Posts Tagged ‘antipsychotic’

Allen Jones, Exposer of Fraudulent Antipsychotic Drug Marketing Named Whistleblower of the Year

Tuesday, September 18th, 2012

Houston Press—September 18, 2012
by Craig Malisow

Allen Jones named whistleblower of the year

The man who exposed a drug maker’s fraudulent marketing of an antipsychotic drug that is still given to Texas’s foster care children has won the Taxpayers Against Fraud Education Fund’s Whistleblower of the Year Award.

Allen Jones was forced out of his job at the Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General’s Office after he questioned how the state adopted a Medicaid protocol that gave preferential treatment to Janssen Pharmaceutical’s drug Risperdal. The protocol, used in many states, was based on the Texas Medicaid Algorithm Project, which state investigations later revealed to be riddled with kickbacks, conflicts of interest, and bad science.  Janssen ultimately settled a lawsuit filed by the Texas Attorney General’s Office for $158 million.


Charles Siegel, a partner in the law firm representing Jones, stated in a press release, “We have represented and continue to represent some very exemplary and admirable relators. But we will never represent anyone more admirable than Allen.”

 

 

« Return to news items


Share

New Study: Psychiatrists Prescribing Powerful Antipsychotics to 1 in 3 Kids diagnosed “ADHD”

Friday, August 10th, 2012

Note from CCHR:  The fact that psychiatrists are prescribing antipsychotics to kids diagnosed “ADHD” is a clear example of the depths to which psychiatry will sink,  putting normal kids at risk.  Take aside the fact that an ADHD diagnoses is arrived at simply by ticking off a checklist of childhood behaviors, such as fidgets, stares out window,  acts on the go, loses pencils or toys,  Antipsychotics are the most powerful in psychiatry’s arsenal of mind-altering drugs. Warnings have been issued on their ability to cause brain damage and International Drug Regulatory Agencies warn antipsychotics cause diabetes, convulsions, seizures,  cognitive impairment, motor impairment, paralysis, blood clots, stroke and sudden death and they’re being prescribed for kids who “fidget.”  All of this information on antipsychotic drugs are  documented on CCHR’s psychiatric drug search engine here.

Antipsychotics Prescribed To Treat ADHD In More Children And Teens, New Study Finds

Huffington Post – August 10, 2012 by Catherine Pearson

The number of children and teens taking antipsychotic medications has skyrocketed in recent years, with psychiatrists prescribing the drugs in nearly one-in-three visits with youth, a new study found.

The drugs are not only being prescribed for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, but also for the commonly diagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Many mental health experts say that the powerful medications come with serious potential side effects and that their effectiveness has not been proven in treating the disorders for which they’re increasingly prescribed.

“The growth in antipsychotic treatment of children — roughly eight-fold in 17 years — is especially impressive,” said study author Dr. Mark Olfson, a professor of clinical psychiatry at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University.

“Practice has overstepped research,” he said. “These rapidly rising rates of antipsychotic treatment in young people should give physicians pause.”

For the new study, published online this week in the Archives of General Psychiatry, Olfson and colleagues categorized people into two groups: children for those up to 13 years old and teens for those aged 14-20. They looked at data from doctor’s office visits collected over several decades, and compared data from 1993 to 1998 with that from 2005-2009. The number of doctor’s visits in which an antipsychotic was prescribed jumped from 0.24 percent to 1.83 percent in children, and from 0.78 percent to 3.76 percent in teens.

“[That] is a pretty big leap — not huge, but substantial,” said Dr. Michael Houston, an associate clinical professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the George Washington university medical center and a member of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. “Whether or not it is bad news is hard to determine,” added Houston, who was not involved with the study.

Doctors primarily prescribed the drugs because of behavior disorders and ADHD, the study found, which is considered “off-label” use. The Food and Drug Administration has approved use of antipsychotics in youth primarily for treating schizophrenia, bipolar mania, Tourette’s syndrome and irritability stemming from autism — but the study found that only a small proportion of treatment was for one of those approved uses.

Read the rest of the article here:

Get the facts about psychiatric disorders here

Search all psychiatric drug warnings, studies and side effects reported to the US FDA here

 

« Return to news items


Share

The Huffington Post—Drug Companies Drive the Psychiatric Drugging of Children

Tuesday, July 24th, 2012
The Huffington Post—July 24, 2012
by Dr. Peter Breggin, Reform Psychiatrist

(click image to visit the psychiatric drug database) “The health professions would do far more good stopping the drugging of children than continuing or increasing it. Ethical professionals need to work toward removing children from psychiatric drugs.” – Dr. Peter Breggin

July 24, 2012 – Johnson & Johnson, the company that makes the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, has tentatively agreed to a settlement of $2.2 billion to resolve a federal investigation into the company’s marketing practices. Although details are not fully finalized, this includes “a roughly $400 million criminal fine for the illegal promotion of the antipsychotic Risperdal,” according to the Wall Street Journal. It’s been well documented that Johnson & Johnson confidentially paid psychiatrists such as Harvard’s Joseph Biederman to promote adult drugs such as the powerful antipsychotic drug Risperdal for children. The company has even ghost-written at least one of the Harvard professor’s “scientific” articles.

Another recent DOJ settlement with drug company GlaxoSmithKline resulted in Glaxo’s agreement to pay $3 billion in criminal and civil fines. As I wrote in an earlier Huffington Post blog:

In one of the most egregious examples of fraudulent marketing, “In the case of Paxil, prosecutors claim GlaxoSmithKline employed several tactics aimed at promoting the use of the drug in children, including helping to publish a medical journal article that misreported data from a clinical trial,” [according to the New York Times].

Glaxo manipulated and rewrote this study, which was rejected by the FDA for failing to show efficacy. The Glaxo rewrite made it appear as though the drug was useful for adolescent depression even though the FDA had not approved Paxil for adolescents. The company then got almost two dozen well-known researchers and “experts” to put their names on the article as if they had written it.

GlaxoSmithKline also secretly paid about $500,000 to psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff, while he was a professor at Emory University, to promote Paxil

GlaxoSmithKline also secretly paid about $500,000 to psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff, while he was a professor at Emory University, to promote Paxil. Glaxo even ghostwrote a psychopharmacology textbook for family doctors, who write many prescriptions for children, which was “coauthored” by Nemeroff and psychiatrist Alan Schatzberg. Nemeroff was sanctioned for failing to report the Glaxo payments he received while at Emory. But he’s landed on his feet running, now chairing the psychiatry department at the Miller School of Medicine at the University of Miami.

None of these drug-company-bought psychiatrists has suffered serious consequences. Biederman remains a star at Harvard and Nemeroff recently received a new $2 million federal grant from the National Institute of Mental Health. These influential psychiatrists are just two out of many doctors who have been investigated for extensive financial relationships with drug companies.

Meanwhile, the DOJ has now enforced a total of $8.9 billion in criminal and civil fines against GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Johnson & Johnson.

Drug-company marketing has bought rich rewards, as reflected in the increasing numbers of children and youth diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and other psychiatric problems. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), 12.3 percent of boys and 5.5 percent of girls age 5-17 were diagnosed with the disorder in 2009. With the rates growing especially rapidly in the older children, considerably more than 12.3 percent of older boys are given this diagnosis, which almost inevitably leads to treatment with stimulant drugs such as Ritalin, Concerta, Focalin, Dexedrine and Adderall. Given estimates of 2.8 million children taking stimulants for ADHD in 2008, the number is now well over three million and rising.

“Drug-company marketing has bought rich rewards, as reflected in the increasing numbers of children and youth diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and other psychiatric problems.” – Dr. Peter Breggin

Last year, the American Academy of Pediatrics overrode FDA drug guidelines and advised that children as young as 4 could be diagnosed with ADHD and treated with stimulants. This will surely increase the numbers of younger children psychiatrically diagnosed and medicated with other drugs as well. In our professional experience, children given stimulants may become the targets of additional drugs as their conditions worsen due to the stimulants. Stimulants have been the entering wedge into the widespread psychiatric drugging of America’s children. Once the door was opened, nearly all the other psychiatric drugs came rushing in.

Keep in mind that the more than three million children on psychiatric drugs are for only one class of medication — stimulants for ADHD. Large numbers of other children are being put on highly dangerous adult antipsychotic drugs, antidepressants, and mood stabilizers, often to treat so-called “childhood bipolar disorder.” Psychiatrist Biederman’s work “helped to fuel a controversial 40-fold increase from 1994 to 2003 in the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder … and a rapid rise in the use of antipsychotic medicines in children,” according to the New York Times. Bipolar disorder, like most other psychiatric diagnoses for children, is linked to the greater use of various psychiatric drugs. No surprise that this is so, since as in the case of Joseph Biederman, the “top” researchers in child psychiatry are heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies.

It is our personal and professional opinion that most childhood psychiatric diagnoses have no scientific validity. ADHD, for example, is described and diagnosed by a collection of behaviors – inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity — that can be caused by innumerable factors including too high expectations for a child, confused parenting, family disintegration, racism and poverty, inadequate teaching, poor nutrition, bullying, and head injury. The diagnosis literally shuts down the search for the real causes, undermines effective parenting and teaching approaches, and guarantees that the child will be medicated.

As another example, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) merely describes a child who displays anger. In the words of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, ODD involves “A pattern of negativistic, hostile, and defiant behavior lasting at least six months.” The top three “symptoms” are “(1) often loses temper, (2) often argues with adults, and (3) often actively defies or refuses to comply with adults’ requests or rules.” That’s not a disease in a child, it’s a sign that something has gone haywire in the child’s life and is not being remedied.

My most recent review of the scientific literature in Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal concludes that stimulants, antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs are very harmful to the brain. With increasing millions of children being placed on drugs that can harm normal development of the child’s brain and mind, and substitute for proper teaching and parenting, it’s time to change emphasis. As a society, we need to resist the quick fix that does more harm than good, and to stand up against the massive drugging of children.

The health professions would do far more good stopping the drugging of children than continuing or increasing it. Ethical professionals need to work toward removing children from psychiatric drugs.

The health professions would make a major contribution to the wide-scale health of children not only by curtailing psychiatric drugging, but also by offering the opportunity for parents to withdraw their children from these psychoactive substances.

Peter R. Breggin, MD is a psychiatrist in private practice in Ithaca, New York, and the cofounder with his wife Ginger Breggin of the Center for the Study of Empathic Therapy. He is the author of dozens of scientific articles and more than twenty books. His latest book is Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and Their Families. It is based on a Person-Centered Collaborative Approach to psychiatric treatment with the focus on psychiatric drug withdrawal. It also describes many of the most severe adverse effects of psychiatric drugs that require drug withdrawal.

Ginger Breggin, in addition to cofounding and managing the Center for the Study of Empathic Therapy, has coauthored books with her husband, contributes to their mutual research projects, and blogs independently on The Huffington Post.

Disclosure: Peter Breggin, M.D. has been a plaintiffs’ medical expert in product liability suits against the mentioned drug companies including Eli Lilly, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Johnson & Johnson.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-breggin/psychiatric-drugs_b_1693649.html

« Return to news items


Share

More States Spank High-Prescribing Docs

Tuesday, April 3rd, 2012

Pharmalot – April 3, 2012
by Ed Silverman

citizens commission on human rights

“Out-of-control pychiatric prescribing is analogous to cutting the brake lines on society. We’ve already seen crashes - witness school shootings, depleted Medicaid coffers, children saddled with ignorant labels such as ADHD. Putting the brakes on out of control psych prescribers is a good first step,” says Ken Kramer, who has investigated high-prescribing doctors for the Citizens Commission on Human Rights International, which objects to psychotropic drugs.

For the past two years, US Senator Chuck Grassley has pressed all 50 states to provide data on doctors who write huge numbers of prescriptions for specific drugs that are paid for by Medicaid programs. Why? There were reports indicating certain meds – widely used antipsychotics and the OxyContin painkiller – have sometimes been prescribed at unusually high rates.

The underlying concern over prescription drug abuse that leads to unnecessary costs and deaths. “Over prescription of these types of drugs strains the financial viability of the Medicaid and Medicare systems and threatens the health and well-being of the American people,” Grassley said last month at a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee Health Care Subcommittee.

The effort is an outgrowth of an earlier investigation into the financial interplay between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry. At issue has been the extent to which these relationships – which can take place in the form of research grants or fees for speaking and consulting – may unduly influence medical research and practice.

Initially, some states refused to comply with his demands. More recently, though, results have begun to trickle in and there are growing signs that some states are taking action against doctors who have been identified as high prescribers. For instance, Minnesota recently reported two physicians to its Board of Medical Practice for disciplinary action in connection with inappropriate prescribing (read here).

In Oregon, 67 prescribers, or 18 percent of 367 prescribers, were recently terminated from Medicaid contracts after a review of data from three years. State officials say most were due to business changes, but there were 15 specific prescribers who were terminated for loss of license, suspension or other disciplinary actions by the Oregon Medical Board (see this).

Simultaneously, Florida has been terminating contracts for high-prescribing docs to participate in its state Medicaid. The list was up to 10 physicians through January, according to documents provided to Grassley (look here, here, here and here). One also had his license suspended (read here).

And as ProPublica noted last fall, one doctor, Huberto Moreyo, was in demand as a speaker and consultant for several drugmakers (see this and this).

The same approach is also under way in Iowa, where the state Board of Medicine is reviewing top prescribers and the state Department of Human Services identified OxyContin and Xanax as among the drugs for which some physicians have written a large number of prescriptions (read this, this and this).

“While the responses from the states are still being received, many states are still reporting a selection of top ten providers that are prescribing at rates double or triple that of their peers,” Grassley said in a recent statement about the ongoing probe. “While some of these outliers are legitimate providers working in high-volume practices, such as mental hospitals, many cannot be explained away.”

He cited one example in which the top prescriber of antipsychotics in Nevada wrote nearly 6,800 prescriptions for these meds in 2010 and 2011, which was more than 10 times other top prescribers. And this one doc accounted for $2.75 million in payments from Medicaid. By contrast, no one doctor in Colorado wrote more than 2,000 prescriptions for the same drugs over the same period.

“Out-of-control pychiatric prescribing is analogous to cutting the brake lines on society. We’ve already seen crashes – witness school shootings, depleted Medicaid coffers, children saddled with ignorant labels such as ADHD. Putting the brakes on out of control psych prescribers is a good first step,” says Ken Kramer, who has investigated high-prescribing doctors for the Citizens Commission on Human Rights International, which objects to psychotropic drugs.

http://www.pharmalot.com/2012/04/more-states-spank-high-prescribing-docs/

« Return to news items


Share

Natural News: Amazing facts about psychiatry revealed by psychiatric reformer, Peter Breggin, MD

Tuesday, March 6th, 2012

Peter Breggin, MD

Natural News
By Mike Bundrant
March 6, 2012

(NaturalNews) I can’t think of a more fitting first guest for Mental Health Exposed. Our mission is to expose the fraud, abuse and incompetence in the mental health industry, as well as promote natural and effective methods of healing. Peter Breggin, MD and I discuss all of the above in the premier of Mental Health Exposed on Natural News Radio.

Peter R. Breggin, M.D. is a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former full-time consultant with NIMH who is in private practice in Ithaca, New York. Dr. Breggin is the author of more than twenty books including the bestseller Talking Back to Prozac and the medical book Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry. His most recent book is Medication Madness, the Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime. He is also the author of dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles, many in the field of psychopharmacology.

For more than thirty years Dr. Breggin has served as a medical expert in many civil and criminal suits, including product liability suits against the manufacturers of psychiatric drugs. His work provided the scientific basis for the original combined Prozac suits. His efforts as a medical expert and his scientific publications have resulted in the FDA changing numerous official drug labels. He has been involved in landmark cases on behalf of patient rights in regard to antidepressants, antipsychotic drugs and tardive dyskinesia, electroshock, and lobotomy.

Here are some of the show’s highlights:

Psychiatry doesn’t know what to do with the mentally ill. Dr. Breggin tells about his first experience, as a young intern, in which he was warned that he might “harm the patients” by talking to them regularly and treating them with decency. Ultimately, his actions led to the successful release of several neglected, back ward patients.

Psychiatry has always been a public abuse. Dr. Breggin pulls no punches here. It is always interesting to hear an expert tell the truth about his own profession and back it up with experience. Dr. Breggin exposes the APA’s goal to turn entire communities into mental health hospitals, which it has successfully accomplished. He backs up his statements with a concise history of psychiatry traced from the publicly documented minutes of the APA’s board of directors

How psychiatry turned to over-prescribing medicine as a way to maintain control of the mental health field. The APA couldn’t compete with people who actually wanted to help their patients, so it turned to a non-researched, unverified medical model of treating mental illness based on the fabricated notion “biochemical imbalance.” Again, this sordid tale is revealed in Dr. Breggin’s history of psychiatry and the APA.

Most important of all, we discuss how to actually help people

How people with a variety of “mental disorders” can become free within minutes and maintain their mental health with a few month’s treatment, as proven by practices in Finland and examples from Dr. Breggin’s own practice in New York.

We discuss various approaches to mental health and recovery, which include Dr. Breggin’s comments on the most overlooked cause of mental stress, which is basic human trust, or lack thereof.

Finally, the ultimate solution may be to learn to become a people whisperer! I’ll take credit for inspiring Dr. Breggin to use the term for the first time. Admittedly, so much of what we discussed may be idealistic, but someone needs to lead the way to a more humane, empathetic mental health system that is based on trust and genuine human contact, not biochemical imbalance. These kinds of discussions are important.

Tune in to Mental Health Exposed on Natural News Radio on, Wednesday, March 7, 2012 at 3 PM EST and hear for yourself.

http://www.naturalnews.com/035157_Peter_Breggin_psychiatry_mental_health.html

« Return to news items


Share

Whistleblower says antipsychotic drug maker subverted science & induced others to betray patients

Friday, January 20th, 2012

“Janssen ran amok,” Allen Jones, the Pennsylvania-based whistleblower on J&J’s marketing practices who was a plaintiff along with state of Texas, told reporters in the Austin courthouse.

“They trashed the Johnson & Johnson credo and they misused Texas and, I believe, well-meaning officials, to further their marketing aims,” Jones said. “They subverted science and they induced others to betray the people they were supposed to be taking care of. To me that is reprehensible.”

January 20, 2012/Reuters

J&J to pay $158 million to settle Texas Risperdal case

Johnson & Johnson said on Thursday it will pay $158 million to settle a Texas lawsuit accusing the drugmaker of improperly marketing its Risperdal anti-psychotic drug to state residents on the Medicaid health program for the poor.

The settlement fully resolves all Risperdal-related claims in Texas, the company said. The agreement is specific to the state of Texas and does not involve other ongoing state or federal Risperdal litigation.

The deal settles claims brought by Texas in 2004 and involves alleged Medicaid overpayments during the years 1994 to 2008 “and will circumvent potentially lengthy and costly appellate activities,” according to a statement from J&J’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals unit.

The settlement will be paid to the original plaintiff, his attorneys, the state of Texas and the federal government, which provides Medicaid reimbursements, the company said.

The complaint against J&J and several of its units filed in U.S. district court in Texas had alleged company representatives “targeted every level of the Texas Medicaid Program with misrepresentations about the safety, superiority, efficacy, appropriate uses and cost effectiveness of Risperdal.”

“Janssen ran amok,” Allen Jones, the Pennsylvania-based whistleblower on J&J’s marketing practices who was a plaintiff along with state of Texas, told reporters in the Austin courthouse.

“They trashed the Johnson & Johnson credo and they misused Texas and, I believe, well-meaning officials, to further their marketing aims,” Jones said. “They subverted science and they induced others to betray the people they were supposed to be taking care of. To me that is reprehensible.”

The deal marks the first Risperdal settlement with any U.S. state, Janssen spokeswoman Teresa Mueller said.

J&J’s once sterling reputation has been battered in the past two years over quality control problems at several of its plants and manufacturing errors that led to massive recalls of a wide variety of its products, including hip replacements, contact lenses, insulin cartridges and heart devices.

Its biggest black eye came from its McNeil consumer healthcare unit, which in a series recalls was forced to pull hundreds of millions of bottles and packages of popular medicines, such as Children’s Tylenol, Motrin, Rolaids and Benadryl.

J&J shares were down 28 cents, or 0.4 percent, at $65 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

 

« Return to news items


Share

U.S. to Force Drug Firms to Report Money Paid to Doctors

Monday, January 16th, 2012

The New York Times – January 16, 2012

by Robert Pear

The new standards carry out legislation championed by Senators Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, and Herb Kohl, Democrat of Wisconsin. The legislation was included in the 2010 health care overhaul. “The goal is to let the sun shine in and make information available to foster accountability,” Mr. Grassley said.

WASHINGTON — To head off medical conflicts of interest, the Obama administration is poised to require drug companies to disclose the payments they make to doctors for research, consulting, speaking, travel and entertainment.

Many researchers have found evidence that such payments can influence doctors’ treatment decisions and contribute to higher costs by encouraging the use of more expensive drugs and medical devices.

Consumer advocates and members of Congress say patients may benefit from the new standards, being issued by the government under the new health care law. Federal officials said the disclosures increased the likelihood that doctors would make decisions in the best interests of patients, without regard to the doctors’ financial interests.

Large numbers of doctors receive payments from drug and device companies every year — sometimes into the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars — in exchange for providing advice and giving lectures. Analyses by The New York Times and others have found that about a quarter of doctors take cash payments from drug or device makers and that nearly two-thirds accept routine gifts of food, including lunch for staff members and dinner for themselves.

The Times has found that doctors who take money from drug makers often practice medicine differently from those who do not and that they are more willing to prescribe drugs in risky and unapproved ways, such as prescribing powerful antipsychotic medicines for children.

Under the new standards, if a company has just one product covered by Medicare or Medicaid, it will have to disclose all its payments to doctors other than its own employees. The federal government will post the payment data on a Web site where it will be available to the public.

Manufacturers of prescription drugs and devices will have to report if they pay a doctor to help develop, assess and promote new products — or if, for example, a pharmaceutical sales agent delivers $25 worth of bagels and coffee to a doctor’s office for a meeting. Royalty payments to doctors, for inventions or discoveries, and payments to teaching hospitals for research or other activities will also have to be reported.

The Obama administration estimates that more than 1,100 drug, device and medical supply companies will have to file reports, generating “large amounts of new data.” Federal officials said they would inspect and audit drug company records to make sure the reports were accurate and complete.

Companies will be subject to a penalty up to $10,000 for each payment they fail to report. A company that knowingly fails to report payments will be subject to a penalty up to $100,000 for each violation, up to a total of $1 million a year.

Top executives are potentially liable because a senior official of each company — the chief executive, chief financial officer or chief compliance officer — must attest to the accuracy of each report.

The new requirements, or something very similar, will take effect soon; in fact, they are overdue. Under the new health care law, the administration was supposed to establish payment-reporting procedures by Oct. 1, 2011. The public will have until Feb. 17 to comment on the proposals, which are broadly consistent with the expectations of industry and consumer groups. After considering the comments, Medicare officials will issue final rules with the force of law.

Consumer advocates have long demanded details of the financial ties between doctors and drug and device companies.

Allan J. Coukell, a pharmacist and consumer advocate at the Pew Charitable Trusts, said: “Patients want to know they are getting treatment based on medical evidence, not a lunch or a financial relationship. They want to know if their doctor has a financial relationship with a pharmaceutical company, but they are often uncomfortable asking the doctor directly.”

In an introduction to the proposed rules, the Obama administration says that patients can benefit when doctors and the industry work together to develop life-saving drugs and devices. But, it said, these relationships can also “lead to conflicts of interests that may affect clinical decision-making” and “threaten the underlying integrity of the health care system.”

The administration does not try to define the difference between proper and improper payments. It says simply that public reporting of the financial ties between doctors and drug and device companies “will permit patients to make better-informed decisions when choosing health care professionals and making treatment decisions.”

The new standards carry out legislation championed by Senators Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, and Herb Kohl, Democrat of Wisconsin. The legislation was included in the 2010 health care overhaul.

“The goal is to let the sun shine in and make information available to foster accountability,” Mr. Grassley said.

Christopher L. White, executive vice president of the Advanced Medical Technology Association, which represents makers of medical devices, said the payment data could be used by federal law enforcement agencies, plaintiffs’ lawyers and whistleblowers.

“Some companies fear that doctors may no longer want to engage in consulting arrangements, and such reluctance could chill innovation,” Mr. White said.

Medicare and Medicaid, the programs for older Americans, the disabled and the poor, spend more than $100 billion a year on drugs and devices.

Although the Congressional Budget Office does not predict immediate savings, it has said that, “over time, disclosure has the potential to reduce spending,” by reducing instances of overprescribing.

As an example of inappropriate payments, the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services cited a case in which manufacturers of medical devices had provided financial incentives — in the form of consulting agreements, lavish trips and other perks — to induce doctors to use particular hip and knee replacement products. Under a civil settlement with the government, the companies agreed to new compliance procedures.

The law also requires drug and device companies to report the amount of “any ownership or investment interest” held by doctors or their immediate family members, other than holdings of publicly traded stocks.

The administration intends to apply the same disclosure requirements to doctor-owned companies that distribute medical devices. Such companies allow doctors to benefit financially from sales of devices they use in surgery.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/health/policy/us-to-tell-drug-makers-to-disclose-payments-to-doctors.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

« Return to news items


Share

J&J to Agree to $1B Accord in Risperdal Probe

Thursday, January 5th, 2012

Bloomberg News – January 5, 2012

By Margaret Cronin Fisk, Jef Feeley and David Voreacos

 Johnson & Johnson will pay more than $1 billion to the U.S. and most states to resolve a civil investigation into marketing of the antipsychotic Risperdal, according to people familiar with the matter.

J&J, the world’s largest health products company, reached an accord last week with the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia, according to the people, who weren’t authorized to speak about the matter. It doesn’t resolve negotiations over a possible criminal plea, they said.

The U.S. government has been investigating Risperdal sales practices since 2004, including allegations the company marketed the drug for unapproved uses, J&J has said in Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company said it has been in negotiations with the U.S. to settle this investigation.

J&J, based in New Brunswick, New Jersey, disclosed in August that it reached an agreement to settle a misdemeanor criminal charge related to Risperdal marketing. The company is in negotiations to pay about $400 million more to settle this portion of the investigation, one of the people said.

“We’re not going to comment on rumor or speculation,” Teresa Mueller, a J&J spokeswoman, said in a phone interview.

Company officials said in an SEC filing in May that they had reserved funds to resolve the government’s claims over Risperdal marketing. The company didn’t say how much had been set aside. The drugmaker said in an August filing it added an unspecified amount to the reserve to cover criminal penalties.

Accord Announcement

When the final settlement will be announced isn’t clear. The Justice Department typically announces civil and criminal resolutions at the same time in corporate cases.

A majority of U.S. states will join the settlement, the people said. Which ones will accept the final agreement hasn’t been determined, they said. Each state can decide whether to join the federal government’s settlement or pursue its own case.

Typically, states with cases in court continue to pursue their own. Texas alone is asking for more than $1 billion in a case that goes to trial next week.

J&J and its Janssen unit have been sued by 12 states, including Texas, South Carolina and Louisiana, over Risperdal marketing. The attorneys general of the other states “have indicated a potential interest in pursuing similar litigation against” Janssen, J&J said in its quarterly SEC filing in November.

A jury in Louisiana, weighing only the claim that the company downplayed the drug’s risks, awarded that state $257.7 million in 2010. A South Carolina judge last year ordered J&J to pay $327 million over Risperdal sold in the state.

Texas Suit

The Texas lawsuit, which involves additional allegations including off-label marketing, goes to trial next week.

“Discussions have been ongoing in an effort to resolve criminal penalties under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act related to the promotion of Risperdal,” J&J said in its August SEC filing. “Certain issues remain open before a settlement can be finalized.”

“The ultimate resolution of the above criminal and these civil matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the company’s financial position,” J&J officials said in the filing.

The agreement in principle on the criminal charge is “pursuant to a single misdemeanor violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act,” the company said.

Risperdal is a member of a class of drugs, known as atypical antipsychotics, that includes Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly & Co.’s Zyprexa and London-based AstraZeneca Plc’s Seroquel.

Lilly, AstraZeneca and two other J&J competitors making these drugs have paid $2.7 billion to resolve government marketing claims, particularly that the companies pushed the drugs for unapproved uses.

Lilly paid more than $1.7 billion to resolve state and federal investigations over Zyprexa and AstraZeneca Plc has paid almost $590 million. Pfizer paid $301 million for its drug Geodon.

–With assistance from Alex Nussbaum in New York. Editors: Charles Carter, John Pickering

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-05/j-j-to-agree-to-1b-accord-in-risperdal-probe.html

 

« Return to news items


Share

Record Breaking $327 Million Verdict Upheld Against Manufacturer of Antipsychotic Risperdal—Request for New Trial Denied

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

PR Newswire – December 21, 2011

(Click image for international warnings on antipsychotic drugs) The "dear doctor" letter, sent to more than 7,000 doctors across South Carolina, and the package insert were found to be misleading about the safety and effectiveness of the antipsychotic drug Risperdal.

The jury verdict in the case of State of South Carolina versus Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Johnson & Johnson, Inc. has been upheld and requests for a new trial denied, affirming groundbreaking $327 million in civil penalties against the manufacturers of the drug Risperdal.

Circuit Court Judge Roger Couch announced the rulings on December 20 through two written orders. One order denies the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, for a new trial; the second order denies the defendant’s motion to alter or amend the judgment and/or for a new trial. John B. White, Jr. and Donald C. Coggins, Jr. of Harrison, White, Smith & Coggins, P.C., a Spartanburg-based law firm, along with John Simmons of the Simmons Law Firm, a Columbia-based law firm, and Bailey Perrin Bailey, a Texas based law firm represented South Carolina in the case.

“We are obviously very pleased with Judge Couch’s decision and his careful consideration of this matter,” stated John B. White, Jr. one of the attorneys representing the state in the case. “The verdict handed down by the jury is just and speaks the truth. The damages awarded further substantiated the level of deception Janssen used in business practices in our state. Once again, we have sent a clear message to drug companies that deceptive business practices will not be tolerated in South Carolina.”

On March 22, 2011 a jury in the Spartanburg Court of Common Pleas found that New Jersey-based Janssen willfully violated the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act by engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce in the “dear doctor” letter of November 10, 2003 and the drug label (package insert). This decision represents the first jury verdict that finds the defendant violated unfair trade practices since the inception of its pharmaceutical product. The “dear doctor” letter, sent to more than 7,000 doctors across South Carolina, and the package insert were found to be misleading about the safety and effectiveness of the antipsychotic drug Risperdal. Risperdal was introduced by Janssen in 1994 and by 2005, generated annual revenues in excess of $3.5 billion.

On June 3, 2011 civil penalties amounting to $327,073,700 were ordered by Circuit Court Judge Roger Couch based upon violations found with the drug labels and “dear doctor” letters. Regarding the drug label violations, the judge ruled that 509,499 package inserts were distributed with sample boxes, and levied $300 per violation for a total drug label awarded damages of $152,849,700. Regarding the “dear doctor” letter violations, the judge ruled that 7,184 letters were mailed and 36,372 were provided during sales calls, and levied $4000 per violation for a total “dear doctor” letter awarded damages of $174,224,000.

The combination of the drug label and letter damages of $327,073,700 amounts to the highest verdict brought against Janssen for the drug Risperdal.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/record-breaking-327-million-verdict-upheld-in-janssen-case-and-request-for-new-trial-denied-2011-12-21

« Return to news items


Share

ABC News: Doctors Put Foster Children at Risk With Mind-Altering Drugs

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

December 1, 2011
by BRINDA ADHIKARI, JOAN MARTELLI and SARAH KOCH
video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Across America, doctors are putting foster children on powerful, mind-altering drugs at rates up to 13 times that of children in the general population. What’s more, doctors are prescribing foster children drugs at doses beyond what the Food and Drug Administration has approved, sometimes in potentially dangerous combinations, according to a new report by the federal Government Accountability Office.

“It’s just almost beyond comprehension,” said Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del., who asked for the GAO investigation. “We want the doctors and nurses that are prescribing these medicines to look at their behavior and think and ask this question. Are we doing something wrong here?”

In Florida, regulator Gabriel Myers, killed himself in 2009 after being prescribed a powerful mix of psychotropic medication.

In Florida, regulators have been grappling with that question since a 7-year-old boy, Gabriel Myers, killed himself in 2009 after being prescribed a powerful mix of psychotropic medication.

His psychiatrist, Dr. Sohail Punjwani, had, at different times, prescribed two drugs that carry black box labels — warning of the need to carefully monitor patients because of the increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior in children, which call for careful monitoring. However, even though Gabriel visited Punjwani’s office seven times, his foster father said Gabriel usually only spent about five minutes talking to the doctor.

Gabriel’s death was ruled an accident, but investigators pointed to the possibility that the medication may have contributed to his death. The tragedy triggered a storm of outrage across the state.

“I don’t accept that the only way to reach a child who is 7 years old is through psychotropic drugs,” said Florida Sen. Ronda Storm, during hearings over Gabriel’s death. “I do not accept that.”

The boy’s doctor settled a lawsuit in 2010 accusing him of prescribing a toxic cocktail of psychotropic drugs to a 16-year-old patient, who suffered a sudden heart attack and died. Punjwani settled that case but admitted no wrongdoing.

Additionally, Punjwani was arrested for driving under the influence and cocaine possession. He pleaded not guilty to those charges but went through a court-ordered rehabilitation program.

When ABC News caught up with Dr. Punjwani, he told us, “Sad stories happen but that does not mean that everything else the doctor is responsible for it because we are in the business of taking care of these children,” he said.

Antipsychotic medication, which can cause a litany of health problems such as severe weight gain, an increased risk of diabetes and irreversible movement disorders, is among the top-selling drugs in America.

Four drug makers have paid a total of more than $2 billion to settle claims they illegally marketed antipsychotics to children. All deny wrongdoing.

“How do antipsychotics, drugs supposedly for people who have lost touch with reality, how do they develop such a wide market?” said neuropsychiatrist Dr. Stefan Kruszewski, who won millions of dollars as a key whistleblower against drug companies.

There have been very limited long-term studies on antipsychotics in children. And for drugs already on the market, the duration of the studies that were used to get FDA approval for children have been as short as three to six weeks.

ABC News interviewed a social worker now working in a state foster care system, who asked not to be identified.

“Every child that I saw was basically on some type of psychotropic medication,” the social worker told ABC News. “It’s much easier to medicate a child than it is to physically restrain them, than it is to pay $200 an hour to a therapist to talk through their problems with them.”

Read the reset of the article here

Watch the year-long investigation tonight on “World News with Diane Sawyer” at 6:30 p.m. ET and then see more on “20/20,” Friday at 10 p.m. ET.

« Return to news items


Share