRA are already aware how unethical Witty & Co can be.

Thanks to The Truthman for alerting me to Consumers International

Read the new book, The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal

By Bob Fiddaman

ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD HERE


PAPERBACK COMING SOON