GlaxoSmithKline pushes really dangerous drugs (Franken, Iraq, global warming, ethical)

[DiogenesofJackson]

News today of some really bad behavior from the powers that be at GlaxoSmithKline. Apparently they aggressively pushed dangerous legal drugs onto children, and suggested to doctors (who should know better) that they prescribe Paxil and Wellbutrin for conditions (like substance addiction) not approved by the FDA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/bu...pagewanted=all

it is truly amazing to me that Americans have such tolerance for corps like Glaxo and other Big Pharma companies such as Abbott and J&J (also caught by the feds for drug pushing), yet Americans are oftentimes quick to demonize the local weed dealer.

It's amazing to me as well that Glaxo reps suggested to doctors that they prescribe Wellbutrin for substance addiction. So it's Big Pharma telling docs to tell their patients to not use whatever illicit substance that they're on, but instead take this Wellbutrin stuff for like the rest of your life.

The sad thing about it all is that the $3 billion Glaxo has to pay in fines will likely not deter drug marketers from committing the same kind of fraud in the future. Glaxo is rich enough to afford the guilty plea, which its CEO's consider as merely "the cost of doing business."

Americans should wake up and tell they're doctor that they're not going to take crap like Paxil, Wellbutrin and any other "wonderdrug" SSRI.

[SourD]

Yeah, much better off being addicted to prescription and illegal drugs like Oxycontin and heroin.

[Frank DeForrest]

Hey if our guv and paid off docs say they are safe, no worries.
The pill pushin will increase with obamascare

[DiogenesofJackson]

Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest

The pill pushin will increase with obamascare

How so? I thought the Affordable Healthcare Act was merely a law designed to influence people to get health insurance from a private insurer. Please tell me how it enables corporations to push more pills on the public? Also, explain the inconsistency of the Obama Administrations Department of Justice going after companies like Glaxo and the new healthcare law being one that will push pills onto consumers?

I'm afraid that I don't see your reasoning in your statement quoted above.

[Kracer]

What GSK did was illegal. It is a crime for which no tolerance is acceptable.

However, it is not the stuff of Frankenstein or Hitler as noted in some theatrical headlines.

Based on the new drug approval process very specific indications have to be included in the submission.

For instance an antibiotic has to specify what particular bugs, by name, the drug has been tested against and found to be effective. So marketing cannot promote anything except what has been presented, clinically proven and approved by the FDA. Regulatory requirements for labeling investigators brochure, maketing ads are all thouroughly examined for wording at a deep deep legal perspective.

now consider you go to the doc for a medical event that requires an antibiotic. All possible drugs clearly state what strain of bacteria they are effective against as noted in their approval documentation/labeling.

the doc would have to take a culture to find out what the specific bug is causing you symptoms. But when was the last time you went to the doc with a cough and he cultured your thoat before giving you an antibiotic?

the loophole is that doctors are exempt from using a drug approved for one indication for another indication not filed with the FDA and approved. If a cardio drug is approved for blood pressure but a doc notices it grows hair or reduces blood sugar or whatever, he can write a prescription for a patient for an off label use.

Pharma will note the off label uses and ethically consider the research and marketing costs before deciding to pursue other indications to be submitted for FDA approval.

The heart of the issue is that when pharma promotes off label indications it is considered to be bypassing the extensive and costly research and approval process put in place to ensure patient safety That theoretically and literally can put patients in danger.

[Who?Me?!]

Originally Posted by DiogenesofJackson

News today of some really bad behavior from the powers that be at GlaxoSmithKline. Apparently they aggressively pushed dangerous legal drugs onto children, and suggested to doctors (who should know better) that they prescribe Paxil and Wellbutrin for conditions (like substance addiction) not approved by the FDA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/bu...pagewanted=all

it is truly amazing to me that Americans have such tolerance for corps like Glaxo and other Big Pharma companies such as Abbott and J&J (also caught by the feds for drug pushing), yet Americans are oftentimes quick to demonize the local weed dealer.

It's amazing to me as well that Glaxo reps suggested to doctors that they prescribe Wellbutrin for substance addiction. So it's Big Pharma telling docs to tell their patients to not use whatever illicit substance that they're on, but instead take this Wellbutrin stuff for like the rest of your life.

The sad thing about it all is that the $3 billion Glaxo has to pay in fines will likely not deter drug marketers from committing the same kind of fraud in the future. Glaxo is rich enough to afford the guilty plea, which its CEO's consider as merely "the cost of doing business."

Americans should wake up and tell they're doctor that they're not going to take crap like Paxil, Wellbutrin and any other "wonderdrug" SSRI.

Aw c'mon...as any good righty will tell ya:

"What's a few dead Americans if you make a profit off them??""(asked in a bewildered tone)"" Doncha know God-Profit is all and everything and you're just some bleeding heart liberal if you care about dead Americans. Regulations!? We don't need no stinkin' regulations! How can our ONLY God, executives, make billions if we don't sacrifice a few Americans!!?? ""

[majoun]

Originally Posted by DiogenesofJackson

News today of some really bad behavior from the powers that be at GlaxoSmithKline. Apparently they aggressively pushed dangerous legal drugs onto children, and suggested to doctors (who should know better) that they prescribe Paxil and Wellbutrin for conditions (like substance addiction) not approved by the FDA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/bu...pagewanted=all

it is truly amazing to me that Americans have such tolerance for corps like Glaxo and other Big Pharma companies such as Abbott and J&J (also caught by the feds for drug pushing), yet Americans are oftentimes quick to demonize the local weed dealer.

It's amazing to me as well that Glaxo reps suggested to doctors that they prescribe Wellbutrin for substance addiction. So it's Big Pharma telling docs to tell their patients to not use whatever illicit substance that they're on, but instead take this Wellbutrin stuff for like the rest of your life.

The sad thing about it all is that the $3 billion Glaxo has to pay in fines will likely not deter drug marketers from committing the same kind of fraud in the future. Glaxo is rich enough to afford the guilty plea, which its CEO's consider as merely "the cost of doing business."

Americans should wake up and tell they're doctor that they're not going to take crap like Paxil, Wellbutrin and any other "wonderdrug" SSRI.

SSRIs have been proven to cause violence.
Every school shooter has been on SSRIs. They should be put on Schedule 1.

[nightbird47]

This is an old story. Pharma has been about this for a long time. There is a drug named neurotin. It was developed to treat restless leg syndrom and seizures. It works for them. But some doctors noticed patients seemed less depressed. The company decided to promote the off label use actively. This was their first mistake. Off label use is legal if not promoted. A doctor can use a drug for it on their own.

To boost sales, they did a study. It was discovered it didn't help depression at all. They hid the study and did not release any information about it, but lied to the company they sold the drug to that it had shown it to work. They didn't owe anyone anything in the class action law suit. Too bad the ones who took it after that didn't get anything from company number one.

But since the study was known, the FDA did their own. It too came out as ineffictive. They legally procured the earlier study. A huge class action lawsuit came out of it for those who's bottle of pills came from company one since they had actively lied.

Only twenty percent of many drugs are used for their tested and approved use. 80 percent is off label. Much of this is gp's and family doctors who don't look too far into the results.

And most SSRI's are not perscribed by psychologists. Patients say I really feel down. Doctors give. Without that market they'd be making a whole lot less money. And the non-generic cost of Wellbrutian has shot way up of late. No coincidence there?

SSRI's and anti-depressents DO have a place. It isn't, however, to take like candy. Some need an anti-depressent long term. Some need it to get them past a hump where they can learn to manage. Most need therapy but therapy is a lot more costly than a bottle of pills.

The problem is MOSTof those taking them are from people not trained to know the difference. Maybe use of them past a certain time limit must come from a trained professional. Except good luck on getting into to see one. A lot of insurence polocies send all mental health patients to the county, where you'll wait six, seven months to see someone for an evaluation.

The system is broken and nobody is going to fix it until the need for real care is met and pharma quits cheating on the big profits.

[GuyNTexas]

Originally Posted by DiogenesofJackson

How so? I thought the Affordable Healthcare Act was merely a law designed to influence people to get health insurance from a private insurer. Please tell me how it enables corporations to push more pills on the public? Also, explain the inconsistency of the Obama Administrations Department of Justice going after companies like Glaxo and the new healthcare law being one that will push pills onto consumers?

I'm afraid that I don't see your reasoning in your statement quoted above.

Of course you don't see the reasoning. Your entire statement here explains why you couldn't possibly see it. When someone operates on an entirely false foundation of lies and deceptions, nothing can ever make sense. So let's break down your statement, and make the corrections needed so that you CAN see the reasoning.

First .... like almost every piece of legislation, the title is the dead giveaway as to it's purpose. The title will tell you what the bill WILL NOT DO or DOES NOT REPRESENT. The actual purpose of any particular bill is exactly the opposite of what the tittle suggests. It's called "advertising". Or in this instance, false-advertising, because if they told you the truth ... you'd obviously not be too keen on the idea. This is the first formula that you MUST apply ... if you don't do that ... nothing will make sense to you, ever.

Take the "Patriot Act" as an example .... nothing in that bill was remotely patriotic. OK? How about the most recent follow on ... the NDAA - National Defense Authorization Act ..... there is nothing "defense" related to this act (other than creating the phony legal grounds for the criminals in charge to attack the American people in defense of their continued criminal conduct). Follow me?

So, applying this formula to the Affordable Health Care Act, we'll immediately see that there is nothing in it remotely related to either health care or affordability. And your suggestion that it is to "influence" purchase of insurance is rather funny .... force is NOT influence, it is force .... influence suggests an attempt to convince someone to agree to something ... having the IRS put a gun to your head and either take your money straight out of your bank account, or threaten you with fines and or imprisonment for not "voluntarily complying" is forceful extortion, not influence. Influence is "advertising" .. force is " you must - under penalties of law".

Now let me explain to you the greater implications of the basic fundamental premise of the health care law, OKAY ? If they can "Force" you to buy insurance ... and that is the basic premise .... and the rationale behind this action is that your individual rights must be sacrificed for the "greater good", because allowing those "free loaders" to continue not paying for insurance is driving the costs up for everyone else. Got it? That is the fundamental argument!

So, once you establish that false argument as legitimate, then the door is swung wide open to apply that same argument across the board. Taken a step further .... after everyone is on board with paying their "fair share" .... then we will have to start working on those skyrocketing costs, because believe me, ObamaCare is going to drive up costs significantly higher ... it has to, and there is no way to avoid that! Now, go back to the formula of title=opposite, and the next step WILL BE to address those astronomically rising costs .... that will be the next problem to fix. Now, you tell me ... can you think? Can you anticipate what THEY might suggest is a good way to control those costs? Come on, use your freaking head!!!

They've already talked about these things PAL .... this "greater good" philosophy has already been in practice for a long time .... it's one of the primary arguments for universal vaccinations!! It's the fundamental premise behind government dictated school lunch programs to solve the childhood "obesity" health problem. It's the fundamental premise for most laws ... the greater good. So, without the need for employing great use of one's imagination ... the next step will be to start tackling YOUR PERSONAL BEHAVIORS that THEY decide may be "unhealthy". And that can include an endless list of potential items, from what you may not eat, drink or smoke ... to what medicines you MUST take to improve your health in order to lower the costs for everyone. GET THE PICTURE NOW?

The various medicines that they will eventually decide must be part of your obligation to the "greater good" will come in the form of forced vaccinations ... flu shots ... Anthrax Shots ... and whatever else they dream up. They may decide that you need to take cholesterol medication, or that you need to take an antidepressant. All of these things are made by those pharmaceutical companies that you spoke of that are making all of those dangerous drugs, like those SSRI's. And just who is "they" making all those decisions about what is good for you? The Government? NOOOOO .... its those very Pharmaceutical companies making all of those dangerous drugs ... they will decide .. because they have always been the one's deciding what is the "proper treatment" for all of the various illnesses and diseases. They tell the doctors which medicnes address which symptoms .... not some stuffed suit in Washington DC The stuffed suits in Washington simply pass the laws giving itself the power to tell you what to do, on behalf of the corporations, like the pharmaceutical industry, who now have managed to get passed the law of their wet dreams ... a law that allows them to FORCE YOU to do whatever they say is best for the "Greater Good".

Now hopefully, once you digest all of this .... the answer to your last question will become self evident. But just in case it doesn't, let me spell it out for you ... by asking you a simple question, OK?

Why don't casinos just fix all of their games so that no one has even the slighest chance of winning? The obvious answer is that if they did that ... nobody would play their games if they knew right from the start that they had no chance of winning. There has to be some winners in order to create the illusion of fair chance, otherwise there can be no game.

By the same token, the government "fining" this pharmaceutical giant creates the illusion of legitimacy of government regulation and protecting the public from harm. Now, a 3 Billion dollar fine may seem like a lot of money to you ... but relatively speaking, it is a DROP IN THE BUCKET compared to the TRILLIONS these pharmaceutical companies make, and will continue to make. And the other side of this is .... there is no guarantee that this fine will ever actually be paid .... you are just assuming it will be. Just as so many assumed that there really were WMD's in Iraq .... occassionally these people don't tell the truth!

Now, do things make more sense? Please say yes.

The real big, real disasterous issue underlying this Health Care Bill goes way beyond the surface. It's greater purpose is to codify in law an extremely dangerous premise. That your individual rights are legitimately up for sacrifice to the greater good of all. By accepting this false idea, you literally relinquish any and all rights you ever had. That bill literally says says that your individual rights NO LONGER EXIST ... you have none. ... zero!

Taken to the extreme .... according to the global warming nuts .... since your very breathing creates CO2, and has negative effects for the greater good, you no longer even have the right to breathe. Get it? Now you and everyone else ought to be able to recognize that false nature of the government claiming the right to come to your house ... take you and your family to a prison camp, and execute the lot of you because of all that CO2 your family produces is harming the planet, and thereby harming the greater good. They instituted a lottery, and you lost. So, for the greater good ... this is necessary. Got a problem with that? I would hope so?

But you see, it's the very idea that you can force me to do something I don't want to do, using the argument that it's for the greater good, that establishes the foundation for such things. Hitler decided to exterminate the Jews using the SAME ARGUMENT! That's why it's so asinine to accept ideas like this, and why they must be rejected, even if they might seem to offer some benefit up front .... the consequences on the back end can be dreadful.

The very simple equation here is that it is impossible to protect ANY individual's right by assigning greater value to collective rights. It is circular reasoning .... because each individual within that collective, by definition, have no individual rights. And if you take a whole group of "individuals" who have no rights, and gather them all up in a big group ... what do you have? You have a big group of people with no rights!!!!!!!! They don't magically gain rights just for joining the group ... who brought that big basket of rights to this picnic ? Nobody did ... because nobody had rights to bring with them. No matter what false reasoning you care to use .... zero multiplied by any factor is still ZERO.

The Health Care Bill in effect, eliminated the constitution, and the rights guaranteed by it. This kinda throws a monkey wrench into the idea that it is constitutional ... but it seems that a lot of monkeys wearing black robes don't know much more about monkey wrenches than they do about the constitution. Because, if you have no rights .. and now you no longer do according to 5 of the monkeys wearing those black robes ... there is no need to keep talking about this silly constitution and constitutional rights. You have no rights ...they're gone .....and all of our fellow Americans who are giving Obama and the Supreme Court this massive standing ovation? They are the dumbest imbecile nitwits ever to breathe air on the soil once called the "land of the free, and the home of the brave".

They are literally cheering the elimination of their own basic individual rights for which people have been fighting and dying for, for over 225 years. Just like that! Gone! And they are screaming YAY !!! How smart is that?

I have another message here ... this one to the United States Supreme Court .... go home .... you're no longer needed. You just eliminated the constitution ... and with it ... the only reason to keep you around. There is no need for your existence anymore ... go home ... you're just as obsolete as that constitution that you just tore to shreds.

[GuyNTexas]

Originally Posted by nightbird47

This is an old story. Pharma has been about this for a long time. There is a drug named neurotin. It was developed to treat restless leg syndrom and seizures. It works for them. But some doctors noticed patients seemed less depressed. The company decided to promote the off label use actively. This was their first mistake. Off label use is legal if not promoted. A doctor can use a drug for it on their own.

To boost sales, they did a study. It was discovered it didn't help depression at all. They hid the study and did not release any information about it, but lied to the company they sold the drug to that it had shown it to work. They didn't owe anyone anything in the class action law suit. Too bad the ones who took it after that didn't get anything from company number one.

But since the study was known, the FDA did their own. It too came out as ineffictive. They legally procured the earlier study. A huge class action lawsuit came out of it for those who's bottle of pills came from company one since they had actively lied.

Only twenty percent of many drugs are used for their tested and approved use. 80 percent is off label. Much of this is gp's and family doctors who don't look too far into the results.

And most SSRI's are not perscribed by psychologists. Patients say I really feel down. Doctors give. Without that market they'd be making a whole lot less money. And the non-generic cost of Wellbrutian has shot way up of late. No coincidence there?

SSRI's and anti-depressents DO have a place. It isn't, however, to take like candy. Some need an anti-depressent long term. Some need it to get them past a hump where they can learn to manage. Most need therapy but therapy is a lot more costly than a bottle of pills.

The problem is MOSTof those taking them are from people not trained to know the difference. Maybe use of them past a certain time limit must come from a trained professional. Except good luck on getting into to see one. A lot of insurence polocies send all mental health patients to the county, where you'll wait six, seven months to see someone for an evaluation.

The system is broken and nobody is going to fix it until the need for real care is met and pharma quits cheating on the big profits.

TOTAL NONSENSE .... SSRI's have no place in anything remotely considered to be science based medicine. SSRI's and their mechanisms of action are unknown .. and that fact is admitted to in the product's own provided literature. In effect, SSRIs induce an effect in the brain that may alter a person's behavior, but they do so in highly unpredictable ways, and by means that are not understood. It's like sticking a screwdriver into an electrical junction box and triggering a short circuit. You may pop a breaker that cuts off electricity to a malfunctioning computer ... but you may also take down things that were working properly that need to continue working properly.

The craziest part of drugs like these .. and the dead giveaway regarding the idiocy of their use is that the possible side effects can mirror the very condition the drug is supposed to be helping. Virtually every antidepressant lists side effects that one would consider to be a highly depressed state ... from anxiety to thoughts of suicide. How in the world can one claim that a drug cures depression, when the possible side effect includes inducing thoughts of suicide? This is brain dead idiocy ... and nothing short of that.

Would you take Pepto Bismal if it caused upset stomach? Would you take Alka Seltzer if it caused heartburn? Would you take an aspirin if it caused headaches?

SSRIs create an unpredictable short circuit in the human brain ... and to do so intentionally is a sign of severe mental illness for which the SSRIs have no chance of correcting. The mere existence of SSRIs, and their wide spread use in medicine today is a clear indictment of the fraud that personifies mainstream medicine today, and the Witch Doctors practicing it.

Everyone knows about those "dummy lights" on cars .... you know ... that red "Check Engine" light that comes on when the car is over heating? Well, the proper thing to do is to pull over and check the engine. DUH! Check to see if there is water in the radiator ... check that the fan belt isn't broken ... check to make sure there is adequate oil, and correct those conditions that caused the red light to come on.

The use of SSRIs by comparison is nothing other than finding the wire to that red light, cutting that wire to to turn off the light, and continuing to drive. The same thing could be said of hearing an engine knock coming from under the hood while driving ... and simply turning up the radio until you can't hear it anymore. That describes the use of SSRIs.