How would you describe the culture at GSK?

A question put to members of Cafepharma, a forum where reps, employees and former employees of GlaxoSmithKline get together to bitch about this particular pharmaceutical company.

How would you describe the culture at GSK?

Here's some of the answers:

"Kind of like a sick dog, that is clueless how to help itself, so it takes out its frustrations by actually biting itself. Yah, I think that would kind of sum it up!"

----

"One word.......CRIMINAL."

----

"Like weeks old milk- lumpy, sour, and definitely spoiled!"

----

"Culture...hmmm.... like...ahhhh...yogurt. More liked spoiled milk.The longer it is around ,the more it stinks."

----

Another thread asks the question, "Is GSK the company to join?"

Some answers:

"...Not only is GSK NOT the company to join, but it is not the industry to join either. I am not trying to be funny or cute, just being serious, just as you asked."

----

"I was in the home office for 13 years. DO NOT join this company. It is in a death spiral. The stress level and morale is way high and way low respectively. Management is terrible. They keep the bad ones and the good leave for other companies as soon as they can get out."

----

"I am one of countless people who would love to get the hell out of GSK if the market were better. GSK is one frustration after another and everyone is miserable."

----

For more opinions visit the following thread.

From GSK's website:

Our culture is summed up in the GSK spirit that defines the qualities we expect all our employees to embrace:

• performance with integrity
  entrepreneurial spirit
  focus on innovation
  a sense of urgency
  passion for achievement
  

Our mission and spirit help our employees deal with new challenges and maintain a clear focus.

Fid


ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

ELI LILLY PLEAD GUILTY!!!

Pharmaceutical criminals [because that's what they are] Eli Lilly, pleaded guilty to a 'misdemeanor' tied to the marketing of its top-seller, the anti-psychotic Zyprexa.

Lilly pleaded guilty to introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce. The company must pay a fine and forfeiture totaling $615 million.

Lilly agreed to the plea earlier this month and will pay about $800 million to resolve a civil case tied to the drug's marketing.

Prosecutors say Lilly sold Zyprexa to treat Alzheimer's-related dementia and depression, among other unapproved uses.

This from the Eli Lilly website:

Since its founding in 1876, Eli Lilly and Company has been rooted in a culture that values honesty, hard work, and caring for our community.

Nice to see that the term 'misdemeanors' now means honesty, hard work and caring for the community.

Fid

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

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

Obama battles big pharma

Tuesday, 27 January 2009

Source: The Independent

"We will lower drug costs by allowing the importation of safe medicines from other developed countries, increasing the use of generic drugs in public programmes and taking on drug companies that block cheaper generic medicines from the market." The wording of President Obama's healthcare policy could not be clearer and should send a shiver through the boardroom of every major pharmaceutical group in the world.

For some time, the big players in the drugs market have faced a simple problem. Treatments that the likes of Pfizer, Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) have spent years and millions of dollars developing are increasingly coming under threat from the generics companies, which invest nearly as much energy in challenging patents and developing cheaper alternatives. The established groups may consider the generics firms parasitical, but the likes of Barack Obama and the European Commission are tiring of the big beasts hiding behind patents ensuring that healthcare is more expensive to the ultimate user.

Full [hopeful] story here

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

ORDER THE PAPERBACK
'THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR...THE SEROXAT SCANDAL' By Bob Fiddaman
SIGNED COPIES HERE OR UNSIGNED FROM CHIPMUNKA PUBLISHING

Glaxo & The Parallel Trade

Interesting PDF HERE

"... A number of wholesalers and associations lodged complaints with the European Commission arguing that Glaxo’s sales conditions infringe Article 81 of the EC Treaty. ... selling prices or apply dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions. Glaxo claimed an exemption under Article 81(3) ..."

Fid

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

Email from Ofsted Confirms Blackburn was asked to resign...

... I think?

I had to chuckle to myself as Ofsted have just sent me the following email.

They actually named me Mr. Silverman instead of Mr. Fiddaman.

I guess Ed over at Pharmalot has been making enquiries too.


----- Original Message -----
From: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk
To:fiddaman
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: Appointment of GSK Vice President to Ofsted


Dear Mr Silverman

In response to your previous email regarding Paul Blackburn; we have checked and can confirm that it was agreed in discussions that Paul would resign.

It is also not standard practice for Ofsted to send a press release out relating to resignations of its board members.

If you wish to make a request for information from Ofsted under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act, we will require a written request detailling the information you require, this will then be passed to the attention of the Information Manager and dealt with accordingly.

I hope this is of help, however if you require any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.


Regards

Kathryn Aylett
Customer Service Team Leader
Ofsted - National Business Unit

Read More in The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal [The Ebook]
Chipmunka Publishing ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
Paperback coming soon

GSK transfers Paroxetine production to Brasov

Source: Ziarul Financiar

British giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), leader of the local pharmaceutical market, which acquired the Europharm plant in Brasov in 1998, will start exports of Paroxetine [Seroxat] this year, an antidepressant which will find its way from the Brasov plant to over 80 countries. According to company data, the new product is expected to boost production of the Brasov plant by 50%.

"We have proven that we can produce and we have been chosen to deliver an antidepressant, Paroxetine, to the whole international market. The programme is part of a global strategy to render our operations more efficient, because players on the pharmaceutical market are going through a rather tough period. We are trying to cut back on costs, and one way to do this is to consolidate production. We preferred to choose a cheaper location," said David Lechleiter, Vice-President and General Manager of GlaxoSmithKline Romania.

Currently, the drug is manufactured in France and the UK, with the transfer process to be completed in 2009, when Paroxetine will be produced at full capacity.

"We are currently working on the production lines. We will run some tests, and the first exports will start in the second half of the year. It is a long-running process, which entails terminating production in other states, which is not achieved easily," says the head of GSK Romania.

The investments scheduled to back these exports amount to 2.5 million pounds (3.1 million euros), with 2.2 million packs of Paroxetine estimated to be exported in 2009, and 15 million packs in 2011.

In terms of the volume produced in Brasov, the increase will exceed 50% in the next year.

The main export destinations for Paroxetine will be France, Germany, the UK and Italy, with the drugs manufactured in Brasov to also reach China, India and Brazil. Exports to the US will be produced at a different location.

Anyone know of any bloggers in France, Germany, Italy, China, India, Brazil and Romania?

Fid

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

OFSTED SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES!

Email I have just wrote to Ofsted:

I'm Angry!

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to you to air my disgust at the recent appointment of Paul Blackburn to the board of education at Ofsted.

Here, you are appointing someone from a company whose history regarding the safety of children is quite appalling. I could give you a list... or links to websites where GSK have disregarded children's health but I am sure you already know this don't you?

Read More in The Evidence, However, Is Clear...The Seroxat Scandal [The Ebook]
Chipmunka Publishing ISBN: 978-1-84991-120-7
Paperback coming soon

The true state of comments to GSK's weight loss petition

Source: Food Navigator

By Lorraine Heller

18-Jun-2008 - Last week, NutraIngredients-USA.com mistakenly reported that comments to the GSK weight loss petition were sparse. A re-examination of data reveals that public comments have been flooding in, with the large majority expressing strong opposition.

To date, there have been almost 600 public submissions in response to the citizen petition filed by drug firm GlaxoSmithKline requesting that weight loss claims be considered disease claims.

Filed on the regulations.gov website, these are principally comments from individual consumers, but also include submissions from health groups, consumer organizations, alternative medicine/treatment groups, academia, health professionals, and marketers of natural products.

A large majority of comments were filed using a standard letter prepared by consumer advocacy Citizens for Health, which urged its members to stand up for their rights to make purchasing decisions. The letter also directly implies that the petition is an attempt by the drug industry to remove the competition from dietary supplements.

Indeed, a general hostility and anger towards GSK and Big Pharma is evident in most of the submissions, which does not necessarily provide FDA with the crucial science-backed response that could counter the petition, but which does go a long way in gauging the public's feelings.

The request put forth by the petition has been called a "ridiculous idea" and a "ridiculous and self-serving claim".

"The drug company is obviously concerned about its bottom line and nothing more," runs the general thread. "It's very clear the pharmaceutical industry has undertaken a campaign to takeover the healthfood/supplement industry."

"It seems perfectly obvious to me that GSK is looking out for their own interests. They are not at all interested in 'protecting' the public," says one commentator that claims to be representing the organic retail giant Whole Foods.

Other thoughts commonly repeated include the consumer right to make choices for themselves, and the inappropriateness of classifying obesity as a disease state (the petition claims that although obesity is not a disease in itself, it is a significant risk factor for ailments like diabetes, cancer and heart disease.)

FDA's Lyle Jaffe, lead legal instruments examiner, division of dockets management, this morning confirmed that the list was "not an accurate reflection of what's in the docket".

The discrepancy, explained Jaffe, may be down to the petition-tracking code entered into the website (0001). He suggested that only the docket number (FDA-2008-P-0248) is used in future searchers, rather than the petition document ID (FDA-2008-P-0248-0001), which brings up the petition, but also an incomplete selection of public submissions.

To view the full list of comments, click here.

To comment on the petition, click here.


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

Alabama Sues GSK, Novartis for $800 Million in AWP Case

Source FDA News

Alabama Sues GSK, Novartis for $800 Million in AWP Case

The state of Alabama has begun its trial against Novartis and SmithKline Beecham, a subsidiary of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), for as much as $800 million for allegedly overcharging Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers by inflating the average wholesale price (AWP) of drugs.

Read on

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

If Corporations were an individual

Dr Robert Hare: One of the questions that comes up periodically is to what extent could a corporation be considered to be psychopathic. And if we look at a corporation as a legal person, that it may not be that difficult to actually draw the transition between psychopathy in the individual to psychopathy in the corporation. We could go through the characteristics that define this disorder, one by one, to how they might apply to corporations. They would have all the characteristics, and, in fact, in many respects, the corporation of that sort is the proto-typical of a psychopath. (From the Documentary 'The Corporation')

Psychopath

Meaning #1:*someone with a sociopathic personality; a person with an antisocial personality disorder (`psychopath' was once widely used but has now been superseded by `sociopath')

Sociopath

*Someone whose social behavior is extremely abnormal. Sociopaths are interested only in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behavior on others.

*Substitue the word 'Someone' to 'Corporation'

Does it remind you of any large corporation?

Here are some clues:

'Sociopaths are only interested in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behaviour on others.'

'Sociopaths are only interested in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behaviour on others' Part II

'Sociopaths are only interested in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behaviour on others' Part III

See also -

GlaxoSmithKline, the Diabetes Drug Avandia and The Intimidation of Dr. John Buse

Glaxo, An Angry Blogger And Free Speech



Watch The Corporation.

HERE



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

THE WEINBERG GROUP - Watching You... Watching Me!

THE WEINBERG GROUP, Arlington, Virginia, United States

Webstats show that THE WEINBERG GROUP have been looking in on my blog.

Who are they?

In February 2008, ABC News reported that the U.S. Congress was investigating the Weinberg Group. Representative John Dingell(Democrat of Michigan) said the firm's practices "raise serious issues about whether science is for sale."

See here

Also here - The Weinberg Proprosal

A scientific consulting firm says that it aids companies in trouble, but critics say that it manufactures uncertainty and undermines science.

Interesting stuff

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

Antidepressants - An Indian Perspective

Source: The Economic Times

We've come full circle
Mythili Bhusnurmath, TNN

Early this month, Western papers were full of reports of a new study that seemed to rubbish the use of anti-depressants. Research at the University of Hull showed new-generation drugs such as Prozac and Seroxat do not relieve depression any more than dummy pills or placebos.

If anti-depressants are not the cure they are meant to be and the only ones gaining from them are drug companies, what’s the alternative therapy now being favoured by many doctors? The answer: Talking therapy! In plain language, a shoulder to cry on, ideally a qualified one, but if not, time, empathy and a willing ear.

Let’s accept it, modern-day life with its tensions means we all have our moments of self-doubt, of feeling life’s not worth living any more. Usually these are fleeting moments and more often than not, except in cases of severe depression, a caring family, a good friend, a sympathetic ear is enough to shake off the blues.

Unfortunately, the atomised lifestyle of the West, and increasingly our metros too, means no one has the time to lend you a shoulder when you are down in the dumps. Everyone is in the rat race. From kindergarten admission (as parents in metros will tell you) to high school and beyond, the pressure to perform, do one better than your neighbour, is relentless. To say time is at a premium is an under-statement; people are working more, sleeping less, spending less time with family and friends. And even when they do pause to listen, they listen with their ears, not with their hearts and that’s no use to someone who’s distressed.

In such a scenario what do you do when you are feeling low? Why, pop a pill, of course! Fortunately drug companies in India are not allowed to advertise on television but that is not the case abroad.

The drug may not actually do you any good but as anyone who has seen the seductive power of the advertisement blitzkrieg unleashed by drug companies on television overseas will vouchsafe, it’s easy to persuade yourself. After all there’s no reason why something that turned that haggard, beaten-looking man/ woman into a smiling, raring-to-go person on TV will not do the same for you. So what do you do? Reach for that bottle of pills much like many in India reach for that tube of Fair and Lovely, or should that be Fair and Handsome?

Counsellors and doctors don’t have much time either. In a world where time is money it’s so much easier to prescribe a drug than listen patiently to a person’s ills, real or imagined, and medicate as a last, not a first, resort.

The 21st century is all about the search for quick fixes. Depressed? No problem! Have a Prozac! Is your child distracted and inattentive in class? No problem! He’s probably suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder. Give him some pills. Don’t trouble yourself asking whether he/she is inattentive because the class is so boring that it does not hold the child’s attention. Whether the emphasis on rote learning means it simply does not interest a child who is inquisitive by nature (as most children are before our system of education kills their enquiring spirit). Or ask why the same child who just cannot sit still in class can sit for hours in front of a computer or a video game, lost to the world.

The answers are all there, staring us in the face but they are too disturbing. They call for patience and for time and effort, none of which most modern-day parents/teachers/doctors or counsellors have. So pop a pill; it’s so much easier. Never mind if it often implies drug-dependency for life.

Hopefully, with the publication of the study, there will now be some effort to turn the clock back. The UK government has already announced a $350 million programme to train psychotherapists who will treat an estimated one million people for depression and anxiety over the next three years. Predictably the drug industry is unhappy. If more and more people turn to old-world remedies whatever will happen to the lifestyle medicines on which the industry makes a fortune?

For us in India, there’s a message in this. Before we go whole hog the western way, pause, reconsider. Call that long-forgotten friend/family member, rethink your work-life balance and never allow drug companies to advertise on television.

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

Pharma giants hit by £5bn hangover

Source: This Is Money

Ian Lyall, Daily Mail
8 February 2008

It was a bloodbath for the pharmaceuticals industry yesterday. More than £5bn was wiped from Britain's two leading drugs companies, with both feeling the pain from copycat competition.

GlaxoSmithKline led the way as it warned its earnings will go into reverse this year as a number of its products come under attack from cheap pill pushers.

The group will also struggle to fill the void left by Avandia, the controversial diabetes treatment dogged by safety concerns.

At one point the shares were down almost 10% - their sharpest one-day fall ever - but recovered to close down 89p at 1,078p.

Meanwhile, rival AstraZeneca was also in the sick-bay as it emerged that the Indian firm Ranbaxy had won permission to produce a cut-price version of its heartburn pill, Nexium, in the US.

But most of the fireworks were at GSK, where departing boss Jean-Pierre Garnier must be wishing he exited early rather than sticking around until May to take the plaudits at the company's annual meeting.

They are more likely to be brickbats after yesterday's annual results, which leave successor Andrew Witty with a tricky inheritance.

Operating profits were up 8% at £7.6bn, and the dividend rose 10% to 53p.

But that's where the good news ends. GSK warned about the after-effects of Avandia's fall from grace and the threat from generic competition, which hits its peak in 2008.

Analysts also detected a worrying weakening in profit margins and an additional US tax claim for £350m.

GSK said its earnings will fall by 'mid-single digits' this year, when some brokers were predicting a rise.

Garnier played up the potential of new drugs such as cervical cancer inoculation Cervarix and Avodart for male prostate problems.

It just gets worse for GSK - GlaxoSmithKline still can’t get its tax right!

Source: Tax Research UK



GlaxoSmithKline can’t get its tax right, and is Sir Christopher Hogg covering for them?

By Richard Murphy

GlaxoSmithKline still can’t get its tax right. The IRS is now challenging it concerning the period from 2001 to 2003. The dispute is over inter-company financing arrangements. Call that transfer pricing by any other name.

GSK, of course disputes the claim. But let’s recall, this is the company that has already settled $3.4 billion over transfer pricing issues with the IRS in 2006 (the biggest tax settlement ever), and remains in conflict with HM Revenue & Customs on the same issue for all periods since 1994.

Now I could look on this with just technical interest but for one thing. Sir Christopher Hogg, chair of the Financial Reporting Council, was at GSK and predecessor companies throughout these periods of dispute. He has been engaged in discussion and correspondence with me concerning country-by-country reporting since December 2007, for which he can see no justification.

Are you sure you’re not just covering your own backside Sir Christopher? Country-by-country reporting would, of course, highlight potential transfer pricing abuses. Now you wouldn’t want that, would you Sir Christopher? That would never do, would it?

Layoffs to begin in April at GlaxoSmithKline plant

Source: examiner.com

BRISTOL, Tenn. (Map, News) - GlaxoSmithKline company officials say they will begin laying off all 236 workers at its pharmaceutical plant in Bristol, Tennessee, in April.

Layoffs are scheduled to begin April 7 and be completed by October 31, 2009.

Company officials say between 20 and 30 people will be leaving in April and the rest will be phased out depending on volumes.

The company originally announced plans to shutter its 400,000-square-foot plant in 2006, citing declining sales of its signature penicillin drug, Augmentin.

Sales of Augmentin have declined by about 70 percent since 2003, when the company lost patent protection and began facing greater competition from generic brands.

At its peak, the plant employed more than 400 workers.


Nothing to do with the shit yourself thin disaster, Alli then? Or nothing to do with sales of Seroxat/Paxil which have fallen dramatically? Or maybe Avandia is the cause of GSK having to lay off?

Save The Children & Paxil Study 329

Mission and Strategy


Save the Children is the leading independent organization creating real and lasting change for children in need in the United States and around the world. It is a member of the International Save the Children Alliance, comprising 28 national Save the Children organizations working in more than 110 countries to ensure the well-being of children.

It seems Save the Children have been looking in at this blog:

22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States
22 January 19:40 SAVE THE CHILDREN, Norwalk, Connecticut, United States

Maybe by chance via a search engine?

Or maybe because they wanted to check out one of their corporate supporters, none other than GlaxoSmithKline.

I really do start to wonder at the ethics at some of these charities. Here we have a charity for children in need, financially supported by a company who suppressed evidence (Paxil Study 329) that could have saved the lives of children!

Maybe SAVE THE CHILDREN don't know about Paxil Study 329... or maybe they do but prefer to ignore it. A question of morals eh? A bit like the Yorkshire Ripper wanting to help fund the Suffragettes or Dr Harold Shipman wanting to make a donation to Help the Aged or even the Boston Strangler wanting to offer financial support to Sampson Rope!

One question for SAVE THE CHILDREN... How could you?

Anyway, I hope whoever it was who visited this blog from SAVE THE CHILDREN found what they were looking for.


Fid

GlaxoSmithKline – Big pharma, big risks

Source: Ethical Corporation



Some fantastic bullshit quotes from GSK here. I've added my own comments in blue after each paragraph.

Fid



GlaxoSmithKline – Big pharma, big risks



Drug firms are opening up to address public distrust, says GlaxoSmithKline’s head of corporate communications (1)

Excuse me! Did I read that correctly? Drug firms are opening up? Opening up surely means they've been shut doesn't it? What's this, GlaxoSmithKline admitting that they have been less than transparent? Surely not!



For drug maker GlaxoSmithKline, 2007 has been a year of severe ill health followed by mild recovery. The firm’s share price crashed to a two-year low in May after its second biggest selling drug, diabetes treatment Avandia, was linked to increased risks of heart attacks. Since the scare, sales of the drug have slumped 50 per cent in the US and 40 per cent worldwide. Avandia last year racked up sales of £1.6 billion. (2)

2007 a year of severe health because more and more resources are available. JP Garnier must rue the day the internet was invented. All praise Bill Gates.

Nice to see GSK hit where it hurts (in the pocket) - £1.6 billion for Avandia sales. GSK Accounts Dept must have had such a wonderful time counting the pennies, hope they washed the blood off their hands after!



There was better news for GSK last month when the US Food and Drug Administration ruled, as expected, that the company must slap a “black box” warning on the drug, but did not ban it. The decision backed up GSK’s claim that the original study linking Avandia to a 43 per cent increase in risk of heart attacks was misleading. But another study, published in September, supported these findings. GSK maintains that “meta-analysis”, looking at a large body of historical clinical data, has found no clear evidence of a link. (3)

The FDA should be utterly ashamed of themselves. Even with a 50% drop in sales Avandia could still earn GSK £800M - Who fund the FDA ladies & gentlemen? Pharma that's who! No conflict of interest with the FDA's descision then huh?

Look at paragraph (1) again then the bottom of paragraph (3) - You see people - GSK are already shutting its doors after stating in the opening paragraph that they would be opening them! Avandia causes heart attacks, it's been proven but GSK want to have the last say on the matter, probably to protect the 50% of sales that haven't yet been affected by Avandiagate.

Let me spell it out for GSK - THERE IS A HIGH RISK OF HEART ATTACKS IF YOU TAKE AVANDIA



GSK’s losses over Avandia show the high stakes that research-based pharmaceutical firms take on when developing drugs. Vice-president for corporate communications Duncan Learmouth admits this is hard to explain to the public, saying: “We feel like we are shouting in a storm.” His concern is that big pharma is too often associated with big risks, such as health scares. “There’s a danger in the media overplaying the risk side without balancing it with the benefit, and oversimplifying what is a very complicated situation of giving a drug to someone,” he says. (4)

Oh look at Duncan Learmouth patronising the public. 'Hard to explain to the public'? What is hard about it? Are GSK some form of extra terrestrial intelligence that us mere mortals (public) are not yet ready for? Mr Learmouth, you are a pious pillock. You don't give the public the credit they richly deserve. Isn't it members of the public that are giving your employers such a hard time right now?

Learmouth doesn't stop at the public, he even has a go at the press for overplaying the risk side without balancing the benefit. Tell you what Mr Learmouth, lets say we get together, just the two of us, we can play russian roulette - one bullet, six chambers - you up for it - hey the benefits far outweigh the risks doncha think? Failing that we could always find a member of your family or a close friend who has diabetes. Maybe you would like to offer them Avandia? Hey, the benefits far outweigh the risks wouldn't you say?



Despite concerns about how product risks will be interpreted by the public, Learmouth expects pharma to become ever more transparent. Two years ago GSK decided to publish data on clinical trials online, although he admits the register could be more user-friendly. The decision came after damaging claims that it had concealed clinical trial results from the general public in the case of anti-depressant Seroxat. (5)

Is Learmouth taking the piss here? Ever more transparent? When have GSK EVER been transparent? They even lied about the Vitamin C content in their Ribena for fucksake! And what about the Paxil 329 study - how was that being transparent? They might argue that they have learned from their mistakes - thing is... they have NEVER admitted to their mistakes. Maybe then the 'public' may take them seriously when they tell us that they are going to be transparent. Do they even know the meaning of the fucking word? Maybe they have the same guidelines as the MHRA when it comes to transparency because they are about as transparent as a scene from a Hammer Horror film featuring Jack the Ripper on the streets of London!



The firm denies that it “improperly” withheld data from Seroxat clinical trials of the 1990s and says that it filed all information with regulators. Learmouth says it is wrong to judge the case by today’s standards of corporate transparency: “Before it was not that there was some conspiracy to hide this information, it was just never done.” (6)

Oh puhlease, you are beginning to sound like that other GSK mouthpiece, Ali Benbow. YOU DID NOT.... I REPEAT... YOU DID NOT file ALL information with the regulators. PAXIL STUDY 329 Mr Learmouth. Your company has settled out of court on numerous occasions regarding your defective product, admittedly, your team of lawyers have persuaded the prosecution to accept gagging orders. Clever... so clever. There will come a day where GSK stumble across some stubborn individual who will not bow down to the money you wave at them. There is no conspiracy - there is only fact!



Similarly, GSK has “recognised the need for much stronger policies” on using ghostwriters in preparing end of trial papers, says Learmouth. He admits that the old practice of using PR agencies to write papers today “does not really pass the smell test”. These days a report’s lead author, a physician, must have written the most significant part of a paper. GSK employees and other outsiders involved must also be named in the paper, and their affiliation noted. (7)

The smell test? HAHAHA now there's a new one from GSK. What is a smell test? The smell test failed when you hired Martin Keller to write his bollocks about the safety of Paxil - did he write it? The only smell coming from that particular test was bullshit Mr Learmouth. Would you be making such comments if Keller had been allowed to get away with it? I doubt it.



An area where GSK is improving its reputation is expanding access to medicines for patients in developing countries. The firm has a malaria vaccine that is about to go into the final phase of clinical trial, which has been part funded by the Gates Foundation. If all goes to plan, the vaccine could hit the market by 2010, says Learmouth. (8)

Developing countries huh? Would these be the same developing countries GSK charged excessive prices for Aids drugs to the detriment of South Africans with HIV/Aids and in violation of the Competition Act? Didn't GSK drop their legal effort to prevent South Africa from importing cheaper anti-AIDS drugs and other medicines?

Don't throw the developing countries line at us Mr Learmouth. We know from your history how you treat developing countries. This IS NOT about helping the ill, it's about making money so please cut the crap!



Next year should see GSK launch a combination vaccine, Globorix, for illnesses that mainly kill children in Africa such as diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough. The company has spent $400 million developing the drug, despite expecting little return on this investment. Globorix will be a tiered-priced product, meaning its price will vary depending on governments’ ability to pay. (9)

And how big is GSK's gun going to be when they ask each indivdual government? They remind me of Spielberg's character Indianna Jones, you all know the scene, he takes a sip of his cocktail only to find out that it is poison - he is however given hope, the villain has the antedote and is prepared to give it to Indianna Jones.... for a rather huge diamond. How big does the diamond have to be for GSK before they give this new combination vaccine to some poor African child?



The company’s efforts to improve access to medicines have won two cheers of support from Oxfam. Policy adviser Helena Vines Fiestas says of the company’s work on access: “GSK is probably the leading company within the sector. But it still falls far short of a desirable position.” She welcomes GSK’s current work on developing 11 new drugs predominantly aimed at patients in poor countries, saying: “This number is high for the industry.” (10)

Oxfam are a charity - who on earth are they to pass comment on how 'wonderful' GSK are? Wait am minute... Do they recieve funding from GSK? I wonder if Helena Vines from Oxfam knows about the following GSK misdameanours? HERE



Critics have sounded the death knell for big pharma because of the lack of new drugs in their research pipelines. Learmouth disagrees. “Because the risk is high and probability is low, chance plays a big part in whether a company can discover a new class of drugs,” he says. “You have to be a certain size to play the odds of that.” (11)

'Risk is high and probabilty low' - maybe you should stick that on Seroxat patient information leaflets!



Despite its recent travails, GSK has the resources to keep playing those odds – for the potential benefit of patients in developed and developing markets alike. (12)

Hmmm, I beg to differ. People have had enough of the lies. The stench eminating from within GSK is overpowering so much so that it can even be smelled outside the offices of the FDA in America and the MHRA in England!

Rant over

Fid

GlaxoSmithKline - Committed to Improving the Quality of Human Life

25th Jun 2003
Questionable Practice
GSK Ordered to pull misleading adverts





The US government has ordered a drug giant to quit running a series of radio and newspaper ads that call the allergy spray Flonase a cost-effective alternative to pricey allergy pills. ...Read more

----

16th Dec 2003
Questionable Practice
Glaxo's CEO to scoop 5.7 mln stg a year

Jean-Pierre Garnier, chief executive of GlaxoSmithKline Plc , will earn up to 5.7 million pounds ($9.96 million) a year under a new pay package agreed by the pharmaceuticals group, the Sunday Telegraph reported. ... Read more


----

11th May 2004
Fraud Investigation
GlaxoSmithKline faces antitrust investigation


A drug manufacturer being investigated for possible antitrust violations because it cut off shipments to Canadian mail-order pharmacies has to turn its records over to the Minnesota attorney general's office, a judge has ruled. ...Read more


----

19th May 2004
New York sues GlaxoSmithKline


The city of New York has sued drug maker GlaxoSmithKline, claiming that the company engaged in "anticompetitive, fraudulent, and inequitable conduct," when it acquired patents for its anti-depressant Paxil. ... Read more


----

6th Sep 2004
GSK faces anti-depressant lawsuit


GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is facing a US lawsuit alleging that it covered up negative research findings on its anti-depressant drug Paxil. ... Read more

----

22nd Sep 2004
Questionable Practice
Glaxo drops appeal in Aids drug pricing case


A landmark legal complaint against British drug maker GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) over its Aids drug pricing and policies in South Africa will proceed after GSK dropped its public and repeated vows to appeal a decision allowing the case to go forward, according to AidsHealthcare Foundation (AHF). ... Read more


----

18th Mar 2005
Glaxo shares dip on factory probe


GlaxoSmithKline shares have fallen almost 2% amid fears a US inquiry into manufacturing quality could be widened and may possibly lead to a big fine. On 4 March the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seized batches of two drugs from the Puerto Rico plant. ... Read more


----

29th Mar 2006
Questionable Practice
Glaxo agrees US Paxil settlement


GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has agreed to pay $14m (£8m) to settle US claims that it fraudulently tried to delay competitors to anti-depressant drug Paxil. ... Read more


----

10th Aug 2006
Glaxo pays $70m to end price row


GlaxoSmithKline has agreed to pay out $70m (£36.9m) to settle numerous civil claims of price-fixing in the US. ... Read more


----

29th Jan 2007
Questionable Practice
GSK hid paxil suicide link


Secret emails reveal that the UK's biggest drug company distorted trial results of an anti-depressant, covering up a link with suicide in teenagers. ... Read more

improve the quality of human life by enabling people to do more, feel better and live longer.

TGA & Delphi Centre - 'Commercial in Confidence'

Well, the Therapeutics Goods Administration did help remove the Aropax advertising from the Delphi Centre website (A Small Victory for Seroxat Sufferers)but it seems they don't want to do anything more about it.

I emailed them with the following:

I notice now that ALL advertisements have been removed. I thank you.

However, could you tell me if you will be investigating this matter further
as these adverts have been running on that very page since 2003?

Bob Fiddaman
Seroxat Sufferers

Their reply:

Dear Mr Fiddaman

The TGA have no objections to the Delphi Centre website as it currently stands.

Any information on the dealings between the TGA and Delphi Centre are considered to be 'commercial in confidence'. We now consider this matter closed.

Regards
Susan AnidoHead - Advertising Unit
Non Prescription Medicines Branch


Hmmm

Investors call for surgical strike on GSK

Source: The Guardian Unlimited

Shareholders want new boss to streamline firm
Richard Wachman, city editor
Sunday September 2, 2007
The Observer

GlaxoSmithKline, the UK drugs giant, faces a shareholder revolt over its dismal share price performance. Anger has spilt into discussions between investors and chairman Sir Christopher Gent over who should succeed chief executive Jean-Pierre Garnier. He is due to retire in May 2008.

GSK's big institutional shareholders have held meetings with Gent and told him in no uncertain terms that Garnier's successor should be someone who is prepared to undertake a fundamental overhaul of the company and consider a radical streamlining of its operations, including a possible break-up.

The company, formed out of a merger between Glaxo and SmithKline in 2000, has been swept up in a tide of shareholder discontent with questions being asked about whether the giant pharmaceutical companies - Big Pharma - operate effectively and efficiently.

An analyst said: 'GSK is facing a backlash from investors who want the company to consider whether large, and sometimes cumbersome operations, such as GSK, are best placed to come up with new medicines.'

Shareholders want Garnier's successor to look at all options. These include: demerging manufacturing and/or the research and development arms, shrinking the firm's massive sales force, and offloading non-core operations such as the drinks subsidiary which owns brands including Ribena and Lucozade.

One institutional investor says: 'What we are telling the chairman is that with the industry facing a regulatory clampdown that makes it more difficult to get new medicines approved, GSK should look at ways to release shareholder value. The status quo is no longer an option.'

Another shareholder, who spoke on the basis of anonymity, says: 'GSK should recognise that Big Pharma is broken and needs to be fixed. Garnier's successor needs to take that on board. It's no good producing more of the same.'

Four potential candidates are jostling for the top job: David Stout, president of pharmaceutical operations; Chris Viehbacher, head of the US side, who is thought to be the frontrunner; Andrew Witty, the British head of European operations; and Russell Greig, head of the international division.

GSK's shares traded at close to £15 in early 2000 against a Friday close of £12.79. The stock price has been hit by safety fears linked to Avandia, one of its leading drugs, worries about generic competition and concern about a possible dearth of new blockbuster medicines in GSK's R&D pipeline.

Neil Ransome, head of the pharmaceuticals department at PricewaterhouseCoopers' corporate finance arm, said recently: 'Evidence that mega-mergers in this sector improve the rate of discovery of new drugs isn't compelling.'

Experts say the industry could move towards a model where companies farm out R&D to small biotech companies.

Analysts Citigroup shook the market earlier this year with research suggesting breaking up GSK could boost the value of the firm by half and enable the company to return £20bn to shareholders.