Zantac Lawsuit

Researching drug company and regulatory malfeasance for over 16 years
Humanist, humorist

Friday, April 30, 2010

AstraZeneca's PR Machine Caught With Their Pants Down!


Well, well, well.

It seems AstraZeneca have been caught with their pants down again.

Not long after licking their wounds re the Seroquel debacle, it now appears they have been busted by... wait for it... a blogger.

Deary me pharma. If you are going to monitor those that write about you then make sure you don't make your database publicly available.

1000 shiny stars to Stan who writes the “Is Something Not Quite Right With Stan,” blog.

Jim Edwards of BNet writes:

The database was prepared by v-Fluence, a pr firm employed by AZ. The agency’s chief, Jay Byrne, published a blog item this morning explaining why drug companies monitor web coverage. Big Food conspiracy theorists can look here for more information on Byrne, a former director of public affairs for Monsanto.

It seems they are now accusing Stan of 'hacking' into their database. Hmmmm. About as believable as the safety and efficacy of Seroquel!

Stepheny, who writes the Soulful Sepulcher blog has a rant about AstraZeneca and Jay Byrne here. It seems that both AstraZeneca and Jay Byrne have been all over her blog today.

Reminds me of a special report the MHRA had commissioned to basically see how their image was on the Internet. I'll give them their dues though, they actually went public with it and didn't put it on a dodgy database that could be opened with the blink of an eye.

This one goes out to V-Fluence, the PR company that are paid to track what bloggers are writing about the pharmaceutical industry.

Thanks for the balls-up - you have made me laugh for the first time today.

Stan, take a bow sir. I salute you.

Stan's blog can be found HERE, his leading story is 'v-Fluence responds to hacking by blogger - v-fluence ties to BIG Pharma'



Dr. Breggin's New Annual Conference


Psychiatrist Peter R. Breggin, MD is starting a new organization and a new annual conference. Get to know Dr. Breggin and his perspectives, and to interact with him and some of his closest colleagues. Dr. Breggin's conference will help you to bring out the best in yourself as a therapist, counselor or teacher.

You’ve read or heard about Dr. Breggin’s many books like Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Prozac and Medication Madness. You’ve heard him on the radio or seen him on TV on Oprah, Larry King Live, or The O’Reilly Factor. You may have read his blogs, heard his radio show interviews or seen him on Youtube. You may have read one of his dozens of scientific papers, or his latest medical textbook: Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry, the Second Edition. Maybe you’ve heard him speak but never spoken with him. This is the best opportunity ever to make a direct and personal connection with Dr. Breggin and some of his closest colleagues.

Read more HERE



Glaxo's Lawyers and Jeremy Bryce

Well it would appear that Addleshaw Goddard, GlaxoSmithKline's lawyers, and my online cyberstalker, Jeremy Bryce from Ballyhornan, Northern Ireland, have nothing better to do with there time other than visit this blog.

Bryce [59] apparently wrote to Addleshaw Goddard, and wanted everyone to know that he did with his post from the Yahoo forum, UK Survivors.

He wrote:

Mon Jul 13, 2009

Further common gossip direct from the desk of the UK Seroxat Solicitor ?

Tomorrow I'll send a letter to David Engel, Partner Addleshaw Goddard, Solicitors for GSK & a copy to Mark Harvey, Partner Hugh James, Solicitors for the Seroxat User Group.

A further copy will be sent to the Law Society.

Naturally as list owner of SSRI Crusaders causes me considerable distress to be considered as an ally of any pharmacutical company engaged in the manufacture of psychiatric medication.

As you will see my web statistics - Addleshaw Goddard seem to be moving around my blog after coming from Jeremy Bryce's fake blog, where he uses the exact same title 'SEROXAT SUFFERERS STAND UP AND BE COUNTED' - he has made a slight change to the url.

Coincidental that the sockpuppet from Ballyhornan should arrive on exactly the same link on my blog three minutes later?

30th April 2010 10:08:39
Page View

Furthermore, the disclaimer blog I have created to counteract the delusional rants of Jeremy John Mitchell Bryce has also been a place for Glaxo's lawyers to hangout.

The blog, JEREMY BRYCE OF BALLYHORNAN, [now removed] has received multiple hits from Addleshaw Goddard, all spread over a number of days.

More about Jeremy Bryce HERE. You will note how he targets the parents of children who have suicided as a result of taking SSRi medication.

It would appear that GlaxoSmithKline are paying for the services of a law team who, it appears, have nothing better to do than sit around all day focussing their attention on me.

I feel honoured. This is the second time they have taken an interest in my online activities [1]

See you all in court.

Addleshaw, it appears, keep 'nice' company - More about cyberbully Jeremy Bryce HERE


Bloggers discussing the intimidation of a patient, Bob Fiddaman, by GlaxoSmithKline.

An Angry Blogger And Free Speech (Ed Silverman of Pharmalot and the Star-Ledger of New Jersey)

Does GSK Love Bad Publicity? (Clin Psych Blog)

This U.S.A. blog supports Bob Fiddaman (Soulful Sepulcher)

Glaxo Smith Kline (Bipolar Blast)

It's Groundhog Day for bullying by GlaxoSmithKline over Seroxat (Scientific Misconduct Blog)

GSK Lawyers target Seroxat campaigner Bob Fiddaman (Seroxat Secrets)

Intimidation: a standard tactic? (Matt Holford)

Glaxo Goes After British Blogger's Video (Furious Seasons)

GSK Video - The Aftermath

BLOGSCAN - GSK Lawyers Have Paxil Video Taken Down

Missisyphus’s Weblog: Bob fiddaman’s video about paxil

Pharma Freaks Out, Fiddaman Under Fire



Thursday, April 29, 2010

MHRA SAFETY UPDATE - To be filed in the "No Shit Sherlock" Drawer.

Open rant to the MHRA.

Drug Safety Update: Volume 3, Issue 8, March 2010 [PDF]

So, both Prozac and Seroxat are teratogen's then?

Honestly, I'm kinda bemused by the fence sitting mob from South London.

If both are teratogen's, then do the right thing.

Of course, a court case involving Liam Kilker would have had nothing to do with this latest announcement from the MHRA, would it?

I'm of the opinion that those responsible for protecting the public against shit drugs, really only spring into action when their paymasters, pharma, lose a case.

Whatever next? Maybe an announcement that Seroxat is addictive?

I guess they will have to wait for some sort of trial against GlaxoSmithKline that proves Seroxat is addictive before they spring into action though.

Further evidence that the MHRA listen to patients... but don't really do anything to help them.

I'm still waiting for a change in the BNF, Mr. Woods. I'm guessing we will have to wait for the outcome of the pending Seroxat litigation in the UK before you start chasing the BNF up though. Am I right?

When I think of the time I wasted with the MHRA. You do nothing but appease patient support groups and advocates - you muffle the drums.

I mean, let's face it, the only reason we have a 'drugs regulator' is down to the fact that patients needed some form of protection in the wake of the thalidomide disaster!

That was a teratogen as well.

Oh, and while we are on this subject of human suffering, perhaps hauling those responsible over the coals for hiding this fact may be wise?

Then again, if your four year investigation into GlaxoSmithKline is anything to go by then the public money would be better spent by setting up an impartial regulator that does not have it's tongue down the trousers of the industry!

Chapter Eighteen: “Is Seroxat A Teratogen? Goodbye MHRA”, in my book, 'The Evidence, However, Is Clear…The Seroxat Scandal', is my case in point of the limp-wristedness of the South London fence-sitters.

I'm thinking of issuing free vomit bags when the paperback is launched later this year!

Don't even think about contacting me - I washed my hands of your stench sometime ago.



Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Shane Clancy : An SSRI Induced Tragedy

Great post from The Truthman over at GSK: Licence To (K)ill

He writes:

I haven’t had time to write much lately, but I feel I need to bring attention to a very tragic case of SSRI induced suicide/homicide that happened in Ireland in August of last year (2009). The case of Shane Clancy is a very tragic one, but unfortunately his is one of many tragedies; terrible tragedies induced solely from the effects of SSRI drugs.

It's a post that is right on the money and yet more flames to fan for the likes of pharmaceutical companies and the MHRA, who are without a shadow of a doubt responsible for the on-going mess regarding SSRi drugs.

Pharma say jump - MHRA say how high?

We speak, they listen... then do fuck all about the whole SSRi problem.

Read more of the Truthman's excellent post HERE



AstraZeneca to Pay $520 Million...But Deny Allegations

AstraZeneca denies the allegations

Source - Bloomberg
By Justin Blum

AstraZeneca Plc agreed to pay $520 million to resolve U.S. allegations that it illegally marketed the schizophrenia drug Seroquel for uses that weren’t approved by regulators.

AstraZeneca, the U.K.’s second-largest drugmaker, promoted Seroquel to doctors for unapproved uses including aggression, Alzheimer’s disease and anger management, the Justice Department said today in a statement. The payment is the largest settlement by a company in a strictly civil case involving unapproved marketing claims for drugs.

AstraZeneca’s Denial

AstraZeneca denies the allegations, the company said in a statement. The company entered into a corporate integrity agreement with the U.S. that will last for five years, the statement said.

“It is in the best interest of AstraZeneca to resolve these matters and to move forward with our business of discovering and developing important, life-changing medicines while avoiding the delay, uncertainty and expense of protracted litigation,” said Glenn Engelmann, the company’s U.S. general counsel, in the statement.




Saturday, April 24, 2010

Numb The Movie - The Hell of Paxil Withdrawal

Phil Lawrence of Minnesota, United States is a film-maker. He is also a patient that has been affected by Paxil [UK brand name, Seroxat]

For some time now Phil has been documenting his horrific time withdrawing from Paxil.

That process has finally come to fruition.

His film, Numb, documents his drastic effects on his physical and psychological well-being after giving up his medications in his quest to stop feeling “numb.” It also reveals the impact his journey had on his family as well as revealing startling information about antidepressants that the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t want you to know.

The Minneapolis Saint Paul International Film Festival is giving 'Numb' it's first screening today. They write:

Phil always wanted to feel emotion and now he feels it too much. It’s painful and riveting to watch a man’s life unravel on video. But it is also incredibly compelling because so many of us know someone whose life has been touched by antidepressants and we understand the dilemma.

In the end, Phil makes a haunting decision as he realizes that he’s trapped in a physical and psychological dependence on the most prescribed drug in the United States

This from the Numb Press Kit:

The documentary begins as filmmaker and suburban dad Phil Lawrence cracks open his pill box and cuts his antidepressant Paxil in half. Under a doctor’s guidance, Phil is weaning himself off the drug and is looking forward to getting back to the day when he can feel emotion instead of feeling numb. He tells his kids what he’s doing and his wife is supportive but skeptical. Over the next few weeks, Lawrence continues to cut back, but withdrawal symptoms emerge. The first is a slight headache and constant ringing in his head. Later the symptoms get more severe. He can’t sleep and he sleeps too much. He struggles with wild emotional swings filled with rage and thoughts of violence. Phil’s relationship with his wife and family becomes strained as he continues to spiral out of control. He attempts to find alternatives to his discomfort through diet and exercise, but the withdrawal symptoms are too severe. His wife thinks she may have lost the man she loved. Phil is moody and exhausted. He can’t even muster the energy to play with his kids on Christmas day. While going through withdrawal, Phil decides to find out how and why he got addicted to antidepressants. He interviews experts all over the country who confirm that the drug companies knew years ago that antidepressants were addictive. He goes to hearings on Capitol Hill where dozens of people testify that their loved ones lost control under the spell of antidepressants. He also uncovers documents that confirm what Phil suspected: the drug companies hid the facts from the public. When we see Phil on day 120, he’s suicidal and terrified. Phil always wanted to feel emotion and now he feels it too much. You cheer for him to keep going and at the same time you secretly hope he gives up. It’s painful and riveting to watch a man’s life unravel on video. But it is also incredibly compelling because so many of us know someone whose life has been touched by antidepressants and we understand the dilemma. In the end, Phil makes a haunting decision as he realizes that he’s trapped in a physical and psychological dependence on the most prescribed drug in the United States.

There is an emotional clip of the movie HERE [You will need Quick Time to view it]

The home page for Phil's new 72 minute documentary is HERE

It gets its première today at The Minneapolis Saint Paul International Film Festival

Saturday, April 24, 2010 - 1:15pm.

This is certainly one film that I will be keeping an eye on and one that I will be itching to see.

No doubt it will have GlaxoSmithKline and their highly paid law teams quivering.

Phil, this blog salutes you. Cometh the man, cometh the hour.

Phil can be contacted via this page.



Friday, April 23, 2010


Try the David Healy withdrawal guidance. [Updated July 2009]

The pharmaceutical companies who manufacture these types of drugs won't give you the help you need, neither, it seems, will the MHRA or FDA.

This is only a guidance but it may help those of you suffering whilst trying to taper.

Good luck.




Be proud of your nationality... even if your government is trying to strip you of it.

The English are one of a kind.

Today I am proud.

Please spare a thought for the armed services who are fighting for democracy elsewhere, be they English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh. Also our overseas allies.



Thursday, April 22, 2010

The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal Introduction


On Friday the 7th of April, 2006, I began, what I thought at the time, to be a mini protest against the Medicines Healthcare products and Regulatory Agency [MHRA] and the second largest pharmaceutical company in the world, GlaxoSmithKline [GSK]. The world of blogging [1] was new to me but it seemed a good outlet to get ones voice heard and a short way to cut through the red tape that exists at government level here in the UK. I wasn't happy with the way an antidepressant called Seroxat, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, was being widely prescribed and its serious adverse side-effects were being largely ignored by both the medical profession and the UK Medicine regulator, the MHRA.

The MHRA was founded in 2003 by merging the Medicines Control Agency (MCA) and the Medical Devices Agency (MDA). The MCA was created by the UK Medicines Act 1968, in the wake of the thalidomide disaster. [2] The Thalidomide tragedy occurred over fifty years ago, when it came onto the market. The years that followed saw it causing serious deformities in children whose mothers had taken the drug during pregnancy. Many of them died. Both the pharmaceuticals industry and legislators learned lessons from this tragedy. The safety tests that a new drug is required to undergo before it can be administered to humans were made much more stringent... or so we were led to believe.

40 years on and prescription drugs are still slipping through the system and into the bloodstreams of humans. Some would say that the whole Seroxat scandal is on a par with the thalidomide disaster, I would suggest, with respect, that it is far worse than that, worse because we actually have a regulator in place who have ignored the pleas of patients, articles and even doctors that have claimed Seroxat has ruined their lives or the lives of their patients. Of course children born with abnormalities is far worse than those suffering withdrawal, those poor children were dragged into this world with defects, it is because of them that we have a drugs regulator in place. The Seroxat scandal should have been quickly nipped in the bud by the regulator, instead the denial continues and patients still suffer. This is what sets it aside to the thalidomide disaster. We have people in place to help us and they are clearly not.

Emails to the CEO of the MHRA, Prof. Kent Woods were being ignored. Freedom of Information requests [FOI's] to the MHRA were being returned to me with exemption rules and/or a vagueness that defied belief. Something just didn't sit right with me. My suspicions regarding the MHRA and their closeness to the pharma industry stemmed from a documentary aired on BBC TV almost two years before I started blogging. BBC's Panorama [1] had already aired two programmes regarding Seroxat and their third, 'Taken on Trust', delved deeper into how prescription drugs are regulated in the UK. The programmes investigative reporter, Shelley Jofre, exposed huge failings in the MHRA and revealed how patients' lives had been put at risk. It focused on one drug, a drug whose controversy was raising daily here in the UK. That drug was GlaxoSmithKline's Seroxat. The first documentary, 'The Secrets of Seroxat' was aired in 2002 and saw 65,000 people ring the BBC helpline and they received over 1,500 emails. This prompted Shelley to make a follow-up programme called 'Emails from the Edge', which was broadcast on BBC TV on the 11th May 2003.

'Taken on Trust', her third and I believe the most powerful of the four, is mentioned above. Her fourth and final instalment [thus far] of the whole Seroxat scandal was called 'Secrets of the Drug Trials', she showed how GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) attempted to show that Seroxat worked for depressed children despite failed clinical trials. This was aired in 2007.

What is Seroxat?

In 2006 the patient information leaflet [PIL] for Seroxat reads:

“Seroxat treats depression and anxiety disorders. Like all medicines it can have unwanted effects. It is therefore important that you and your doctor weigh up the benefits of against the possible unwanted affects, before starting treatment.”


“Seroxat is a treatment for adults with depression and anxiety disorders. It is not fully understood how Seroxat and other SSRI’s work but they may help by increasing the level of serotonin in the brain.”

All seems above board with these statements but it wasn't always like that. The PIL from 1996 did everything but relay warnings and they [GSK] were adamant that there was an illness that Seroxat could treat.

1996 PIL:

What is “Seroxat”?

“Everyone has a substance called Serotonin in their body. Low levels of Serotonin are thought to be a cause of Depression and other related conditions. This medicine works by bringing the levels of serotonin back to normal.”

The statement by GSK is utter nonsense and it has never been scientifically proven, it is merely a theory that low levels of serotonin cause depression yet GSK claim that Seroxat works by bringing the levels of serotonin back to normal. How can a medicine act on a theory?

The PIL continued with:

Seroxat works by relieving symptoms of depression and any associated anxiety. It also treats obsessions , compulsions and panic attacks. These tablets are not addictive. Most people find that Seroxat does not affect their daily lives.

We now know that this broad statement by GSK was wrong. They carefully worded sections simply by adding a word, for instance, 'Most people find that Seroxat does not affect their daily lives .' - By adding the word 'Most', GSK had cleverly spun the fact that some people find that Seroxat does affect their daily lives. It's a marketing trick to keep the consumer from the truth. Can you imagine if, in 1996, the wording would have read something like this: “Some people find that Seroxat does affect their daily lives.” It would have been a marketing disaster and could possibly have been detrimental to GlaxoSmithKline making billions of pounds with their drug, Seroxat.

It was research like this that led me to believe that not only I was being duped but so were millions of others worldwide. This was the reason that I started to bang the drum.

I took Seroxat for 6 years, the last 22 months I tapered using an oral syringe and a liquid form of Seroxat. On month 19, I went cold turkey. [See Chapter 2] The following 3 months were the worst moments of my life.

The first chapter of this book takes you through my six years on Seroxat. It is a snapshot of how this one drug completely changed my character. Many of the personal events I mention throughout this book are hazy at best. Seroxat, I believe, has left me impaired in as much that my memory is not what it used to be, nor is my sleep. My life has changed as a result of taking Seroxat. I have lost many things along the way, both physical and mental. Seroxat depersonalised me.

It's time for change here in the UK.

It's time to stand up and be counted.

The Evidence, However, Is Clear…The Seroxat Scandal
ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
Chipmunka Publishing.

Download the E-Book HERE

Paperback coming later this year.



Wednesday, April 21, 2010

The Seroxat Sufferers Alternative Guide to The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM]

Image: Cuckoo Land Promotions

The Seroxat Sufferers Alternative Guide to The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM]

Please take the following with a pinch of salt [unless you have an allergy to salt.]

1. Snotalotsponditus [SNEEZING]:

Sneezing will now be deemed a mental illness.

Sneezing is an expulsion of air from the lung, usually caused by particles irritating the nasal passage. Sneezing can be triggered through sudden exposure to pepper, and also viral infections. It can also be caused by flowers or freshly cut grass. Quite often 'sneezers' leave behind a trail of mucus [snot]. Sneezing requires wiping the mucus area, be it, your nose, window or the person's neck sitting in front of you. Severe sneezers often make unexplainable noises during the expulsion of air from the lungs.


Quaint little sneezers who try to disguise their sneezes should be treated with medication such as AllerSneeze. They should also endure a course of talk therapy with a psychiatrist who can then recommend further treatment.


Sneezers that use a handkerchief whilst sneezing more often than not return the said handkerchief into their pockets, thus keeping hold of their sneeze. We believe it is of vital importance to 'let go' of the sneeze forever. These types of sneezers have an inability to let go of things thus causing an emotional imbalance. Medication such as Catchasneeze will be helpful to these patients and maybe a course of SSRi type medication to correct the emotional imbalance.


Sneezers that make a song and dance in public. Quite often using a language that can only be described as a form of Swahili. A Sneeze is often preceded by holding of the breath, a squinting of the eyes and during the expulsion noises such as, "ATISHOO", "AAAAACHEWWWWWWWWWWWW" can be heard. Immediate medication is required as new evidence suggests that these sneezers are possessed by Demons. The Demons can be exorcised by using Snotarella, a relatively new drug that has been endorsed by top psychiatrists all over the world. Manufactured by Cassper Pharmaceuticals, it has been clinically proven to cure Category C sneezers.

2. Gibsonelectricococus [AIR GUITAR SYNDROME]

Often patients will start strumming an 'invisible guitar' and actually believe that they are playing the correct chords. This is a delusional state of mind and borders on the first stages of Schizophrenia.

An immediate course of Splitzoid is highly recommended.


Those who gently rub the front of their thighs whilst in a sitting position. These particular 'pluckers' tend not to hold the neck of the imaginary guitar so a low dose of Splitzoid is recommended [20mg].


These 'pluckers' stand whilst playing their imaginary instruments. They often screw up their faces whilst moving their fingers up and down an imaginary fret. They also feel the need to tap their legs [see restless legs syndrome treatment - GlaxoSmithKline website]. A dose of Splitzoid is highly recommended for this category [40mg]


Pluckers in this category feel the need to mimic the noise of the imaginary guitar and are often seen duck-walking in the style of Angus Young [AC/DC] across living rooms, dance floors and other public places. This has now been deemed as a form of epileptic seizure. Patients in this category will often play other instruments such as an air bass guitar and air drums. An immediate course of Splitzoid is required [60-80mg]

** Persuading category C patients to throw away copies of CD's that trigger this affliction may prove impossible so it is of vital importance that these patients are sedated.

3. Caninepoopacitis [DOG POOP DODGERS]

Dog owners who do not pick up their dog faeces are now deemed as mentally ill. Once again, they fall into three categories.


Often seen on beaches and disguise the fouling by throwing a stick or ball into the sea. Once the cold water hits the canine's underbelly a desire to urinate and defecate overcomes the pooch. The waste is deposited into the sea and the dog owner continues his stroll along the sand. A mild form of denial is induced. We highly recommend Truthdux, a new drug that has the backing of Emory University Scientists and fellow psychiatrists.


These patients often only allow to let their dogs poop under trees. This has caused major problems for families wishing to picnic under a shade. Although it keeps the flies off the food, it can cause severe retching if a member of the public mistakes it for a chocolate gateaux. Patients who allow their dogs to defecate under trees or other shaded areas are deemed to have severe personality disorders. A course of antidepressants will help these patients.


These patients allow their dogs to defecate in the middle of football pitches, knowing that there will be a game played later that evening. Electroconvulsive therapy [ECT] is highly recommended. If that fails then we suggest contacting the local Police - they may contact the local courts and apply for the relevant documents to have the patient committed to a psychiatric facility where further ECT and treatment with anti-psychotics may be carried out.




Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers in the US - Part II


Part One HERE

Special Thanks to Evelyn Pringle for allowing me to republish her article in its entirety.

Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers in the US - Part II

Of all the harmful actions of modern psychiatry, "the mass diagnosing and drugging of children is the most appalling with the most serious consequences for the future of individual lives and for society," warns the world-renowned expert, Dr Peter Breggin, often referred to as the "Conscience of Psychiatry."

Peter Lehman, author of the book, "Coming off Psychiatric Drugs: Successful Withdrawal from Neuroleptics, Antidepressants, Lithium, Carbamazepine and Tranquilizers," believes that giving infants and toddlers "powerful, brain-effecting psychiatric medication is close to criminal activity."

"Giving them these drugs," he says, "has no rationale, and ignores the basic fact that youngsters are very sensitive to their environments, both social and chemical, with the juvenile brain easily damaged by the latter."

Inventing Disorders

During an interview on ABC Radio National in August 2007, Dr David Healy (right), the noted British pharmacology expert, and author of the book, "Mania: A Short History of Bipolar Disorder," told reporter Jane Shields: "Just to give you a feel for how crazy things have actually got recently, it would appear that clinicians in the US are happy to look at the ultrasounds of children in the womb, and based on the fact that they appear to be more overactive at times, and then possibly less active later, they're prepared to actually consider the possibility that these children could be bipolar."

On April 9, 2009, Christopher Lane, author of the book, "Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness," published an interview on his Psychology Today blog with Dr Healy. In the interview, Healy explained the history behind the drastic rise in the sale of anticonvulsants and antipsychotics as "mood stabilizers," and the diagnosis of bipolar disorder.

"The key event in the mid-1990s that led to the change in perspective was the marketing of Depakote by Abbott as a mood stabilizer," Healy tells Lane, and further explains:

"Mood stabilization didn't exist before the mid-1990s. It can't be found in any of the earlier reference books and journals. Since then, however, we now have sections for mood stabilizers in all the books on psychotropic drugs, and over a hundred articles per year featuring mood stabilization in their titles.

"In the same way, Abbott and other companies such as Lilly marketing Zyprexa for bipolar disorder have re-engineered manic-depressive illness. While the term bipolar disorder was there since 1980, manic-depression was the term that was still more commonly used until the mid-1990s when it vanishes and is replaced by bipolar disorder. Nowadays, over 500 articles per year feature bipolar disorder in their titles."

"As of 2008, upwards of a million children in the United States--in many cases preschoolers--are on "mood-stabilizers" for bipolar disorder, even though the condition remains unrecognized in the rest of the world," Healy points out.

"But there is no evidence that the drugs stabilize moods," he says. "In fact, it is not even clear that it makes sense to talk about a mood center in the brain."

"A further piece of mythology aimed at keeping people on the drugs," he reports, "is that these are supposedly neuroprotective--but there's no evidence that this is the case and in fact these drugs can lead to brain damage."

Healy says the FDA's decision to add a black-box warning about suicide to SSRIs likely had little to do with the switch to prescribing antipsychotics as safer for children. What "was quite striking was how quickly companies were able to use the views of the few bipolar-ologists who argued that when children become suicidal on antidepressants it's not the fault of the drug," he points out.

"The problem, they said, stems from a mistaken diagnosis and if we could just get the diagnosis right and put the child on mood stabilizers then there wouldn't be a problem," he explains.

"There is no evidence for this viewpoint, but it was interesting to see how company support could put wind in the sails of such a perspective," he says.

Because having just one label was very limiting, Healy says, child psychiatry "needed another disorder--and for this reason bipolar disorder was welcome."

He reports that the same thing is happening to children labeled with ADHD. "Not all children find stimulants suitable," he advises, "and just as with the SSRIs and bipolar disorder it has become very convenient to say that the stimulants weren't causing the problem the child was experiencing; the child in fact had a different disorder and if we could just get the diagnosis correct, then everything else would fall into place."

A report titled, "Adverse Events Associated with Drug Treatment of ADHD: Review of Postmarketing Safety Data," presented at the FDA's March 22, 2006, Pediatric Advisory Committee meeting bears witness to Healy's explanation by stating in part: "The most important finding of this review is that signs and symptoms of psychosis or mania, particularly hallucinations, can occur in some patients with no identifiable risk factors, at usual doses of any of the drugs currently used to treat ADHD."

Between January 2000, and June 30, 2005, the FDA identified nearly 1,000 cases of psychosis or mania linked to the drugs in its own database and those from the drug makers themselves.

The antipsychotics are just as dangerous as the SSRI antidepressants, Healy says. "Long before the antidepressants were linked with akathisia, the antipsychotics were universally recognized as causing this problem," he explains in the Lane interview. "It was also universally accepted that the akathisia they induce risked precipitating the patient into suicidality or violence."

"They also cause a physical dependence," Healy states. "Zyprexa is among the drugs most likely to cause people to become physically dependent on it."

"In addition," he points out, "these drugs are known to cause a range of neurological syndromes, diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and other problems."

"It's hard to understand how blind clinicians can get to problems like these, especially in youngsters who grow obese and become diabetic right before their eyes," Healy tells Lane.

As for what he calls the "medicalization of childhood," in the radio interview, Healy points out that "children always have been unhappy, they always have been nervous, but that's actually part and parcel of being a child."

"You have to go through these things," he said. "This is how we learn to cope with the problems of life."

Children can best be helped in the safest way, he says, "if they're just seen and if they actually have the opportunity to talk about their problems, and if they get basic and sensible input about how to perhaps help them cope with these problems."

Healy said it's important to remember that severe mental illness is rare in children and that most children with a mental health problem do not need medication. Children are being picked up and put on pills "who really don't need to be on these pills and who are going to be injured by them," he warned.

"I think possibly 10 to 15 years up the road," he told Shields, "we're going to be looking at a generation of children who will have been seriously injured by the treatments that they appear ever-increasingly likely to be put on now."

But the administration of multiple drugs at once complicates the situation so that it may be impossible to determine which drugs are most responsible for the adverse reactions children experience, according to Dr Breggin.

"Because so many doctors and so many drug companies will share the blame for mistreating these children, they will be unable to seek redress against individual perpetrators through the courts when they grow up," he explains.

(Evelyn Pringle is an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)

(This report is one of a series of articles focused on the rising rates of psychiatric drugging in the US and is sponsored by the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology)



8 Invented Diseases Big Pharma Is Banking on.


I just paid a visit to one of the Yahoo forums I am subscribed to, a forum that centres around psychiatry. You need to subscribe to read the posts, many of which use the anti-Scientology rants as arguments.

Speak out on this group against psychiatric medication and be prepared to be labelled a Scientologist - much of which is orchestrated by my online stalker, the deluded Jeremy Bryce, otherwise known as jeremy9282 and bryce_j_j plus a whole host of other online identities he has used in the past to bully.

It seems remarkable to me that these pro-pill pushers and pharmaceutical whores run off at the mouth shouting, "SCIENTOLOGIST" every time someone dares speak out against their experiences on SSRi type medications, even more remarkable is they completely ignore the flip side of the coin.

I shall explain.

We go to our doctor, a nice young Christian man who goes to Church every Sunday and reads his Bible before he sleeps at night. Stories of men living inside killer whales or a bearded man who walked on water, died, then come back to life again. The same book that claims the earth is only 8,000 years old.

This same doctor then prescribes you a drug that he believes [like his belief in the Bible] will help lift your depression. He believes this because he has read it in medical journals or has the latest copy of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM]

The latest invention of diseases from this 'book of faith' is highlighted by Martha Rosenburg with her article, 8 Invented Diseases Big Pharma Is Banking on.

It's a great read and I guarantee that you will be entertained. I haven't laughed so much in years.

Sadly, there are those that will believe they have these 'new illnesses' - because their Christian doctor's will tell them that they have.

For the record, I have no affiliation with Scientology, I'm actually an atheist from the planet Zog.



Monday, April 19, 2010

Chinese Take-Away for Drug Regulators


The Shanghai Daily is reporting that 5 officials from the Chinese Food and Drug Watchdog have been arrested on graft charges.

I must admit that I have never heard of a graft charge before - Thank God for Wikipedia.

Political corruption is the use of legislated powers by government officials for illegitimate private gain. Misuse of government power for other purposes, such as repression of political opponents and general police brutality, is not considered political corruption. Neither are illegal acts by private persons or corporations not directly involved with the government. An illegal act by an officeholder constitutes political corruption only if the act is directly related to their official duties.

Forms of corruption vary, but include bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft, and embezzlement. While corruption may facilitate criminal enterprise such as drug trafficking, money laundering, and trafficking, it is not restricted to these activities.

The five arrests comes less than three years after the head of China's Food and Drug watchdog was executed for the same offence.

The Shanghai Daily writes:

The five were arrested on suspicion of taking bribes, the Economic Observer News reported yesterday.

Of the five arrested officials, Wei Liang was the first to be given double designation status in the investigation, which is still undergoing and may take in more officials, a well-informed source told the newspaper.

Double designation is when a Party official is ordered to answer allegations of disciplinary violations or corruption at a designated time and place.

You can read more here

The UK drug regulator, the MHRA, are currently funded by the pharmaceutical industry and feature heavily in my book [shameless plug] - "The Evidence, However, Is Clear…The Seroxat Scandal."

Anyone for a Chinese Take-Away?

Thanks to Cyndi White for passing this information on.



Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers in the US - Part I By Evie Pringle


Following on from the excellent Louis Theroux documentary, America's Medicated Kids, here's an article from investigative journalist, Evie Pringle. Part two will be here shortly.

I have had a lot of hits on this blog in the last 24 hours or so, due, in the main to adding videos from the Louis Theroux documentary. Sadly, the videos have now been taken down by YouTube for apparent copyright infringement. It's a shame because this really was an excellent documentary... as is the article from Evie you are about to read.

Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers in the US - Part I

The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world for kids with children being medicated at a younger and younger age. Medicaid records in some states show infants less than a year old on drugs for mental disorders.

The use of powerful antipsychotics with privately insured children, aged 2 through 5 in the US, doubled between 1999 and 2007, according to a study of data on more than one million children with private health insurance in the January, 2010, "Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry."

The number of children in this age group diagnosed with bipolar disorder also doubled over the last decade, Reuters reported.

Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).

The study reported that fewer than half of drug treated children received a mental health assessment (40.8%), a psychotherapy visit (41.4%), or a visit with a psychiatrist (42.6%) during the year of antipsychotic use.

"Antipsychotics, which are being widely and irresponsibly prescribed for American children--mostly as chemical restraints--are shown to be causing irreparable harm," warned Vera Hassner Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, in a February 26, 2010 InfoMail.

"These drugs have measurable severe hazardous effects on vital biological systems, including: cardiovascular adverse effects that result in shortening lives; metabolic adverse effects that induce diabetes and the metabolic syndrome," she wrote. "Long-term use of antipsychotics has been shown to result in metabolic syndrome in 40% to 50% of patients."

The lead researcher on the study above, Columbia University psychiatry professor Mark Olfson, told Reuters that about 1.5% of all privately insured children between the ages of 2 and 5, or one in 70, received some type of psychiatric drug in 2007, be it an antipsychotic, a mood stabilizer, a stimulant or an antidepressant.

Psychiatric drugs bathe the brains of growing children with agents that threaten the normal development of the brain, according to Dr Peter Breggin, founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), and author of about 20 books, including "Medication Madness."

The drugs themselves are causing severe disorders in millions of children in the US, he warns. "Substances like antidepressants, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotic drugs cause severe, and potentially permanent, biochemical imbalances."

American Phenomenon

A number of presentations at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in May 2009, addressed the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, including one titled, "Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Critical Look at an American Phenomenon," at which Dr Peter Parry, a consultant child & adolescent psychiatrist, and senior lecturer at Flinders University in Australia, presented a survey on, "Australian and New Zealand's Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists' Views on Bipolar Disorder Prevalence and on Rates of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder in the USA."

Dr Parry and his colleagues conducted a survey of child and adolescent psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand. Of the 199 psychiatrists who responded to the survey, 90.5% thought pediatric bipolar disorder was overdiagnosed in the US.

In an October 1, 2009 article titled, "Medicating Our Children," Dr Parry reports that since "the mid-1990s in the USA, some researchers have claimed that Paediatric Bipolar Disorder (PBD) frequently starts prior to puberty."

One of PBD's main proponents, Harvard University's Professor Joseph Biederman, stating onset "is squarely in the preschooler age group," he notes.

Parry explains that "PBD has been created by moving the diagnostic goalposts away from traditional concepts of bipolar disorder."

"In children," he says, "episodes were redefined to last hours instead of days or weeks and, instead of manic elation, severe anger in children sufficed as mania."

"Unlike diagnoses like ADHD or depression, or simply accepting a child has serious emotional and behavioural problems in reaction to various stressors, PBD implies a lifelong severe mental illness requiring of strong psychiatric medication," Parry warns.

"In the USA," he says, "the public is furthermore exposed to direct pharmaceutical advertising that can feed the natural desire parents of distressed and aggressive children have for a quick solution by suggesting a simple medication fix."

"The medicating of America's children has become intensely controversial, highlighted by the tragic case of Rebecca Riley, a four-year-old Boston girl diagnosed at 28 months old with ADHD and PBD," he points out.

On April 7, 2009, the author of the book, "Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness," Christopher Lane, featured an interview on his Psychology Today blog, "Side Effects," with journalist, Philip Dawdy, the creator of the popular website, Furious Seasons, and discussed the rising number of children being diagnosed with bipolar disorder.

"As for bipolar disorder in kids (meaning pre-teens and younger), it's simply not an issue in the rest of the world," Dawdy told Lane. "The bipolar child is a purely American phenomenon."

"The pharma companies and the Harvard crew worked hand-in-hand to bring America a generation of ADHD kids and bipolar children, and their profound influence can be seen in the millions of children and teens who now carry lifetime diagnoses and take gobs of psychotropic drugs each day, often to their detriment," he advised. Lane asked for Dawdy's opinion on a recent report in the St Petersburg Times that found 23 infants less than one-year-old had been prescribed antipsychotics in Florida in 2007, as well as the drug overdose death of 4-year-old Rebecca Riley in Massachusetts. "How is it possible for psychiatrists to continue prescribing to infants in such numbers without more oversight?" Lane asked.

"What's gone on with antipsychotics prescribed to infants and toddlers is simply inexplicable to me," Dawdy said. "The drugs are known to cause huge problems in adults, so why the heck would a doctor give them to little kids, especially infants? It boggles my small mind."

"I'm no fan of bans or restrictions," he told Lane, "but this does strike me as a situation where there needs to be a serious rethinking of what we are doing—and maybe there should be a ban on the use of these drugs in kids under, say, 6 years of age."

An October 2007 report by the University of South Florida found the most common diagnosis for antipsychotic use with children in Florida’s Medicaid program, between July and December 2005, was ADHD. Roughly 54%, or 1,372 cases, involved prescriptions for children five and under and the total number of antipsychotic users in this young age group was 2,549, with all disorders combined, according to the report.

Increased Prescribing to Poor Children

Federally funded research published online in December, 2009, revealed that children covered by Medicaid were prescribed antipsychotics at a rate four time higher than children with private insurance. The data showed that more than 4% of children in Medicaid fee-for-service programs received antipsychotics, compared to less than 1% of privately insured youth. The study found Medicaid kids were more likely to receive antipsychotics for unapproved uses such as ADHD and conduct disorders than privately insured children.

The researchers examined records for children in seven states for the years 2001 and 2004, chosen as representative of the US Medicaid population. But more recent data through 2007 indicates that the disparity has remained, said Stephen Crystal, a Rutgers professor who led the study, according to the December 11, 2009, New York Times.

Antipsychotics were the top selling class of drugs in both 2008 and 2009. With sales of $14.6 billion in 2009, they brought in more than the $13.6 billion earned by both heart burn and cholesterol medications. Antidepressants ranked fourth with sales of $9.9 billion, according to data by IMS Health. In 2008, the drug makers took in $11.3 billion from antiseizure drugs and $4.8 billion from ADHD drugs.

In a new book titled, "Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America," Robert Whitaker reports that the number of children on government disability rolls due to severe mental illness has increased more than 35-fold since 1987.

The book explores the question of whether the epidemic rise in people disabled by mental illness, among all age groups in the US over the past 20 years, could have been fueled by a drug-based paradigm of care.

It also explores what is happening to children over the long-term who are placed on psychiatric drugs. "Once again, science tells a very clear story, and, as you might imagine, it is one that — when you think of the millions of children so affected — makes you want to weep," Whitaker stated in a March 26, 2010, notice for the book's release on the Beyond Meds Website.

Evelyn Pringle
(Evelyn Pringle is an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)

(This report is one of a series of articles focused on the rising rates of psychiatric drugging in the US and is sponsored by the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology)




Goldilocks and the Three Bears - "Who's been taking my Paxil?"

Not for Children

Once upon a time, there was a little girl named Mary Anne Goldilocks. One day she went for a walk in the forest close-by to her million dollar mansion in Pennsylvania, USA. Pretty soon, she came upon a house. She knocked and, when no one answered, she walked right in.

At the table in the kitchen, there were three packets of Paxil. Mary Anne Goldilocks was suffering from shyness so she took one Paxil from the first packet.

She had forgotten her daily dose of Paxil and it seemed a remarkable coincidence that the owner of this particular house was also on the medication.

"Fuck, I feel agitated" she exclaimed.

So, she took another Paxil from the second packet.

"These head zaps are making me cranky," she said

So, she took another Paxil from the third packet.

"That's better," she said happily.

After she'd popped 60mg of Paxil, she was feeling a little tired. So, she walked into the living room where she saw three chairs. Mary Anne Goldilocks sat in the first chair to rest her feet and because she was feeling slightly nauseus and dizzy.

"Fuck, these zaps in my head are bugging the shit outta me," she exclaimed.

Unable to sit still, due to akathesia, she sat in the second chair.

"Damn these zaps," she whined.

So she tried the last and smallest chair.

"Ahhh, this chair is just right," she sighed. But just as she settled down into the chair to rest, it broke into pieces! Mary Anne Goldilocks had put on lots of weight since being prescribed Paxil.

Mary Anne Goldilocks was very tired and about to drop on the spot, so she climbed upstairs to the bedrooms. She lay down in the first bed, but it was too hard. Then she lay in the second bed, but it was too soft. Then she lay down in the third bed and it was just right. Mary Anne Goldilocks was sleeping within seconds.

As she was sleeping, the three bears came home.

"Someone has been taking my Paxil that I take for Post Partum Depression for men," growled the Papa bear.

"Someone has been taking my Paxil that I take for PMDD," said the Mama bear.

"Someone's been taking my Paxil too. I hope they didn't take them all because how else am I going to control my ADHD?," piped Baby bear.

"Who's been sitting in my chair?," growled the Papa bear.

"Who's been sitting in my chair?," said the Mama bear.

"Someone's been sitting in my chair and by the look of things, the fat fucker has broke it!," announced Baby bear.

"Calm down," cried Mama Bear. "Here, take one of these," she added, whilst handing a Paxil to her 7 year old baby bear. She also took one herslef as her period was due.

They decided to look around some more and when they got upstairs to the bedroom, Papa bear growled, "Who's been sleeping in my bed?,"

"Someone's been sleeping in my bed, too" said the Mama bear

"Someone's been sleeping in my bed and she's still there!" exclaimed Baby bear.

Just then, Mary Anne Goldilocks woke up and saw the three bears. She screamed, "Help!" And she jumped up and ran out of the room.

Mary Anne Goldilocks ran down the stairs, picked up a loaded shotgun and shot the three bears dead.

Mary Anne Goldilocks is currently awaiting trial.

For the record - she is not a Scientologist.

Porridge can be just as effective as Paxil for treating fairy tale characters with fairy tale diseases such as shyness.

A Fiddaman story in conjunction with the makers of Porridge Oats.

**Please feel free to disseminate and change the medication from Paxil to whatever drug you wish to raise issue with.



Louis Theroux: America's Medicated Kids - The Videos

This is for the benefit of my overseas readers who cannot access the BBC IPlayer.

I watched this as it aired tonight and one thing kept running through my mind.

Why have we, as humans, forgotten how to be parents?

I don't know if these videos will remain on YouTube as there may be some copyright infringement - hopefully they will stay up.

It's a riveting 1 hour documentary.

Theroux covered this subject brilliantly and at times you can almost see the sense of disbelief on his face as he talks to parents, psychiatrists and the children on these meds such as Adderall, Seroquel and Cipramil.

There is a very moving segment when Theroux spends time alone with one of the children featured in this powerful documentary.

I feel for these poor kids. Who knows how long they will be on these drugs for? Who knows what psychological [Neurological] damage is being caused?










Sunday, April 18, 2010

Paxil Off-Label Use to Be Focus of Heart Defects Trial


Source: Lawyers & Settlements

Well done Evie - your hard work has not gone unnoticed.

April 18, 2010

By Gordon Gibb

Washington, DC: Paxil manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline (Glaxo) faces hundreds of Paxil lawsuits alleging that the antidepressant causes birth defects. Next up at the plate is Delaney Novak, a little girl born on April 4, 2002 with heart defects. In June, her parents Laura and Derek will contend that misconduct on the part of Glaxo over safety warnings for Paxil caused Delaney’s birth defects.

Investigative journalist Evelyn Pringle reported in the 3/17/10 issue of the Public Record that Laura Novak is a client of United Healthcare, which was contracted by Glaxo for a study investigating the potential for birth defects. Laura was part of a study that eventually resulted in the issuance of a warning letter in September 2005—three years after Delaney was born.

Also notable is the fact Paxil was never approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use with pregnant women in the first place. Thus, any prescriptions for Paxil written for use by pregnant women have occurred off-label. Doctors have the authority to engage in such practice, although it is illegal for manufacturers to actively promote or market drugs for off-label use. A doctor will not prescribe a drug for off-label use if the safety risks outweigh the potential benefits.

Laura Novak's doctor has said he never would have prescribed Paxil to his patient if he had been made aware of the safety concerns in 2000 or 2001. He further noted that there was no clear benefit to using Paxil that would have outweighed any risk of birth defects. He has not used Paxil in his practice since receiving a 'dear doctor' letter from the manufacturer in 2005.

Pringle reports in the Public Record that Dr. Dee Mangin is an expert witness in the Novak case and submitted a report in October of last year with regard to Glaxo's alleged off-label promotion of Paxil, about the same time that Laura became pregnant.

"GlaxoSmithKline from 2000 mounted a multifaceted and targeted national promotional campaign that employed explicit strategies designed to promote sales of Paxil in pregnant women and women of reproductive age," Dr. Mangin writes. "One of the known reasons that physicians change their prescribing behavior is as a response to the volume of evidence containing the same message that the physician is exposed to. The so-called 'Carpet Bombing' technique used in the Paxil campaign feeds directly into this."

An exhibit cited in the report from a "Paxil Tactical Marketing Plan in 2000" states: "New Paxil data with high media interest, hot flash, postpartum, depression, pregnancy, and lactation will position Paxil as the drug of choice for women."

Novak's doctor noted in his 8/11/09 deposition that Glaxo sales reps made a habit of leaving reprints of articles on off-label uses. He also claimed that Glaxo sales representatives talked with him about literature on the off-label use of Paxil for migraine headaches.

"The strategies outlined where reprints about treatment of migraine with paroxetine, large numbers of form letters containing summaries of studies of use in headache were sent to physicians and detailing and providing free samples to physicians likely to treat women with migraine were therefore encouraging use of Paxil and exposure to its risks when in reality it is no more effective in this situation than a sugar pill," Dr. Mangin reports.

Encouragement "of unapproved use for migraine further attempted to expand the market beyond that which was medically justified and likely to lead to unnecessary exposure to the risks of Paxil," she continues. "None of the information from the medical records of the family or their statements on potential genetic, environmental and pharmaceutical causes of heart defects indicates any other factor more likely to have caused [Delaney's] condition than the Paxil exposure.

"It is clear that if the prescribing doctor had been informed of the risk of heart defects, Laura Novak would not have been exposed to Paxil."



Louis Theroux: America's Medicated Kids


I must watch this tonight. UK Viewers only - unless those stateside have access to BBC TV?

The BBC have an I Player online, just in case you miss it.

Here's the blurb from the BBC.

Faced with the challenging behaviour of their kids, more and more parents in America are turning to psychoactive medication to help them cope, even though the drugs, and sometimes the diagnoses, remain controversial. Louis travels to one of America's leading children's psychiatric treatment centres, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to get to know the diagnosed children and hoping to understand what drives parents to put their kids on drugs.

Louis meets Hugh, a 10-year-old who has been diagnosed with ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, Asperger's syndrome and bipolar disorder. Moving in with Hugh and his family, Louis learns more about his controversial diagnosis and gets to know a family where even the dog is on meds.

He also meets Jack, aged six, a child who has been excluded from school for his explosive behaviour and who now takes antidepressant medication for his anxiety. And when 15-year-old Kaylee (diagnosed with ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder) takes a day off her medication, Louis gets a glimpse of what life is like without the drugs.

From 'med checks' to 'personal pharmacies', Louis explores the world of psychiatric medication for kids, attempting to find the line between ordinary bad behaviour and pathology, and answer the question of whether the latest pharmaceuticals are taking the place of old-fashioned parenting.



The Past - And it's Dark Secrets - Jeremy Bryce - Obsessive Stalker

Jeremy Bryce is the list owner and moderator of the Yahoo form, SSRi Crusaders. He is also behind the fake Bob Fiddaman blog HERE and the fake Bob Fiddaman Twitter account HERE

Jeremy not only targets me, he mocks the children who have died as a result of taking antidepressant medication. More HERE.



Friday, April 16, 2010


For Evie.


Once upon a time there were three little pigs and the time came for them to leave home and seek their fortunes and basically stand on their own four trotters.

Before they left, their mom told them "Be honest and truthful because that's the only way to get along in this world. Also be aware that one day a big bad wolf will come knocking at your door. Don't let him in, for he is evil."

Soon the time came when each of the little piggies moved on to the property ladder.

The first little pig built his house out of straw.

The second little pig built his house out of sticks.

The third little pig built his house out of bricks.

One night there was a knock at the little piggie house that was made of straw.

Outside was the CEO of a major pharmaceutical company.

"Let me in, Let me in, little pig or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house in!", said the CEO.

"Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin", said the little pig.

"Very well", said the CEO, and he moved on to the second little piggie house.

"Let me in, Let me in, little pig or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house in!", said the CEO.

"Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin", said the second little pig.

"Okay, your loss", said the CEO as he moved on to the third little piggie house.

"Let me in, Let me in, little pig or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house in!", said the CEO.

"Not by the hair of my chinny chin chin", said the third little pig.

Stumped by the three little pigs ignorance, the CEO of the pharmaceutical company walked away and sat down at a board meeting with his directors, trustees, key opinion leaders and government officials.

"The bastards wouldn't let me in the house, they are really stubborn. Sadly, it looks like we are going to have to go ahead with our plan without their permission."

A look of horror bestowed the board of directors and trustees, even the key opinion leaders were shocked into silence.

"Did they not realise that we would have paid handsomely to buy the copyright of the word, 'Swine'?", asked a confused government leader.

"I never got the chance to put it to them", replied the CEO.

"Since when did we ever need permission to ask anyone about our intentions?", enquired one director.

"Good point", announced the CEO.

Later that year, in 2010, it was announced that a human from Mexico had a bad case of the flu. This was unlike any other bout of flu, it was a pig flu. Thus, the term 'Swine Flu' was born.

Back at Pigsville, the three little pigs got together to discuss the flagrant use of their species name with regard to this new, apparent, strain of influenza.

They all agreed that they were silly and they should have let the CEO man into their houses earlier that year - they wrongfully assumed that he was the big bad wolf that their mother had warned them about.

What a silly bunch of piggies they were. Now pharmaceutical companies were reaping the rewards, rewards that really should have been shared amongst the piggie community in Pigsville.

The three little piggies all decided to become patient advocates and each of them started writing blogs and using the piggy networking sites, such as, Snoutbook and Oinker.

Soon the pharmaceutical companies were sitting up and taking notice, particularly when investigative journalist, Evie Piggle, started researching the root of the outbreak.

Moral of this story: Take the time to build something solid that cannot be readily "blown" down.

The Author of this work has no affiliation with GlaxoSmithSwine.



FDA Haul Glaxo Over The Coals for Misleading Advertisement


Looks like Glaxo have been naughty again.

The standard 'Who's been naughty then?' type of letter has been sent to them by the American medicines regulator, the FDA.

In a letter to Philip A. Witman, GlaxoSmithKline's Associate Director of Global Regulatory Affairs, the FDA wrote:

Dear Mr. Witman:

The Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications (DDMAC) has reviewed a professional journal advertisement (AZA141R0 October 2009) (ad) for Arzerra™ (ofatumumab) Injection, for intravenous infusion (Arzerra) printed in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, Volume 27, No 34, dated December 1, 2009. The ad is false or misleading because it omits important information about the drug’s safety and effectiveness. Therefore, the ad misbrands Arzerra in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 352(n) & 321(n), and FDA implementing regulations. 21 CFR 202.1(e)(1); (e)(5) & (e)(6)(i). In addition, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) published the ad within the first 120 days of marketing approval of Arzerra, which received accelerated approval under 21 CFR 601.41, but failed to submit a copy of this promotional ad to the FDA for consideration during the preapproval review period, as required by 21 CFR 601.45. Moreover, GSK failed to submit the ad to FDA under cover of Form FDA-2253, as required by 21 CFR 314.81(b)(3)(i). These violations concern us from a public health perspective because they suggest that Arzerra is more effective and safer than demonstrated.

The scathing letter to Witman continues with:

Misleading Product Claim Ad

While not mentioning Arzerra by name, the ad clearly points to the product, claiming that a “NEW Treatment Option for Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL),” “*Refractory to fludarabine and alemtuzumab,” is “NOW APPROVED” and featuring GSK’s name and logo on the bottom of the ad. The characteristics of the product promoted in the ad can only describe Arzerra. Not only is Arzerra the only recently approved drug marketed by GSK for CLL, but no other product approved for the treatment of CLL has an indication that is limited to this specific population. Consequently, this presentation is a product-specific prescription drug ad for Arzerra. It is misleading because it omits material facts about the drug. The Arzerra ad also fails to include a true statement of information in brief summary relating to the side effects, contraindications (including warnings, precautions, etc.) and effectiveness of the drug (commonly referred to as the “brief summary”).

Specifically, the journal ad fails to reveal any of the risks associated with the use of Arzerra. By omitting the most serious and frequently occurring risks (see Background above), the journal ad suggests that Arzerra is safer than has been demonstrated by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience

It has now been requested to GlaxoSmithKline that they immediately cease the dissemination of violative promotional materials for Arzerra.

The full letter can be downloaded HERE

Here is the ad that caused the stir.

Click on image to enlarge.

GlaxoSmithKline – one of the world's leading research-based pharmaceutical and healthcare companies – is committed to improving the quality of human life by enabling people to do more, feel better and live longer.



Please contact me if you would like a guest post considered for publication on my blog.