Hey Glaxo, Can You Send me Some Champagne?

The countdown starts.

I started writing this blog back in 2006. I was peeved at the way the MHRA [UK Medicine (ahem) Regulators] were handling a series of emails I had sent to them about the antidepressant Seroxat [known as Paxil in the US]

I'm not going to go into detail of why I pursued and dug deeper, I've already done that in my book.

Well, one look at my blog counter and you will note that I'm just over 5,000 clicks off a million hits.

With that in mind I wish to share with you all an open letter to Glaxo CEO, Andrew Witty - that's Sir Andrew if you believe all the hype behind that regal pomp.

Dear Mr Witty,

Seeing as your American lawyers King & Spalding have been keeping tabs on me over the past few weeks I feel it's a great opportunity to ask you if you would like to donate a couple of bottles of the finest champagne to a worthy cause?

As you are probably aware my blog has been running for some considerable time now and I am fast approaching 1 million views. I'd love to celebrate that millionth hit with a couple of bottles of champagne. I'll toast your [ahem] good name and those of past employees of Glaxo.

You may think I'm being greedy asking for two bottles but there's a reason I am requesting a set. You see, one is for me and me alone. I think I deserve it after highlighting stories of GSK, stories that the mainstream have avoided like the plague. You should be thanking me for bringing these stories to your attention Andy baby.

The other bottle will be for more sombre purposes. I wish to toast the dead kids killed by Seroxat. I wish to toast the dead fetuses mothers were forced to abort because Seroxat caused severe birth defects. I wish to toast all those who suffered severe withdrawal at the hands of Seroxat. I also wish to toast those who are still hooked on Seroxat because they have become addicted to it.

Hmmm, I'm thinking two bottles won't even scratch the surface. Maybe a crate will suffice?

I'm not much of a connoisseur when it comes to champagne, I'm more of a beer person, but this is a special occasion, don't you think Andy?

One million hits, that's one million people who have read the work of a nobody. The guy who was wasting his time because GSK will just ignore him and he will, like so many others, just disappear.

I'm still here Andy. 

I may just be a flea on a giant sewer rat but I'm betting that I have become annoying hey? How's that itch on the rat, has it spread to a rash yet?

Your American attorneys will no doubt tell you that I'm sitting on something pretty powerful, something that will question your recent comments regarding Glaxo's past behaviour. "All part of an era", I think you were quoted as saying?

Well, sadly, it's not all part of an era. The concealment is very much alive today, just ask King & Spalding.

Hey, you ever thought about meeting with Seroxat victims, you know, the parents who lost their kids because they killed themselves whilst on your drug. How about the mother's who gave birth to babies who had birth defects or those who had to abort because the Seroxat had caused so much damage that the chances of survival for the children they were carrying were slim to zero.

So, just a simple request. A crate of your finest.

Oh, don't get popping those corks and replacing them either.

Here's to a million more.

Yours sincerely

Bob Fiddaman

Blogger

Published author

Flea

Seroxat Secrets, Half a Million of Them

Seroxat Secrets has reached a milestone. The author of the popular blog has just announced that his hits have gone over the half a million mark - that's great going!

It's a terrific blog full of useful information about Seroxat, GlaxoSmithKline and the MHRA. The author pulls no punches either, he writes:

A few years ago I added a page to Seroxat Secrets, ‘What I believe’ – and it’s still what I believe:

I believe Seroxat is defective and dangerous.

I believe that Glaxo has hidden negative clinical trial data that shows exactly how dangerous a drug it is.

I believe that Seroxat is addictive.

I believe that Seroxat can cause anger, aggression and violence.

I believe that something must be done to help people who suffer terrible problems during withdrawal, as they desperately try to stop taking Seroxat.

I believe that doctors have taken large sums of money from Glaxo to lie about the efficacy and safety of the drug.

I believe that GlaxoSmithKline puts profits before patients – their wealth before our health.

I took Seroxat for 9 years and it took me 22 months to withdraw from the drug little by little.

Believe me – I know what I’m talking about.

There is just one thing I’d add to this list today:

Glaxo must not be allowed to get away with it.

I met the author of Seroxat Secrets in London a couple of years ago. I hope to meet him again someday soon. The drinks are on me sir.

Seroxat Secrets is a wealth of information and can be viewed HERE


Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

"Glaxo Cringe at Your Blog"

I've been out of the country for the past two weeks or so, the reasons of which shall remain, like GlaxoSmithKline's clinical trial data, hidden from the public eye. Sufficed to say, it's been fruitful for me.

During my two weeks in Los Angeles I met with some old friends, some new ones, some really interesting ones.

I was introduced to a person, who shall remain nameless. She/he has a story to tell, she/he is a whistleblower.

She/he used to work for GlaxoSmithKline.

I was introduced to this person who was "dying to meet me".

"I read your blog every day and have done for sometime, I'm a former Glaxo rep and I can tell you this, Glaxo cringe at your blog, keep up the good work."

Hey, being jet-lagged from a flight from LA to Newark and then Newark to Birmingham, that will really help me catch the zeds tonight.

One has to ask why Glaxo cringe, do I embarrass them, are they surprised at my staying power, do they know about the UK Seroxat litigation and the fight that has gone on behind the scenes, are they sick and tired of reading all their muck in one one place, is it because I'm just a blogger with no editor to answer to?

Who knows, who really cares?

GlaxoSmithKline are a multi-billion dollar entity who have thrown money in the direction of people they have injured with their drugs. I'm mainly concerned with their antidepressant Seroxat [Paxil] and the out-of-court settlements they have made, moreover the reasons why they make these out-of-court settlements, the reasons why they wish to seal documents disclosed in court rooms.

They are one of many, all of those who peddle the SSRi's have secrets, have lies, have a lack of empathy to the human race, in particular children.

Cringe?

I'd do more than cringe if I were they.

That's the second Glaxo whistleblower I've spoken to in the space of two months. One in person, one on Skype. No details have been given to me about the pending cases, that would be wrong but assurances have been given to me by one of the whistleblowers that they will let me have first dibs of an exclusive when the shit hits the fan.

I've been writing this blog since 2006, both the UK regulator [MHRA] and GlaxoSmithKline have been monitoring it, as have the honeytraps and hired shills who throw dirt in my direction. Ironically, it is they who have lifted the profile of this blog, it is they who have directed readers to inquire about getting off Seroxat  and readers who have a story to tell...but can't tell it just yet.

Private Eye have recently been in touch - they are also interested in one of the whistleblowers that approached me.

2012 should prove interesting...the year of the Cringe, if you will.

APA Use Restraints on Blogger

Image Capture - .pogo.org

The American Psychiatric Publishing, an arm of the American Psychiatric Association, [APA] have forced a commentator to change the web address of her popular blog because it apparently violated the American Trademark Law.

Suzy Chapman has, for the past two years or so, been voicing her opinion of the proposed new DSM-5, an opinion that has been, in many instances, critical of the biggest book of mythical tales since J.K Rowling's Harry Potter series.

Her original url included the use of the acronym 'dsm' [dsm5watch.wordpress.com/] so the APA decided to send Chapman a threatening 'cease and desist' email, part of which Chapman writes:

On December 22, I was stunned to receive two emails from the Licensing and Permissions department of American Psychiatric Publishing, claiming that the domain name my site operates under was infringing upon the DSM 5 trademark in violation of United States Trademark Law and that my unauthorized actions may subject me to contributory infringement liability including increased damages for willful infringement. I was told to cease and desist immediately all use of the DSM 5 mark and to provide documentation within ten days confirming I had done so.”

Chapman complied and changed the name of her blog to dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/

The intimidation by the APA has prompted a former Chair of the DSM task force, Allen Frances, to come out in support of Chapman and to write an aptly named post, "Is DSM 5 A Public Trust Or An APA Cash Cow?" on his website.

I, myself, was, sometime ago, contacted by GlaxoSmithKline's lawyer's, Addleshaw Gooddard, in relation to a video I had made. Apparently, my video had caused GlaxoSmithKline's former Head of Psychiatry, Alastair Benbow, great distress. Glaxo also mentioned that I had used their company logo in my slide-show video without their permission. I removed the video from YouTube but it was uploaded by an astute American blogger just 24 hours later. The video that landed me in hot water can be seen HERE and the whole "Videogate" scandal can be read in my book, 'The evidence, however, is clear...the Seroxat scandal.'

Last year two bloggers who voiced their opinions were targeted by lawyers. The anonymous author who writes the Seroquel Lawsuit Blog was, like Chapman, sent a 'cease and desist' email by lawyers because he/she had uploaded a settlement that had been put to plaintiffs by their lawyers Weitz & Luxenberg. The blogger was told to remove the document, he/she didn't and it is still available today.

Irish blogger Leonie Fennell, whose son committed suicide after a short period on the antidepressant citalopram, was also sent a threatening letter by Irish lawyers because she had voiced an opinion about Irish psychiatrist Patricia Casey. Fennell writes about her son's death and included Casey in one of her articles [Casey was present at the inquest of Fennell's son, Shane, representing and observing for Psychiatry Ireland and to ask questions if the need arose.] Fennell posted the letter HERE.

I can't quite see what the APA have to gain by intimidating a critique of the DSM. Often when one in power gets uncomfortable they use that power to threaten, usually in the manner of seeking damages that they know their critique just does not have.

If the APA are correct and a Trademark violation has been breached then what of other blogs/websites that use trademarks as part of their web address? Will this move by the APA be the start of further intimidation to stifle opinion for blogs such as Seroxat Secrets, Prozac Withdrawal,  GSK Internal Files, all of which use trademarked names as part of their web address. There are literally hundreds of thousands of others.

It would appear that Chapman's opinions about the DSM-5 have been carefully monitored by the APA, they don't like what they see nor do they like the fact that Chapman has had over 40,000 visitors to her blog during the last two years, a number that was significantly increasing with each post she made.

Blogging is a powerful weapon against the Goliath's of this world, they are a bigger threat to the big boys because they answer to nobody. A newspaper article is run by the Chief editor before it is published, bloggers, in the main, hit the publish button more out of frustration that the mainstream media won't cover what needs to be covered.

And what if Suzy Chapman decided to write her blog anonymously with no contact details on her blog? The APA would have had to go through the laborious process of contacting the webhost, in this instance Wordpress.com, and asking them for an injunction. That would have cost them money so they take the easier route when people, like Chapman, are open and transparent about who they are. It is detrimental these days to be open and honest, how perverse is that?

Chapman continues to critique the proposals for the DSM-5, she has every right to critique a book of apparent psychiatric disorders designed to hook yet more people on mind-altering drugs and make the pharmaceutical industry billions of dollars in sales of their remedies to help 'fix' the problems created out of thin air by the Rowlingesque book.

The field of psychiatry is doing itself no favours by using intimidation tactics against people that criticize their opinion, let's face it, the whole premise of psychiatry is based on opinion, I've not yet seen any scientific evidence of the chemical imbalance the field of psychiatry tout when someone is depressed or has a psychiatric disorder.

Chapman's blog can be read at her new web address HERE. Her work/opinion continues to spread, much to the annoyance of the APA who have probably shot themselves in the foot with their intimidation tactics.

Memo to the APA - Intimidate a blogger and you put them on a pedastal, you highlight what it is that they have to say... here endeth your first lesson in psychology.




Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK 'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE


AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

Irish Lawyers Threaten Blogger Mom

Professor Patricia Casey, Professor of Psychiatry, UCD and Nora Broderick, product manager psychiatry, Lundbeck (Ireland) Ltd

Irish lawyers, Brophy Solicitors, have sent a threatening letter to Leonie Fennell, the mother of Shane Clancy, who writes about her son's death and offers opinion as to why he died.

Shane was just 22 when he killed a young man before turning the knife on himself. The subsequent inquest found an open verdict, large traces of the SSRi antidepressant citalopram [Cipramil UK, Celexa US] were found in his system.

Irish psychiatrist Patricia Casey was present at the inquest representing and observing for Psychiatry Ireland and to ask questions if the need arose. Casey has come under fire from Fennell on a number of occasions, in particular her relationship with the pharmaceutical industry and fees, grants etc that she has received from them.

Casey was at Shane’s inquest and took issue with some aspects of it, according to Leonie, Casey has publicly stated that there is no evidence to suggest that antidepressants can cause suicide or homicide and she is also a member of psychiatry Ireland  and has worked in association with Lundbeck, the manufacturers of citalopram.

The threatening letter from Brophy Solicitors carries an odd disclaimer at the footer, this, more than the threatening content, rather intrigued me.

************************************************************************
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this messages is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to message and deleting it from your computer.
***********************************************************************

I just love the use of the word 'may' here. It either is...or it isn't. It appears Brophy Solicitors are trying to stop Leonie Fennell from posting the letter or passing it on to third parties. Quite what disclosure they refer to is baffling as no court proceedings are in place to my knowledge.

What lands in my inbox becomes my property and I can do with it what I wish to do. I certainly wouldn't pay any attention by a law firm who represent a psychiatrist!

The content of the letter appears to be telling...not asking...Leonie to remove certain segments of a post she wrote about Patricia Casey.

Our client has instructed us in relation to comments appearing on your internet blog in which you repeat a statement that another lady made to you that “Patricia Casey ruined my son’s life”.

You also publish a letter on your blog to the Irish Medicines Board on 16th March 2011. As part of this letter you say “... as Patricia Casey has a long and I am sure lucrative association with Lundbeck ... you can take from that anything you want to”.

So, let's just get this straight. A blogger uses a quote from another person and then writes an opinion about Casey's association with Lundbeck. For that she is sent a threatening letter because Casey didn't like it?

Boo hoo.

I imagine writers across the blogsphere are shitting themselves!

I find it comical that a psychiatrist such as Casey wishes to suppress opinion, particularly when the whole field of psychiatry is based on opinion. The mere fact that Casey hands out antidepressants to children is based on opinion...unless of course Casey can provide evidence that shows her patients have a mental disorder? Blood tests, urine samples will suffice. Incidentally, SSRi antidepressants are not recommended for children in Ireland but they can be prescribed 'off-label' - in other words, if the doctor or psychiatrist are of the opinion that a child will benefit from them then they will prescribe them.

Leonie Fennell is right to question a psychiatrist who has links to the manufacturer of the drug that, she believes, killed her son. If she didn't question then what sort of mother would she be?

Brophy solicitors are making assumptions as far as I can ascertain.

"The implication in this second comment is that our client either knows or ought to know of what you describe in your blog as the potentially fatal side effects of certain antidepressants, and yet continues to prescribe these anti-depressants."

First off, it is Brophy Solicitors that have drawn that conclusion. If they feel that antidepressants do not pose a fatal reaction to young people then they are going against what medicine regulators around the world claim. The fact that their client, Patricia Casey, prescribes them should be in question, particularly when they are not recommended for Casey's younger patients. Visit the MHRA website HERE - I'll leave it to Brophy Solicitors to work their way around that particular labyrinth to find what they are looking for.

"The very clear implication here is that our client receives payments from drug companies and is quite happy to prescribe anti-depressants to individuals who should not take these drugs and who would be placed in danger if they did take these drugs."

Brophy Solicitors really need to do their homework. Children and adolescents ARE placed in danger when prescribed these drugs. It is on Casey's own behest [her opinion] that despite not being recommended she continues to prescribe after weighing up the risks versus benefits.

"The first comment – that our client ‘ruined’ someone’s life is even more serious and while it is entirely untrue and without foundation, it is clearly extremely damaging to our client."

This is a particular sticky issue and, as I understand, Leonie Fennell, has now removed that comment. It kind of runs against those programs you see such as Crimewatch where the victim is silhouetted and their voices are changed. They do so for protection. Fennell claims the woman who made that statement feared repercussions from Casey, hence the reason for leaving her name out.

Are Brophy Solicitors going to send out letters to all bloggers who have opinions about their client or who question their client's ties to the industry?

Leonie Fennell lost her son because he was prescribed an antidepressant on the opinion of a doctor. No blood samples were taken, no urine samples were taken, no MRI scan, PET scan or X-rays. It was the opinion of Shane's doctor that citalopram would help lift the blues he was feeling. Sadly it didn't and Shane took his own life. If these drugs worked then there would be no suicides. If they were so safe then regulators around the world would not have imposed restrictions on them...restrictions that Casey appears to ignore because she has her own opinions on these types of drugs.

Leonie has published the threatening letter in full and added her own opinion HERE

If either Casey or indeed Brophy Solicitors wish to debate the ethics of giving children and adolescents drugs that are not recommended for children and adolescents then I'm all ears. Feel free to leave a comment beneath this post. If the benefits outweigh the potential risks then please feel free to send me a detailed list of those benefits.

For the record I take umbrage to Casey making the following statement on the Irish Health Website:

“Around 50% of people do not have a trigger or risk factors for depressive illness”, she said. “The outcome for those who get treatment is very good. It is also important to be aware too that antidepressants are not addictive”.

Coincidental that Casey sings from the same hymn sheet as the manufacturers of antidepressants?

Perhaps Casey would like to tell the 10,000 or so paroxetine users that what they are experiencing is not addiction?

Maybe she should confront the 20,000+ Prozac sufferers who have posted online regarding Prozac's addictive qualities?

Or she could oppose the near 24,000 who have expressed their views regarding the SNRi Effexor online?

I could go on but then again I'm of the opinion that psychiatrists who don't speak out against psychiatric drugs have irrational and delusional traits - Just an opinion of mine I happen to hold.

Here's a classic reason why:

“Fidgeting and foot movements (known in our research setting as ‘Wender’s sign’) are very common signs of hyperactivity in adult ADHD patients – so much so that such patients can usually be diagnosed in the waiting room by a knowledgeable receptionist.” - Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Utah School of Medicine, Paul Wender [Paul H. Wender, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Adults, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995, p. 20]

Professionalism at its very best.

In the meantime, stick in your headphones and listen to the mother of Shane Clancy pour her heart out in a recent podcast she did with me HERE.

Am I sticking up for Leonie Fennell because she did an interview with me? Nup, I'd stick up for any parent who was having their voices stifled by lawyers who have not done their homework with regard to the way their client's prescribe drugs to a generation, despite those drugs not being recommend by world-wide medicines regulators.

All of the above is my opinion, I'm sure many other bloggers will offer theirs over the course of the next week or so. I'm of the opinion that Casey has brought some rather unwanted attention on herself by using Solicitors to try and suppress the voice of a grieving mother.

Some bedtime reading for Brophy Solicitors - http://www.ssristories.com/ - Your opinion and Casey's too, on the stories featured, would be greatly appreciated, there's over 4,500 of them!  If you disagree with the 4,500+ stories, I won't be sending you a threatening letter, it is, after all, just your opinion, however wrong you may be.

Related Media

Podcast - Robert Whitaker on Today With Patricia Casey

Blogger - Crash! Boom! Bang!

Blogger has been down for almost 24 hours, apparently they had trouble on the maintenance side of things.

You will note that posts have been deleted from this blog, Blogger have, it appears, removed posts from Thursday from a whole host of blogs - they maintain that they will re-appear at some point.

I have a pretty good story coming up regarding Seroxat, been on the phone with GSK today - I may have to wait a few days until I can get confirmation of their findings.

Keep coming back folks.

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
US & CANADA HERE OR FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING [UK]