Posts Tagged ‘wellbutrin’

Justice to Pharma: “Do the Perp Walk!”

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

PharmaExec.com – November 17, 2010

by Walter Armstrong

Former GSK counsel is the first target in government’s executive-liability crackdown. Could J&J be next?

The US Department of Justice filed criminal charges last week against Lauren Stevens, a former VP and assistant general counsel at GlaxoSmithKline. Going after pharma execs marks a seismic shift in the government’s efforts to stem the tide of fraud and other illegal pharma marketing practices, which a raft of billion-dollar settlements have so far failed to end. Stevens is charged with obstruction of an investigation, concealment and falsification of documents, and making false statements to the FDA in its 2002 investigation of off-label promotion of the antidepressant Wellbutrin for weight loss, an indication for which it has never been approved but has shown some clinical benefit. The DoJ says that it has evidence, in the vast paper and electronic documentation turned over by GSK, showing that Stevens hid and otherwise misled the agency about some 1,000 instances of GSK-paid doctors promoting Wellbutrin for weight loss to other doctors.

Officials had warned that they would target “repeat offenders,” and GSK certainly qualifies for that dubious distinction. The British firm has racked up some of the biggest settlements of the past decade, including $750 million in October to put to rest civil and criminal charges arising in part from a whistleblower suit filed by a quality-control cop who was fired after she advised temporarily shutting down one of its major manufacturing plants because it was routinely producing adulterated drugs (and selling some of them on the black market) between 2001 and 2005. GSK execs chose instead to look the other way. The former compliance advisor’s cut of the settlement was a record-setting $96 million.

In fact, GSK has been making headlines for all the wrong reasons this year: Prior to the whistleblower suit settlement news came the denouement of the Avandia side effects case revealing that the company had failed to disclose damaging data and otherwise misled the FDA about the diabetes drug’s heart-attack risks.

But the new charges against a former VP in its legal department and all the bad press are almost certainly coincidental, says Daniel Carpenter, a professor of political science at Harvard and leading expert on the FDA. “I am not inclined to read anything political into the fact that it is a Glaxo employee,” he says. “The real symbolic feature of this action is the general message that any criminal proceeding sends to the pharmaceutical industry, namely that the FDA general counsel is now willing to use criminal proceedings—something it has had the power to do for seven decades.” Lauren Stevens, who was said by a GSK spokesperson to be “retired,” has hired a high-profile team of defense attorneys who told the media that their client was innocent and looking forward to her day in court. Be that as it may, if convicted, Stevens could spend at least some of her retirement years in the slammer because the charges are felonies carrying lengthy prison sentences.

BNet’s Jim Edwards has raised the possibility on his Placebo Effect blog that the DoJ may offer Stevens immunity for spilling the beans on other misdeeds at GSK, especially those committed by top management. That lineup include, of course, several of the industry’s most powerful players: former GSK CEO Jean-Pierre Garnier; his successor in 2008, Andrew Witty; Chris Veihbacher, who was GSK’s head of US pharmaceuticals from 2003 to 2008, when he became the CEO of Sanofi-Aventis; and David Stout, the head of global pharma operations from 2003 to 2008.

But the most probable scenario, according to Pharm Exec’s legal sources, is that the DoJ has picked a first case that it is confident it can win a conviction in. And Stevens is likely merely the first shoe to drop. It is widely assumed that the coming months will offer other executives at other firms the opportunity to do a perp walk, with some insiders betting that J&J is next on deck following recent congressional hearings into the company’s recent series of OTC product recalls, including a “phantom” recall of defective Motrin during which consultants posing as consumers attempted to buy out the product.

Slammed for failing to announce an official recall in a speedy fashion, FDA deputy commissioner Josh Sharfstein told Congress last June that J&J had misled the agency about the scope of the retrieval, not to mention its bizarre counterfeit style. But when J&J CEO William Weldon took the hot seat, he countered that his firm had informed the agency of its plans.

One of the two men is lying to Congress, so this line of speculation goes, and if it’s Weldon, the FDA may be expected to pounce—calling its no. 2 a liar only adds insult to injury.

http://blog.pharmexec.com/2010/11/17/lauren-stevens-charged-with-obstruction/

« Return to news items


Share

Is this for real, or just more smoke and mirrors – Big Pharma Executive being prosecuted by DOJ for obstruction of justice & lies

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

Is Something Not Quite Right With Stan – A Mental Health Blog – November 10, 2010

The Big News in Pharma-land is that the DOJ is going after a former GSK lawyer/Exec for a myriad of crimes which could lead to a Fashionable Federal Prison Jump Suit & a very long stay at a Martha Steward Foo Foo Club Fed. The question still remains if this scum bag exec does go to trial and is convicted (or sings like a Canary); what effect this might have on the World Wide Pharmaceutical Drug Cartel Criminal business as usual model?

From the rumblings being heard around the Pharma CEO world it appears this maybe a circle the wagons strategy developing orgy with a huge PR campaign of “we need to be more open and listen themes” while prospects of huge corporate take overs, turf wars, and more profits shine like stars in their beady & greedy CEO eyes ( read here–> AstraZeneca CEO: Pharma Must Be Open, Work With Stakeholders – FoxBusiness.com and here Glaxo sees more industry consolidation - Pharma Not Well Equipped to Handle a PR Cyber Storm-VOX

For a little back story)

This all sounds like a big wonderful hug fest & one giant “can’t we all just get along” moment for all those that have been watching these corporate crimes being waged against society and humanity go unchecked for decades now. But the caution bells are ringing in distance as we have learned the hard way many times before with Big Pharma; words are always cheap, while honesty & accountability is something of an abomination to the holy pharmaceutical corporate stone tablet creed.

So as they say, the proof will lay/lie in the pudding. Will AstraZeneca finally do the right thing when it’s comes to the many thousands injured by Seroquel, will J&J make good on the Risperdal crime settlements and get clean/sober, will GSK come in with a apology mop with groveling pledges of restitution and pay outs for damage caused by Paxil, Wellbutrin, Avandia, as we just name a few of the many ongoing Big Pharma Cartel horrendous criminal actions that have seriously harmed or killed consumers.

If you believe the sweet smell of change is in the air, you might want to ask/consider why is Big Pharma trying to close the honesty door at the same time they are saying they want it to be wide open? read here–>And Here Is The SEC Whistleblower Program

Now if one was to place this in the framed context that Big Pharma is still pumping huge amounts of money into the drug influence game involving doctors and research here—> http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/ and here–>http://www.madinamerica.com/madinamerica.com/Leo/F7BDF895-0DE9-4605-8C73-A25177CBA9FE.html

Or here where they continue funding front marketing groups – AstraZeneca Funds DBSA http://www.speakaboutdepression.com/ and AstraZeneca funds NAMI -http://www.namimi.org/astrazeneca-bipolar-journey-exhibit-appearing-2010-nami-walks as stellar examples.

One might would get the distinct impression that Big Pharma has no intention of changing their profitable criminal ways, or their seedy business as usual model.  Definitely give us all some food for thought as the DOJ finally appears on it’s face to be taking some substantive action against the world largest criminal organization.

http://bipolar-stanscroniclesandnarritive.blogspot.com/2010/11/is-this-for-real-or-just-more-smoke-and.html

« Return to news items


Share

U.S. Justice Department Charges Former GlaxoSmithKline VP — A Top Lawyer—with Fraud over Illegal Marketing of Antidepressant Wellbutrin

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010

The New York Times, November 9, 2010

by Duff Wilson

In a rare move, the Justice Department on Tuesday announced that it had charged a former vice president and top lawyer for the British drug giant GlaxoSmithKline with making false statements and obstructing a federal investigation into illegal marketing of the antidepressant Wellbutrin for weight loss.

The indictment grabbed the attention of pharmaceutical executives who have been bracing for a long-promised government crackdown on company officials — rather than the corporations themselves — in drug-fraud cases that have resulted in billions of dollars in fines and payments.

“This is absolutely precedent-setting — this is really going to set people’s hair on fire,” said Douglas B. Farquhar, a Washington lawyer who recently presided at a panel on law enforcement during a drug industry conference where federal officials warned they were focusing on individuals. “This is indicative of the F.D.A. and Justice strategy to go after the very top-ranking managing officials at regulated companies.”

The indictment accuses the Glaxo official, Lauren C. Stevens of Durham, N.C., of lying to the Food and Drug Administration in 2003, by writing letters, as associate general counsel, denying that doctors speaking at company events had promoted Wellbutrin for uses not approved by the agency. Ms. Stevens “made false statements and withheld documents she recognized as incriminating,” including slides the F.D.A. had sought during its investigation, the indictment stated.

Tony West, assistant attorney general for the civil division, said in a statement, “Where the facts and law allow, the Justice Department will pursue individuals responsible for illegal conduct just as vigorously as we pursue corporations.”

Ms. Stevens has assembled a high-powered legal defense team. “She’s pleading not guilty,” said Reid H. Weingarten, one of her lawyers, who previously represented Bernard J. Ebbers, former chief executive of WorldCom, and Mark A. Belnick, former Tyco counsel. “We’re going to trial and looking forward to it, and we fully expect her to be vindicated.”

Brien T. O’Connor, a lawyer with Ropes & Gray, said in a statement, “Lauren Stevens is an utterly decent and honorable woman. She is not guilty of obstruction or of making false statements. Everything she did in this case was consistent with ethical lawyering and the advice provided her by a nationally prominent law firm retained by her employer specifically because of its experience in working with F.D.A.”

Ms. Stevens, who is 60, could not be contacted Tuesday. No one answered her home telephone.

She is retired, according to Mary Anne Rhyne, a spokeswoman for GlaxoSmithKline. Ms. Rhyne said the company was cooperating fully with a federal investigation into allegations of illegal sales and marketing of Wellbutrin. Last year, it set aside $400 million to resolve the case, which is still pending.

Two weeks ago, in an unrelated case, GlaxoSmithKline agreed to pay $750 million to the government to settle civil and criminal complaints that it sold tainted or ineffective products from a large manufacturing facility in Puerto Rico.

The theme of the drug-law industry conference last month was “more individuals, more often.” In a presentation, Eric M. Blumberg, a deputy chief counsel at the F.D.A., warned: “If you are a corporate executive — or counsel advising such a client — do not wait for the first case to decide now is the time to comply with the law.”

“Once you threaten somebody with jail, people really start paying attention,” said Frances H. Miller, a Boston University law professor and expert on health care policy. “This fits in that framework of sending very high-profile messages very fast.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/health/10glaxo.html

« Return to news items


Share

Antidepressant Drugs Are Not Safe During Pregnancy—No Matter What the Pharma Shills Say

Thursday, November 4th, 2010

by CCHR International

November 4, 2010

Medical News Today published an article entitled “Increased Depression Screening Needed During Pregnancy, Study Says,” that is so highly misleading,  we wonder if they ever bother checking the validity of what they’re forwarding under the guise of “medical news.”

We’re going to make this really simple—the study and its findings are bogus not to mention highly misleading and we’re only going to take up the two most egregious “facts” of the article to make our point.

The article states, “The authors of the study say their findings suggest that screening for depression should be a routine part of prenatal and postnatal care.  They conducted a 10-week pilot project at WIC clinics in Santa Fe and Las Vegas, N.M., finding that 109 of 467 women who were screened had a high enough score on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale to require a referral.”

FACT: The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale—also called EPDS, is a screening method documented to triple the number of women diagnosed with Post partum depression, according to a study published in Obstecrics & Gynecology. The Scandinavian Journal of Public Health stated that EPDS screening was so unethical it should not be used.

So the authors are knowingly promoting a study which is known to triple the amount of women diagnosed postpartum depression,  has been called so unethical it should not be used.

Next, the article states, “There are antidepressants that are safe to take during pregnancy”

False.

FACT: Four countries have done nine studies on the effects of antidepressants during pregnancy or breast feeding.  They found that newer and older antidepressants can cause premature births, and increase the risk of cardiovascular interventions such as heart surgery in early childhood.  In addition, newer antidepressants could also cause withdrawal symptoms, respiratory problems, and neurological problems.

Six counties have issued a total of 15 drug regulatory warnings on antidepressants causing severe problems for newborns.

They warn of:

  • Newer antidepressants causing seizures,
  • Wellbutrin, Cipralex, Luvox, Remeron, Effexor and Zyban increasing the risk of a life-threatening lung condition in newborns,
  • Zoloft and Celexa causing withdrawal symptoms and increasing the risk of a life-threatening lung condition in newborns,
  • Paxil and Prozac causing withdrawal symptoms and increasing the risk of cardiovascular birth defects and a life-threatening lung condition in newborns

Like we said, the article and the “findings” are highly misleading to say the least.

We’d also like to suggest something to any press forwarding these psycho/pharma puff pieces— Its called Google Search.   Its pretty easy these days to check the facts before promoting bogus studies and or “findings”  that are not only false, but can harm pregnant women and can give false information under the guise of “medical news.”   We also recommend that anyone reporting on psychiatric drugs at least check  our psychiatric drug database to see what international drug regulatory agencies and international studies have warned about these drugs instead of just regurgitating the latest pro drug study http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/

Here is  a very short video of what can happen to pregnant women when they are not given the facts about these drugs:

In Memory of Matthew Schultz / Effexor Baby Pregnancy Infant Death

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnxuw2ufSug&p=7F22F2C419977E5A&playnext=1&index=70

And finally, the “Medical News” article:

Increased Depression Screening Needed During Pregnancy, Study Says

Medical News Today

Twenty-three percent of pregnant women screened at two Women, Infant and Children clinics in New Mexico met criteria for depression, according to a study by a work group of the New Mexico Health Department and state Human Services Department, the Albuquerque Journal reports.

Nationwide, 10% to 16% of pregnant women meet the criteria for depression, and 70% show some depressive symptoms, according to the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists.  In June, ACOG said that screening of pregnant women for depression should be “strongly considered” but that there is not enough evidence to recommend it.

The authors of the new study say their findings suggest that screening for depression should be a routine part of prenatal and postnatal care. They conducted a 10-week pilot project at WIC clinics in Santa Fe and Las Vegas, N.M., finding that 109 of 467 women who were screened had a high enough score on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale to require a referral. The work group recommended increased training on depression screening tools for providers and more support groups for women, in both English and Spanish.

Signs of depression in pregnant women include feeling dread about the pregnancy, anxiety, isolation from loved ones, suicidal thoughts, self-harm, constant sadness, changes in appetite and lack of ability to experience pleasure, according to therapist Stefanie Luna. Doctors say leaving severe depression untreated could increase the risk for low birthweight or premature birth. When women are depressed they also are less likely to care for themselves and more likely to drink or smoke. There are antidepressants that are safe to take during pregnancy (Schoenberg, Albuquerque Journal, 11/1).

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/206701.php

« Return to news items


Share

Psych Meds Spike Among Younger Troops—The rise & potential dangers of psychiatric drug use a growing concern

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

The Navy Times

by Andrew Tilghman and Brendan McGarry
Friday Sep 3, 2010

Use of psychiatric medications among people ages 18 to 34 — mostly active-duty troops and their spouses — is rising at a significantly higher rate than other age groups in the military health care system, according to data newly released to Military Times.

Overall, the number of prescriptions filled for psychiatric medications rose 42 percent from 2005 to 2009 among Tricare beneficiaries in that age group, according to data provided by Tricare Management Activity in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

That compares to an increase of 24 percent among Tricare beneficiaries ages 45 to 64, mostly retirees. For children 17 and younger, the increase was 18 percent.

All the increases outpace overall growth in the Tricare population over the same period.

Anti-depressants like Zoloft, Wellbutrin and Celexa account for slightly more than half of the prescriptions in this age group. But increasingly, young adults in the military and their spouses are turning to other types of psych meds to treat their mental health problems.

Prescriptions for stimulants, including amphetamines and drugs to treat attention-deficit disorders, more than doubled. And claims for anti-psychotics like Seroquel and Abilify nearly doubled from 2005 to 2009 among beneficiaries ages 18 to 34, the Tricare data show. Seroquel is often used to treat nightmares and sleeping problems related to post-traumatic stress disorder.

The rise — and potential dangers — of psychiatric drug use is a growing concern for many military officials and doctors.

The Army also should “conduct comprehensive research and analysis of the impact of increased use of antidepressant, psychiatric and narcotic pain management medications on the force,” the report said.

Last year, the Army issued a series of policies designed to reduce the risks linked to multi-drug use. Another policy is expected out later this year.

Military death records obtained by Military Times show that at least 68 accidental drug deaths in 2009, up from 24 in 2001. In total, at least 430 troops have died from drug use — or, in a small number of cases, alcohol use — in the past decade.

Read the rest of this article here:  http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/09/military-psych-meds-080910/

« Return to news items


Share

US Kids Represent Psychiatric Drug Goldmine

Monday, December 14th, 2009

Truthout
Evelyn Pringle
December 12, 2009

Prescriptions for psychiatric drugs increased 50 percent with children in the US, and 73 percent among adults, from 1996 to 2006, according to a study in the May/June 2009 issue of the journal Health Affairs. Another study in the same issue of Health Affairs found spending for mental health care grew more than 30 percent over the same ten-year period, with almost all of the increase due to psychiatric drug costs.

On April 22, 2009, the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reported that in 2006 more money was spent on treating mental disorders in children aged 0 to 17 than for any other medical condition, with a total of $8.9 billion. By comparison, the cost of treating trauma-related disorders, including fractures, sprains, burns, and other physical injuries, was only $6.1 billion.

In 2008, psychiatric drug makers had overall sales in the US of $14.6 billion from antipsychotics, $9.6 billion off antidepressants, $11.3 billion from antiseizure drugs and $4.8 billion in sales of ADHD drugs, for a grand total of $40.3 billion.

The path to child drugging in the US started with providing adolescents with stimulants for ADHD in the early 80s. That was followed by Prozac in the late 80s, and in the mid-90s drug companies started claiming that ADHD kids really had bipolar disorder, coinciding with the marketing of epilepsy drugs as “mood stablizers” and the arrival of the new atypical antipsychotics.

Read entire article: http://www.truthout.org/1213091

« Return to news items


Share

Father sues Harvard over son’s suicide – 3 psychiatric drugs prescribed him were all documented to cause suicide

Saturday, December 5th, 2009

Thom Weidlich
Bloomberg.com
December 5, 2009

The father of a Harvard College sophomore who killed himself in 2007 sued the school’s president and fellows for wrongful death, alleging the institution’s health service prescribed drugs known to increase suicide risk.

John B. Edwards II of Wellesley, Massachusetts, sued on behalf of the estate of his son, known as Johnny, in state court in Middlesex County on Dec. 2. A doctor and nurse employed by Harvard simultaneously prescribed skin, antidepressant and attention-deficit disorder drugs linked to suicide and other side effects, according to the complaint.

“Three of these drugs have risks associated with heightened suicidality,” the father’s lawyer alleged in the complaint. “All four drugs have significant side effects.”

Harvard College in Cambridge, Massachusetts is the undergraduate school of Harvard University, whose $26-billion endowment is the world’s largest academic fund.

“The care he received at Harvard University Health Services was thorough and appropriate and he was monitored closely by its physicians and allied health specialists,” Harvard said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. “Similar complaints previously have been filed with the Board of Registration in Medicine, the Board of Registration in Nursing and the Board of Registration in Pharmacy, and in all three instances the complaints were dismissed upon review.”

Read entire article:  http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aIlr9YQwCSnY

« Return to news items


Share