Archive for December, 2010

New Mental Hospital Unveiled but Nurse Ratched Now Pusher for Big Pharma

Thursday, December 2nd, 2010
“Never console yourself into believing that the terror has passed, for it looms as large and evil today as it did in the despicable era of Bedlam. But I must relate the horrors as I recall them, in the hope that some force for mankind might be moved to relieve forever the unfortunate creatures who are still imprisoned in the back wards of decaying institutions.”
Actress  Frances Farmer—who was  drugged, electroshocked and lobotomized in  a psychiatric ward

Natural News, December 2, 2010
by Monica C. Young
Oregon state officials recently unveiled part of a state mental hospital that will replace the asylum which once served as a real-life set for “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. While using the occasion to trumpet psychiatry’s “modern” mental health treatment, they ignore the industry’s contemporary atrocities, most notably its reliance on highly debilitating drugs as chemical straitjackets. Although the Oregon State Hospital was not specifically named in Ken Kesey’s novel, on which the 1975 Academy-award winning movie was based, it could have been. For its legacy of real abuses spans over a century.

Just two years ago the U.S. Department of Justice warned Oregon that care and conditions at the hospital violated patients’ rights. One person had been in seclusion for a year with no other treatment. Another patient with a condition that causes excessive thirst was left at a water fountain and gained 13 pounds in water weight in one day.

The Oregonian newspaper revealed the death last year of a 42-year-old man who succumbed to a heart attack in his bed hours before anyone in the facility found his body. Nobody checked on him even though he’d missed two meals.

Although the chilling film starring Jack Nicholson is now decades old, it wasn’t until state lawmakers toured the facility in 2004 that they discovered the cremated remains of 3,600 patients who had been locked away and forgotten inside. “You can see the place where they showered. You can see their scratchings on the wall,” said Oregon Senate President Peter Courtney. “They lived there. And then often people forgot them. They just took them there and it was over.”

Gov. Ted Kulongoski, in dedicating the new building, said, “It will be the life at the end of despair and the start of a new dawn that will help patients recover.” Nice speech writing, but how true is this?

Psychiatric institutions today commonly put patients on cocktails of multiple drugs which numb the brain and have potentially lethal side effects. And as withdrawal can itself create intense physical and emotional disturbances, they hook patients on meds for life.

Prolonged use of the older “typical” antipsychotics, still in use today, can cause tardive dyskinesia (involuntary writhing movements of the facial muscles and tongue, an irreversible neurological disorder). Yet the newer, heavily marketed and much more costly “atypical” drugs have their own array of serious effects. Eli Lilly’s blockbuster antipsychotic typically generates excessive weight gain and can predisposition an individual to early heart attacks and type-2 diabetes. Ironically, this same drug maker counts diabetic medications as some of its top-sellers.

While these extremely toxic drugs are highly profitable for drug makers and make institutional patients more submissive, they also deaden their sensibility and threaten their life expectancy.

So does the new Cuckoo’s Nest building truly reflect a restoration of human rights, or has Nurse Ratched forged a more lucrative alliance with Big Pharma?

http://www.naturalnews.com/030593_mental_hospital_Big_Pharma.html#ixzz16yjVzKva

« Return to news items


Share

Wyeth Execs Can’t Hide Behind Silence on Antidepressant Data

Wednesday, December 1st, 2010

BNET – December 1, 2012

Image by Francesco Marino

by Jim Edwards

lawsuit that alleges Wyeth executives told a series of lies about the antidepressant Pristiq — suggesting that it was a good treatment for post-menopause hot-flashes when they were sitting on study data showing a risk of heart and liver problems — gives new guidance to management on what counts as a false or misleading disclosure to investors.

In the case, the judge ruled that front-loading your investor presentations with a bunch of boilerplate language about “safe-harbor” predictions and “forward-looking statements” that ought to be treated with caution does not allow you to stay silent about negative data that you know will affect the fortunes of your company. (The order was reaffirmed just before Thanksgiving.)

A pension plan that was invested in Wyeth stock (before it merged with Pfizer (PFE)) alleged that Wyeth CEO Bernard Poussot and others knew by 2005 that using Pristiq for post-menopausal vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes) carried increased risks of liver and heart damage. The ruling says:

Of the 707 participants [in a Phase III clinical trial], 27 suffered serious adverse effects (“SAEs”), including three coronary occlusions and two heart attacks.

No one taking the placebo experienced a serious adverse event. Wyeth did not reveal this data to investors, however, and instead applied to the FDA for approval to market the drug as if nothing was wrong.

At the time, Pristiq was crucial to Wyeth’s fortunes. It previous antidepressant, Effexor, was losing its exclusive patent protection and the company’s two post-menopause drugs, Prempro and Premarin, turned out to be associated with blood clots and cancer. If the company could get Pristiq approved for hot flashes, it would be a double-blockbuster.

In 2007, however, Wyeth announced that the FDA turned down Pristiq for hot flashes. Wyeth’s stock dropped more than 10 percent, losing $5.70 per share.

Between learning of the negative data in 2005 and the FDA’s thumbs down in 2007, Poussot’s team fed investors a stream of upbeat chatter about the likelihood of getting Pristiq approved for post-menopausal women:

February 9, 2006, Merrill Lynch Pharma Conference, CFO Kenneth Martin: The opportunity clearly is there. The market clearly is there. And if the profile of the product is where we hope it be, we think this is a –- this could be a very big opportunity. … This is a drug that we’re very optimistic about.

October 5, 2006, annual investor conference, svp/president Joseph Mahady: [Pristiq] begins to really differentiate itself with its ability to reduce the frequency and severity of moderate to several [sic] vasomotor symptoms associated with … menopause. … [W]e predict that Pristiq has the potential to exceed $2 billion in peak sales, and that’s the cost of the two indications that we’ve spoken about, MDD and VMS.

At the same conference, svp R&D Robert Ruffolo: We think that [Pristiq] will also be important for the vasomotor indication where – it would obviously be our intent for this drug to be used as another option for women who are suffering from vasomotor symptoms, which is the number one reason women will go to the doctor to seek treatment. … In fact, the way Pristiq looks like it’s positioning itself right now, it’s a drug primarily for women’s health.

Wyeth’s defense was that safe harbor statements about future predictions ought to be treated with caution as “forward-looking statements” — i.e. all the legal disclaimers you see in front of every investor presentation — so Wyeth could not have predicted the FDA’s decision.

The judge agreed with that, but he then ruled that managers’ statements about Pristiq’s safety were not forward-looking because Wyeth already had all the safety data in hand when the statements were made.

Wyeth also argued that the adverse events were not statistically significant, and that they were disclosed at a poster-session at an ob-gyn conference and in a single analyst’s note to investors. The judge dismissed both of those arguments, as statistical significance is an issue of fact to be decided by a jury not a matter of law, and because the conference poster disclosure was too minimal to count as a disclosure to investors.

The case is a warning from the federal judiciary that sometimes CEOs and their lieutenants go too far in concealing negative data. Recently, the federal judiciary has sided with executives who lie to investors and to the federal government. Nonetheless it appears there is still a limit to judges’ sympathy for managers who have difficulty disclosing the whole truth.

http://www.bnet.com/blog/drug-business/wyeth-execs-can-8217t-hide-behind-silence-on-antidepressant-data/6592

« Return to news items


Share