Glaxo & The Premenstrual Collusion

You may remember a few days ago I wrote about the recent study coming out of Hamilton, Ontario regarding Paxil [Seroxat] and PMT [Pre Menstrual Tension]

The study was conducted by Dr. Meir Steiner with St. Joseph's Healthcare.

Thanks to the wonders of the internet I now have the full paper.

The study was conducted by Steiner M, Ravindran AV, Lemelledo JM, Carter D, Huang JO, Anonychuk AM, Simpson SD.

The declaration of interests [Financial Disclosure] shows what I believe to be a severe conflict of interests in this study.

First and foremost the study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline, Canada.

Financial Disclosure:


Financial disclosure:

Dr. Steiner has served as a consultant to Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Lundbeck, Novartis, Wyeth, Ortho- McNeil, AstraZeneca, and Azevan; has served on the speakers bureaus of AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Wyeth; has served on the advisory boards of Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Lundbeck, Ortho-McNeil, Wyeth, Sherring, Ferring, and Azevan; and has received grant/research support from Wyeth, Pfizer, AllerGen, AstraZeneca, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Society for Women's Health Research, Ontario Mental Health Foundation, and Physicians Services Inc. Foundation.

Dr. Ravindran has received grant/research support from, served as a consultant for and on the advisory boards of, and participated in continuing medical education programs sponsored by AstraZeneca, Cephalon, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Ortho, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, and Wyeth.

Dr. LeMelledo has received honorarium and performed clinical trials for Roche, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Merck and has received funding from Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Psychiatric Research Foundation, and University of Alberta.

Dr. Carter has received grant/research support from Wyeth.

Mss. Huang and Anonychuk and Dr. Simpson are employees of GlaxoSmithKline, Canada.


Thanks to Neil Carlin for pointing me in the right direction to help me find the full paper for this 'study'.

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

More on the PMS paxil nonsense!

Placebo-Controlled Trial Comparing Intermittent and Continuous Paroxetine in Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder

Key points of the 'Clinical Research'

• Serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) do not have to be administered continuously to be effective for premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD), but can be given during luteal phases only.

• The study indicates that the response rate when treating PMDD with SRIs is high, and that irritability is a key target symptom. Symptoms such as irritability, affect lability, and mood swings appear to be more inclined to respond rapidly to SRIs, enabling intermittent treatment, than are, for example, the somatic symptoms.

The 'study' was headed by Mikael Landén of the Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Section of Psychiatry St Göran, Karolinska Institutet, SE 112 81 Stockholm, Sweden.

Want to know who had a vested interest in this 'clinical research'?

This study was supported by grants from Novo Nordisk Sweden and GlaxoSmithKline. We thank study nurses Benita Gezelius and Carin Carlquist forskillful assistance. Dr Brian Hunter at Glaxo SmithKline gave valuable input on the study protocol. Niklas Morton and Gunnar Ekroth provided valuable statistical advice."

Paroxetine is manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline.

Do we really need to say anymore?

...And what about the premenstrual syndrome paper?

Written by Kimberly Ann Yonkers, P M Shaughn O’Brien and Elias Eriksson.

"Serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs)Many clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of an SRI for the management ofPMS/PMDD have shown benefit, the response rate usually being 60-90% foractive treatment versus 30-40% for placebo.110 SRIs that have been shown effective are the serotonergic tricyclic antidepressant clomipramine, theselective SRIs citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine,andsertraline, and the serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitorvenlafaxine (table). SRIs reduce both mood symptoms and somatic complaints,and they also improve quality of life and social functioning. Many believethat SRIs should be regarded as first-line treatment in PMS patients withsevere mood symptoms.

Kimberly Ann Yonkers, P M Shaughn O’Brien and Elias Eriksson Conflict of Interest Statement appears in very small text on the paper.

I'll enlarge it for you all. [KAY is Kimberly Ann Yonkers], the other two authors were P M Shaughn O’Brien and Elias Eriksson or PMSO'B and EE

"Between 2004 and 2006, KAY provided a consultation to Wyeth and Berlex; received honoraria from Wyeth and Berlex that was less than $10 000 annually; received grants from Berlex, Wyeth, and medication to support asmall study from GlaxoSmithKline and from Pfizer; grants from the National Institutes of Health, the National Association for Research in Schizophrenia and Affective Disorders, and the Federal Health Resources Services Administration; received an honorarium in 2007 for a lecture from Berlex; and receives continued grants from Wyeth (ongoing since 2006) and from the National Institutes of Health and the National Association for Research in Schizophrenia and Affective Disorders. Between 2004 and 2007.

PMSO'B provided consultations to Bayer Schering and TAP Pharmaceuticals; received research grants from Bayer Schering, Wyeth, GlaxoSmithKline, Beecham, and Lilly; received honoraria from Bayer Schering totally less than £5000; and received grants from the British Heart Foundation and North Staffordshire Medical Institute.

EE has received research grants from Lundbeck and Bristol Myers Squibb, and has provided consultations to Schering, Lundbeck, and Lilly."

Dunno bout you... but something just does not sit right with me.

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

Paxil helps PMS sufferers

So, I had this fire going the other day. I lit it over the field. Damn wind changed direction and the fire hit some bushes. Jeez, I thought, what can I do to douse the flames?

I know! Why not throw some petrol on to the flames. Makes sense doesn't it?

Is Fid going insane?

I'm using an analogy for the recent study coming out of Hamilton, Ontario regarding Paxil [Seroxat] and PMS [Pre Menstrual Tension]

Apparently, women treated with Paxil will benefit.

The study, conducted by Dr. Meir Steiner with St. Joseph's Healthcare found that women treated with the higher dose of Paxil experienced "significant improvements in the psychological symptoms associated with PMDD such as irritability, depressed mood, and tension."

You can read more about it here, here and here.

Incidently, in 2004 Dr. Meir Steiner duties included:

Medical Consultant/Advisory Board Member/Speakers Bureau for the following

Eli Lilly,
Pfizer International,
Novartis Canada,
GlaxoSmithKline,
Lundbeck,
Wyeth Pharmaceuticals,
Azevan Pharmaceuticals,
Ferring.

As usual, Paxil manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline, have made no comment about this recent study. They only seem to make comment when studies appear that may damage sales of the drug!

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

GSK's Second Hand Drugs

Thanks to The Truthman for sending me this story.

Yet another example of 'misconduct' by GSK perhaps?

SOURCE

A story by Arun Bhatia [Arun Bhatia is a retired I.A.S officer and has served as Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration.]

In India, applying the due process of law to a powerful individual or institution is seen as confrontation because governance is feudal, though garbed in democratic jargon. The establishment will not support an officer who wants to go all the way in applying the law unless there are vested interests equally powerful on the other side who wish to use the law to settle scores. In this playing field the official remains a glorified puppet.

Inspecting the Glaxo factory and then attempting to punish the company for a gross violation of the prescribed and established procedures and rules, demonstrated arbitrary governance, misuse of authority and protection given to the company by abruptly and prematurely dislodging the Commissioner, Food and Drugs Administration, by a sudden and unjust transfer. I was then the F.D.A. Commissioner.

Few people know that I was transferred in the midst of the inspection of the second Glaxo factory at Nasik. Just a few days after that inspection commenced I was removed from the post! I had only completed about a year.

Action against three drug companies was taken for violating safety regulations, enabling recycling and sale of spurious drugs etc. The companies were Glaxo India Ltd., German Remedies and Boots India. Of these, Glaxo opted to flex its muscles. German Remedies were charged with selling drugs using raw materials whose expiry dates were over. The company's licenses for two drugs were cancelled - Testoviron and Ultralan.The charge against Glaxo was that it had violated codified rules and procedures and not destroyed the waste from the Bombay factory. Consequently the contractor for lifting waste received labels, packaging material and packed medicines which he used for marketing spurious/rejected drugs. This spurious drug business extended up to Agra. Also Glaxo could not fully account for the sale of drugs. The Glaxo case had been detected before I came but no action against the company had been taken. Closure of the factory for ten days was therefore ordered. Glaxo appealed the High Court against the closure of the factory and made typical and false allegations that I had a grudge against the company, that my action in ordering the inspection was not bona fide etc. I was not even allowed to remain in the post to defend myself against these charges.

Yes, the system will say it is impartial and the successor in office will handle the defence. This is not true. I can give numerous examples of transfers made in order to protect powerful interests. Successors are brought in precisely to change the course of events. Glaxo lost in the High Court. The court upheld my bona fide performance of duty but have a look at the following points:

(a) The Chief Minister and the Chief Secretary should explain to the public why the Commissioner was transferred. The physical event may be over but the question of accountability remains alive.

(b) The findings of the inspection of the Nasik factory of Glaxo should be made public and provided to the press.

(c) What was the action taken against the Glaxo officials who did not Bureaucratic Travails corporate crimes destroy the material before handing it over to the contractor.

(d) I had asked for action to be taken against an official in the F.D.A. laboratory for corruption. The Government ignored the report. My report and the explanation of the Health Secretary should be made public. This was not connected with the Glaxo case. The laboratory which tests drug samples is the heart of the F.D.A. If this limb of the FDA becomes corrupted, the monitoring of the drug market by the FDA will become a façade.

(e) Justice Shah of the High Court wrote, "I am satisfied that Mr. Bhatia acted honestly and in the interest of the department". But what about the defamation that had already taken place. One magazine reported that Glaxo had stated that Bhatia had done this for publicity etc. The Government should have contradicted this and lodged defamation proceedings against Glaxo to defend its officers. It is common for corruption fighters to be classified as publicity seekers or mentally imbalanced.

(f) Glaxo had also lodged a civil case for compensation. Fearful that the giant would launch personal attacks to redeem its reputation and claim massive compensation and the system had already indicated its displeasure by transferring me, the fact that the transfer was made while the second inspection was in progress was not divulged to the public. Normally an inspection takes a few weeks

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

GlaxoSmithKline's Seroxat Killed my Mom! [Beverly Hatcher's Testimony]

"...She quickly began to complain about constant bad dreams, hearing voices and feeling nervous. After only 16 days taking Paxil [Seroxat], Beverly’s mother committed suicide."

SOURCE

Beverly Hatcher is a licensed practical nurse and, as a health care provider, the importance of medical responsibility is something she knows quite well. When her mother, Barbara Darden, was prescribed Paxil, she complained to Beverly that she did not feel like herself. She quickly began to complain about constant bad dreams, hearing voices and feeling nervous. After only 16 days taking Paxil, Beverly’s mother committed suicide.

Beverly testified at the Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee hearing on December 13, 2006 concerning suicidality data in adults taking antidepressants.

This is the second FDA hearing at which Beverly testified. She also testified at the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee and Pediatric Drugs Advisory Committee hearing held on September 13-14, 2004 concerning the risk of suicide in children and adolescents taking antidepressants. In her testimony, Beverly makes it clear that the drug companies (including GlaxoSmithKline) must take responsibility for not only the death of her mother, but everyone adversely affected by SSRI’s. Beverly is very proactive about exposing antidepressant risks and in addition to testifying before the FDA, she has also visited members and representatives of Congress on three different occasions about the dangers of antidepressants.

*Related links:

Senator Charles Grassley Investigation of GSK

Glenmullen Report

Alistair Benbow: [Head of European Clinical Psychiatry at GlaxoSmithKline] "These medicines are not linked with suicide"

Alasdair Breckenridge: [Chairman of the MHRA] "They [Seroxat] do not cause suicide... they do not cause suicide in adults"

WATCH BENBOW & BRECKENRIDGE DEFEND SEROXAT 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

Senator Charles Grassley Investigation of GSK

Source: Baum Hedlund

Senator Charles Grassley Investigation of GSK -Based on Paxil Suicide Documents Obtained by Baum Hedlund

Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), a ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, launched an investigation of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) regarding its controversial antidepressant Paxil based on GSK documents collected by Baum Hedlund during Paxil suicide litigation. See: http://finance.senate.gov/press/Gpress/2008/prg061208.pdf

The documents include a comprehensive report (based on GSK’s internal documents, studies and data analyses) from Harvard psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Glenmullen. Dr. Glenmullen’s report has been provided to the FDA, which is said to be investigating the report, as well as accusations GSK hid Paxil’s link to suicidal behavior.

Concerned about the public health implications of the documents obtained in the Paxil suicide litigation, Baum Hedlund asked GSK to allow it to share the documents with the FDA, but GSK declined to allow the firm to do so.

In addition to the Grassley investigation, Baum Hedlund attorneys were contacted by the Department of Justice for information concerning GSK’s marketing practices related to Paxil. Attorneys from the firm met with DOJ and other government attorneys and staff in 2007.

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman has been litigating Paxil suicide and suicide attempt cases for more than 18 years and has a number of cases pending in courts across the United States. The firm has collected hundreds of thousands of pages of internal GSK documents and conducted dozens of depositions of GSK executives, employees, physicians, researchers and academics. The vast majority of the documents and deposition testimony is confidential, however, Baum Hedlund has been successful in getting numerous documents out from under confidentiality seal. Baum Hedlund has and will continue to champion the rights of its clients and the public affected by antidepressants such as Paxil.

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

GlaxoSmithKline's Paroxetine

From the BMJ - 2002

6 years ago.

The regulator didn't listen then.

Will they listen now 6 years on?

The "dizziness" associated with paroxetine withdrawal has happened to me on two separate occasions of dose-reduction, and within two days on each occasion. The nearest description I can apply to the sensation is the feeling of having one's head inflated by an air pump,without evidence of any such appliance in the immediate vicinity. Cipramil, an alternative SSRI, does not produce this spaceman sensation, when my dosage is reduced. - Garrett R FitzGerald, Consultant Physician Waterford Regional Hospital, Waterford, IRELAND

At last a recognition of what most general practitioners and community mental health workers have recognised for some time; withdrawal from paroxetine is much more likely than other SSRI's to produce a characteristic and often severe syndrome. We belief that the figure is considerably higher than the 7% quoted. Paroxetine is, however, an extremely effective and useful drug, and what should now follow is a wide debate, (with appropriate research), to address the following questions;-

1)How common is the withdrawal syndrome?
2)In what proportion of patients is it severe?
3)What regime should be used for withdrawing the drug?
4)How is the syndrome best treated, other than re- starting paroxetine, e.g. should an alternative SSRI be used?
5)Are there particular patient characteristics which predispose them to the syndrome?
Failing satisfactory answers to these questions will inevitably lead to the substitution of alternative therapies. - Ian K. Campbell, partner Heacham Group Practice

In fact, I think withdrawal symptoms with paroxetine are more frequent, more severe and more difficult to treat than currently believed. I have tried to stop paroxetine in a female patient by reducing the dose during a long period: three weeks on a 3/4 of the current dose (20 mg); three weeks on 1/2 and, finally, other three weeks on 1/4. After finishing the medication, symptoms have appeared, being the more prominent insomnia, bad dreams and restlessness. It is worrisome that these symptoms resemble those of depression. I agree that it is necessary to find out better strategies to stop this medication but important as well, to have into account, before starting this medication, the appearance of a difficult to treat withdrawal syndrome. - Alfonso Carvajal, Clinical pharmacologist Instituto de Farmacoepidemiología Universidad de Valladolid 47005 Valladolid (Spain)

I am encouraged to finally see the FDA take action on this extremely urgent matter. I have been communicating with hundreds of people across the United States and throughout Europe who have been attempting to warn the public about the dangers of not only Paroxetine, but other SSRI/SNRI drugs.

These are people who were prescribed Paroxetine (or one of the other SSRI/SNRI drugs), without any warning of the addictive nature, or severe side effects upon withdrawal that all too often accompany these drugs.

I can only hope that similar action will be taken against all drugs that are within the SSRI/SNRI classification of drugs. The population so adversely affected by these drugs may appear to be nominal when written up as a percentage in the drug labeling insert, but in reality- with so many now being prescribed these new "wonder" drugs for everything from mild depression to PMS, there are millions now using these drugs, most without proper follow up care. The "small percentage" factor now translates into thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands who are so adversely affected.

I know from personal experience. I have never taken any of these drugs, but we lost our fourteen year old son to suicide, which I firmly believe was brought on by his own adverse reaction to Prozac, and I have watched my husband suffer terribly in attempting to withdraw from Paxil. I would venture to guess that those who are adversely affected by these drugs are much higher than even the 7-10% that is now being proposed.

I encourage you to investigate further into the hundreds of thousands of other "anecdotal" evidences from those using the other SSRI/SNRI drugs. If you don't take the responsibility to do this now, the reality will manifest itself, as has been the case with Paroxetine. There are simply too many people now who are beginning to realize that they were denied the opportunity of "Informed Clinical Consent". These people are not laboratory rats who should be subjected to such experimentation. Listen to what they have to say!

Oh, and one more thing, until there is absolute proof positive that one has a "serotonin imbalance", it would be best if this theory ceased to be pushed upon the public as fact. Until there is a method in place to determine what is a "normal" serotonin level in a patient, and a method to determine how much that level should be tampered with to achieve the desired results, the pharmaceutical firms should cease comparing patients diagnosed with depression, anxiety, bi-polar disorder or any other number of "mental health disorders" to those diagnosed with diabetes. You can measure the level of insulin needed to obtain the correct balance needed for someone with diabetes. Not so with serotonin. - Dawn Rider, Administrative KOTM Early Intervention

This is my personal experience with Paxil. Some of this isn't as clear as I wish it to be since I've been off of Paxil for over 1 year.

I was put on Paxil after my daughter was born to treat Post Partum Depression. After about 9-10 months my doctor and I determined that I could start coming off. She suggested step down to 15mg from 20mg the first week taking 15mg every day for 7 days then 10mg everyday for 7days, then 5mg for 7days then none. This just didn't work. I remember getting very agitated, irritable, feeling very out of control, and weepy. Every time I stepped into a hot shower I would feel very flushed and dizzy. This dizziness would dissipate, but to this day this still happens. I stepped down from 20mg - 15 mg ok, spent probably about 2 weeks at 15mg until I felt comfortable enough to step down again to 10mg. Stayed at 10mg for about 3-4 weeks, and 5mg for about another 3-4 weeks. A process that, by my doctor's and the drug company's estimation, should have only taken 4 weeks took me about 8-10 weeks.

During my time on Paxil if I missed a dose the symptoms I described above, would roar in and wouldn't subside until about 3-4 hours after I took the missed dose.

I also believe that my daughter's seizures as an infant were caused by Paxil withdrawal. I started on Paxil before I gave up trying to breast feed (having had breast reduction surgery 3 years earlier, severely limited my milk production to almost none). Her seizures started within several of days of stopping breast feeding. Timing coincidence. I don't think so.

This drug can be very helpful, but needs to be used very carefully. - Julia A Mandeville, Software QA Engineer

Many more here

If discontinuation reactions’ occur in patients stopping [Paxil], the majority will experience symptoms that are mild to moderate in intensity, and are usually limited to two weeks - Mary Anne Rhyne GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson 2005

Drugs like Seroxat [Paxil] have been around for almost a decade and help millions of people fight depression. There’s no reliable scientific evidence to show they cause withdrawal symptoms or dependency. - Alan Chandler GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson

I think patients have nothing to fear from taking Seroxat. - Dr. Alastair Benbow GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director 6/13/2002

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

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

'Duff Withdrawal Advice' from Chairman of the CSM

Who are/were the CSM?

The Committee on the Safety of Medicines (CSM) was an independent advisory committee that for 40 years advised the UK Licensing Authority on the quality, efficacy and safety of medicines. It was replaced on 30 October 2005 by the Commission on Human Medicines which combines the functions of both the former committee and the Medicines Commission.

In 2003, Professor Gordon Duff, the then Chairman of the Committee on Safety of Medicines, sent out an URGENT transmission regarding new evidence relating to the efficacy and safety of
Seroxat (paroxetine) in children and adolescents under the age of 18 years when used to treat depreesive illness.

Included in this transmission was Duff's 'expert opinion' on tapering.

He writes:

Seroxat should not be stopped suddenly because of the risk of withdrawal reactions. The dose should be reduced very gradually, using half tablets, and then alternating days, if necessary. If the dose is not tapered, there is a greater chance of experiencing side effects. For the majority of people, symptoms go away on their own within 2 weeks. If side effects are intolerable on dose reduction or stopping, the dose should be increased and subsequently reduced more gradually.

The dose should be reduced very gradually, using half tablets, and then alternating days, if necessary?

Is this the guidance that the MHRA followed?

Is it any wonder that there are so many people struggling with withdrawal problems when tapering off Seroxat when the Chairman, who considers himself an expert in these matters, offer advice like this?

Duff advice indeed!

Maybe Duff should have told these people that the way to slowly taper is by cutting a tablet in half then alternating days.

It's just another classic example of how the 'experts' got it wrong and how the patients pleas once again went unheard... or as I prefer to label it [ignored] by the regulator!

It's time for change.

It's time for the regulator to not only listen to us but to act on what we have to say. I will continue banging the drum until they show some willing and start believing.

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

VIDEO INTERLUDE - AC/DC

Am I a bad boy?

BAD BOY BOOGIE - AC/DC

**NEW ALBUM COMING SOON - CAN'T WAIT :-)

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

Reply from Patient UK's Hilary Cole

I have had a response from Patient UK after I alerted them to a post about them I wrote a few days ago.

I have replied to the email (see blue txt)

----- Original Message -----
From: Hilary Cole
To: fiddaman64
Cc: Patient Webmaster
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:21 PM
Subject: RE: patient.co.uk - site feedback - SSRIs

Dear Bob

Further to your feedback, I have passed your comments to the author of the leaflet. At the time of writing (June 2006) all the information would have been based on fully evidence-based reference sources. When he gets back from leave (he is away at present) I’m sure the author will respond to you direct with regard to the specific comments on your blog.

In the meantime you suggest a number of times that Patient UK receives funding from drug companies, eg “Is this site/organisation funded by Pharma?”, “This just has to be funded by pharma in some way?” and “Are they funded by pharma? Is this what is known as Astroturfing?”

Patient UK is not, and never has been, funded externally in any way. The following is taken from the ‘About Us’ page, see http://www.patient.co.uk/about.asp, which I suggest you should have read before posting your highly emotive blog:

Advertising and Funding
Independent editorial control of Patient UK and site construction are wholly funded by EMIS. Patient UK makes no user charge and receives no funding from external sources, for example drug companies.

Advertising banners and skyscrapers on the site provide income revenue by means of page display or 'click thru'. Adverts are provided by external sources and are not endorsed by Patient UK. All revenue from this source is passed to EMIS.

So please would you remove this spurious suggestion from your blog.

Something we do on Patient UK is encourage people to post their own experiences of medical conditions and drugs on our sister site – the Patient UK Experience Forum, http://experience.patient.co.uk. I suggest you go to this site and search on seroxat to see the vast number of postings that have been received on this topic. We use as many opportunities that we can think of to get the messages posted in the forum across to interested parties, eg health trusts and pcts, government agencies, NHS departments etc.

It’s interesting that you have the Unite Against Bullying.com logo on your website and yet to my mind your posting about the SSRI leaflet on Patient UK is of an extremely bullying nature.

Regards
Hilary ColeContent Manager
Tel: 01329 828564
Email: hilary.cole@kbs.e-mis.co.ukwww.patient.co.uk
www.mentor-online.com

MY REPLY

Bullying nature?

The advice given on your page is, at best, shoddy!

4 weeks to come off an SSRi? Are you criminally insane?

Thanks for your reply Hilary. Where as I merely make suggestions your website hands out advice that is outdated, wrong and could cause serious harm to patients tapering from SSRi's. I see no question marks on any of the lines written by your team of withdrawal experts, therefore I assume you believe their advice to be correct?

I visited the forum you suggested - a mish mash of patients saying yes it's fine and some saying no it's not.

The point of my blog Hilary is to raise awareness. The point of Patient UK, it seems, is to offer advice to patients withdrawing from SSRi's [at least a certain section of it is]

Talk to the experts on this matter Hilary, those poor sods whose lives have been blighted because of information, such as is given on Patient UK sings straight from the book of Pharma.

Yes, I do have a Unite Against Bullying logo on my page, well spotted. I don't like bullying Hilary. I also don't like it when I read so called experts on SSRi's touting the now defunct chemical imbalance theory, or when so called experts make no mention of the FACT that antidepressants [SSRi's] should not really be used in mild to moderate depression [they are as useful as a placebo]. Nor do I take kindly to the claim that 'Most people have either minor, or no, side-effects.' Where did your 'experts' do their homework? Nor do I like it when your 'experts' claim 'The leaflet that comes in the drug packet gives a full list of possible side-effects.' - The list on the PIL DOES NOT include a full list, certainly not in the case of Seroxat.

I also found the advice on SSRi withdrawal contradictory with the statement 'SSRIs are not tranquillisers, and are not thought to be addictive. (This is disputed by some people, and so this is a controversial issue. If addiction does occur, it is only in a minority of cases.)'

Now, they are either addictive or they are not. When giving advice it's best not to sit on the fence Hilary!

You excelled yourselves with "...Most people can stop an SSRI without any problem. At the end of a course of treatment you should reduce the dose gradually over about four weeks before finally stopping."

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW DANGEROUS THIS INFORMATION IS?

Don't talk to me about bullying when you practically are putting patients lives at risk Hilary.

Do your research, talk to patients, read the readily available files on the internet then amend your advice on SSRi's accordingly.

Regards

Bob


Seroxat Sufferers
http://fiddaman.blogspot.com

cc - To campaigners and other interested parties

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

Total Antidepressant Prescriptions Rise By 16 Million, USA

Source: Medical News Today

Prescriptions filled for antidepressant drugs increased from 154 million in 2002 to 170 million in 2005, according to the latest News and Numbers from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Among the prescriptions (not including refills) which were written after patients talked with doctors in-person or over the phone. AHRQ data found that in 2005:

-- Psychiatrists - medical doctors who specialize in the treatment of mental disorders - prescribed 29 percent.

-- General practitioners - physicians who provide primary care but are specialty-trained - prescribed 23 percent.

-- Family practitioners - primary care physicians who complete a residency in family medicine -- prescribed 21 percent.

-- Internal medicine specialists - physicians who complete a residency in internal medicine and who focus on the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of illnesses in adults that are often difficult to diagnose or manage - prescribed 10 percent.

AHRQ, which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, works to enhance the quality, safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of health care in the United States. The data in this AHRQ News and Numbers summary are taken from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a detailed source of information on the health services used by Americans, the frequency with which they are used, the cost of those services, and how they are paid. For more information, go to Antidepressants Prescribed by Medical Doctors in Office-Based and Outpatient Settings for the U.S. Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population, 2002 and 2005.

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