Video sets GSK Hounds to Intimidate British Blogger

[Guest guest]

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION

Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability

http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com

FYI

Acting much like wounded predatory animals, pharmaceutical companies that

are accused of engaging in deceptive marketing, whose defective drugs have

been shown to inflict greater harm than a demonstrable benefit, use their

lawyers not only to defend them, but to intimidate critics who disseminate

evidence of such deception.

A recent example of corporate intimidation tactics by a company that stands

accused of concealing its drug's life-threatening risks, and of publishing

selective, partial data-which constitutes disreputable science--is

GlaxoKline (GSK).

The cages of GSK, the maker of the SSRI antidepressant drug, Paxil (Seroxat)

seem to have been rattled by Bob Fiddaman a patient advocate in the UK who

writes the " Seroxat (Paxil) Sufferers blog " who posted on his website a

video that he created out of footage from the public domain, featuring clips

of GSK's most prominent medical spokesman, Dr Alistair Benbow, Head of GSKs

European Clinical Psychiatry.

Dr. Benbow's public utterances in defense of Paxil, many of which were

highlighted in investigative reports by BBC's Panorama-are contradicted by

the company's own documents. http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/ His

utterances show him to be either totally uninformed, disingenuous or

knowingly misstating the truth. The video was posted to Fiddaman's website

in February until a GSK lawyers' letter so intimidated him that he removed

it.

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/03/gsk-lawyers-target-seroxat-campaigner.h

tml

Here are two links to the Fiddaman Video which is now hosted on You-Tube.

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://www.furiousseasons.com/archives/2008/03/glaxo_goes_after_british_bloggers\

_video_1.html

The pivotal catalyst for legal action against GlaxoKline-and its

illegal marketing of Seroxat / Paxil for children was the lawsuit filed by

New York State Attorney General (2004). That suit charged GSK with " having

engaged in repeated and persistent fraud by concealing and failing to

disclose to physicians information about Paxil, a drug used to treat

depression. " Glaxo's internal documents showing deliberate concealment of

the negative findings of Study #329 was the cornerstone of the suit: [Link]

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/aug/aug26a_04.html

To settle the suit, GSK agreed to Establish " Clinical Trials Register " with

Information on All Company Drugs and paid a token $2.5 million.

Subsequently, GSK acknowledged a six-fold increased risk of suicidality for

children and adults taking their drug, Paxil (in May 2006).

http://www.gsk.com/media/paroxetine/adult_hcp_letter.pdf

In February, 2008, an even more incriminating report by Dr. ph

Glenmullen, was unsealed revealing that: " GlaxoKline's Paxil data in

its earliest reports to the FDA in 1989 show a statistically significant,

greater than eight-fold increased risk of suicidal behaviour - suicide and

suicide attempts - for patients put on Paxil when compared to patients put

on placebo (dummy) pills, " he wrote. " Unfortunately, this demonstration of a

causal link between Paxil and suicidal behaviour was obscured by

GlaxoKline's improperly reporting the data to the FDA, doctors,

patients, and the public for over fifteen years. "

http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2008/02/gsk-needs-to-respond-re-paxil-suicide.html

A month after Dr. Glenmullen's report became public, the British Medicine

and Healthcare Products Regulatory authority released the findings of its

criminal investigation confirming that GSK failed to report in a timely

manner: " The lack of evidence of efficacy, together with evidence of a

causal association between Seroxat and suicidal behaviour, meant that the

overall benefit-risk balance could not be positive for use in under-18s. At

the time, there were an estimated 7-8,000 under-18s being treated with

Seroxat in the UK. " For strictly political reasons, the MHRA declined to

recommend prosecuting the company and those involved in concealing the

truth. However, in the court of public opinion the reputation of the

company and its high ranking employees are deservedly sullied.

What do GSK executives think they gain by intimidating a blogger in the UK?

Do they seriously think they can suppress the evidence of their wrongdoing?

See:

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://clinpsyc.blogspot.com/

http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav

veracare@...

212-595-8974

[Guest guest]

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION

Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability

http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com

FYI

Acting much like wounded predatory animals, pharmaceutical companies that

are accused of engaging in deceptive marketing, whose defective drugs have

been shown to inflict greater harm than a demonstrable benefit, use their

lawyers not only to defend them, but to intimidate critics who disseminate

evidence of such deception.

A recent example of corporate intimidation tactics by a company that stands

accused of concealing its drug's life-threatening risks, and of publishing

selective, partial data-which constitutes disreputable science--is

GlaxoKline (GSK).

The cages of GSK, the maker of the SSRI antidepressant drug, Paxil (Seroxat)

seem to have been rattled by Bob Fiddaman a patient advocate in the UK who

writes the " Seroxat (Paxil) Sufferers blog " who posted on his website a

video that he created out of footage from the public domain, featuring clips

of GSK's most prominent medical spokesman, Dr Alistair Benbow, Head of GSKs

European Clinical Psychiatry.

Dr. Benbow's public utterances in defense of Paxil, many of which were

highlighted in investigative reports by BBC's Panorama-are contradicted by

the company's own documents. http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/ His

utterances show him to be either totally uninformed, disingenuous or

knowingly misstating the truth. The video was posted to Fiddaman's website

in February until a GSK lawyers' letter so intimidated him that he removed

it.

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/03/gsk-lawyers-target-seroxat-campaigner.h

tml

Here are two links to the Fiddaman Video which is now hosted on You-Tube.

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://www.furiousseasons.com/archives/2008/03/glaxo_goes_after_british_bloggers\

_video_1.html

The pivotal catalyst for legal action against GlaxoKline-and its

illegal marketing of Seroxat / Paxil for children was the lawsuit filed by

New York State Attorney General (2004). That suit charged GSK with " having

engaged in repeated and persistent fraud by concealing and failing to

disclose to physicians information about Paxil, a drug used to treat

depression. " Glaxo's internal documents showing deliberate concealment of

the negative findings of Study #329 was the cornerstone of the suit: [Link]

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/aug/aug26a_04.html

To settle the suit, GSK agreed to Establish " Clinical Trials Register " with

Information on All Company Drugs and paid a token $2.5 million.

Subsequently, GSK acknowledged a six-fold increased risk of suicidality for

children and adults taking their drug, Paxil (in May 2006).

http://www.gsk.com/media/paroxetine/adult_hcp_letter.pdf

In February, 2008, an even more incriminating report by Dr. ph

Glenmullen, was unsealed revealing that: " GlaxoKline's Paxil data in

its earliest reports to the FDA in 1989 show a statistically significant,

greater than eight-fold increased risk of suicidal behaviour - suicide and

suicide attempts - for patients put on Paxil when compared to patients put

on placebo (dummy) pills, " he wrote. " Unfortunately, this demonstration of a

causal link between Paxil and suicidal behaviour was obscured by

GlaxoKline's improperly reporting the data to the FDA, doctors,

patients, and the public for over fifteen years. "

http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2008/02/gsk-needs-to-respond-re-paxil-suicide.html

A month after Dr. Glenmullen's report became public, the British Medicine

and Healthcare Products Regulatory authority released the findings of its

criminal investigation confirming that GSK failed to report in a timely

manner: " The lack of evidence of efficacy, together with evidence of a

causal association between Seroxat and suicidal behaviour, meant that the

overall benefit-risk balance could not be positive for use in under-18s. At

the time, there were an estimated 7-8,000 under-18s being treated with

Seroxat in the UK. " For strictly political reasons, the MHRA declined to

recommend prosecuting the company and those involved in concealing the

truth. However, in the court of public opinion the reputation of the

company and its high ranking employees are deservedly sullied.

What do GSK executives think they gain by intimidating a blogger in the UK?

Do they seriously think they can suppress the evidence of their wrongdoing?

See:

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://clinpsyc.blogspot.com/

http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav

veracare@...

212-595-8974

[Guest guest]

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION

Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability

http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com

FYI

Acting much like wounded predatory animals, pharmaceutical companies that

are accused of engaging in deceptive marketing, whose defective drugs have

been shown to inflict greater harm than a demonstrable benefit, use their

lawyers not only to defend them, but to intimidate critics who disseminate

evidence of such deception.

A recent example of corporate intimidation tactics by a company that stands

accused of concealing its drug's life-threatening risks, and of publishing

selective, partial data-which constitutes disreputable science--is

GlaxoKline (GSK).

The cages of GSK, the maker of the SSRI antidepressant drug, Paxil (Seroxat)

seem to have been rattled by Bob Fiddaman a patient advocate in the UK who

writes the " Seroxat (Paxil) Sufferers blog " who posted on his website a

video that he created out of footage from the public domain, featuring clips

of GSK's most prominent medical spokesman, Dr Alistair Benbow, Head of GSKs

European Clinical Psychiatry.

Dr. Benbow's public utterances in defense of Paxil, many of which were

highlighted in investigative reports by BBC's Panorama-are contradicted by

the company's own documents. http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/ His

utterances show him to be either totally uninformed, disingenuous or

knowingly misstating the truth. The video was posted to Fiddaman's website

in February until a GSK lawyers' letter so intimidated him that he removed

it.

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/03/gsk-lawyers-target-seroxat-campaigner.h

tml

Here are two links to the Fiddaman Video which is now hosted on You-Tube.

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://www.furiousseasons.com/archives/2008/03/glaxo_goes_after_british_bloggers\

_video_1.html

The pivotal catalyst for legal action against GlaxoKline-and its

illegal marketing of Seroxat / Paxil for children was the lawsuit filed by

New York State Attorney General (2004). That suit charged GSK with " having

engaged in repeated and persistent fraud by concealing and failing to

disclose to physicians information about Paxil, a drug used to treat

depression. " Glaxo's internal documents showing deliberate concealment of

the negative findings of Study #329 was the cornerstone of the suit: [Link]

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/aug/aug26a_04.html

To settle the suit, GSK agreed to Establish " Clinical Trials Register " with

Information on All Company Drugs and paid a token $2.5 million.

Subsequently, GSK acknowledged a six-fold increased risk of suicidality for

children and adults taking their drug, Paxil (in May 2006).

http://www.gsk.com/media/paroxetine/adult_hcp_letter.pdf

In February, 2008, an even more incriminating report by Dr. ph

Glenmullen, was unsealed revealing that: " GlaxoKline's Paxil data in

its earliest reports to the FDA in 1989 show a statistically significant,

greater than eight-fold increased risk of suicidal behaviour - suicide and

suicide attempts - for patients put on Paxil when compared to patients put

on placebo (dummy) pills, " he wrote. " Unfortunately, this demonstration of a

causal link between Paxil and suicidal behaviour was obscured by

GlaxoKline's improperly reporting the data to the FDA, doctors,

patients, and the public for over fifteen years. "

http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2008/02/gsk-needs-to-respond-re-paxil-suicide.html

A month after Dr. Glenmullen's report became public, the British Medicine

and Healthcare Products Regulatory authority released the findings of its

criminal investigation confirming that GSK failed to report in a timely

manner: " The lack of evidence of efficacy, together with evidence of a

causal association between Seroxat and suicidal behaviour, meant that the

overall benefit-risk balance could not be positive for use in under-18s. At

the time, there were an estimated 7-8,000 under-18s being treated with

Seroxat in the UK. " For strictly political reasons, the MHRA declined to

recommend prosecuting the company and those involved in concealing the

truth. However, in the court of public opinion the reputation of the

company and its high ranking employees are deservedly sullied.

What do GSK executives think they gain by intimidating a blogger in the UK?

Do they seriously think they can suppress the evidence of their wrongdoing?

See:

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://clinpsyc.blogspot.com/

http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav

veracare@...

212-595-8974

[Guest guest]

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION

Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability

http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com

FYI

Acting much like wounded predatory animals, pharmaceutical companies that

are accused of engaging in deceptive marketing, whose defective drugs have

been shown to inflict greater harm than a demonstrable benefit, use their

lawyers not only to defend them, but to intimidate critics who disseminate

evidence of such deception.

A recent example of corporate intimidation tactics by a company that stands

accused of concealing its drug's life-threatening risks, and of publishing

selective, partial data-which constitutes disreputable science--is

GlaxoKline (GSK).

The cages of GSK, the maker of the SSRI antidepressant drug, Paxil (Seroxat)

seem to have been rattled by Bob Fiddaman a patient advocate in the UK who

writes the " Seroxat (Paxil) Sufferers blog " who posted on his website a

video that he created out of footage from the public domain, featuring clips

of GSK's most prominent medical spokesman, Dr Alistair Benbow, Head of GSKs

European Clinical Psychiatry.

Dr. Benbow's public utterances in defense of Paxil, many of which were

highlighted in investigative reports by BBC's Panorama-are contradicted by

the company's own documents. http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/ His

utterances show him to be either totally uninformed, disingenuous or

knowingly misstating the truth. The video was posted to Fiddaman's website

in February until a GSK lawyers' letter so intimidated him that he removed

it.

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2008/03/gsk-lawyers-target-seroxat-campaigner.h

tml

Here are two links to the Fiddaman Video which is now hosted on You-Tube.

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://www.furiousseasons.com/archives/2008/03/glaxo_goes_after_british_bloggers\

_video_1.html

The pivotal catalyst for legal action against GlaxoKline-and its

illegal marketing of Seroxat / Paxil for children was the lawsuit filed by

New York State Attorney General (2004). That suit charged GSK with " having

engaged in repeated and persistent fraud by concealing and failing to

disclose to physicians information about Paxil, a drug used to treat

depression. " Glaxo's internal documents showing deliberate concealment of

the negative findings of Study #329 was the cornerstone of the suit: [Link]

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/aug/aug26a_04.html

To settle the suit, GSK agreed to Establish " Clinical Trials Register " with

Information on All Company Drugs and paid a token $2.5 million.

Subsequently, GSK acknowledged a six-fold increased risk of suicidality for

children and adults taking their drug, Paxil (in May 2006).

http://www.gsk.com/media/paroxetine/adult_hcp_letter.pdf

In February, 2008, an even more incriminating report by Dr. ph

Glenmullen, was unsealed revealing that: " GlaxoKline's Paxil data in

its earliest reports to the FDA in 1989 show a statistically significant,

greater than eight-fold increased risk of suicidal behaviour - suicide and

suicide attempts - for patients put on Paxil when compared to patients put

on placebo (dummy) pills, " he wrote. " Unfortunately, this demonstration of a

causal link between Paxil and suicidal behaviour was obscured by

GlaxoKline's improperly reporting the data to the FDA, doctors,

patients, and the public for over fifteen years. "

http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2008/02/gsk-needs-to-respond-re-paxil-suicide.html

A month after Dr. Glenmullen's report became public, the British Medicine

and Healthcare Products Regulatory authority released the findings of its

criminal investigation confirming that GSK failed to report in a timely

manner: " The lack of evidence of efficacy, together with evidence of a

causal association between Seroxat and suicidal behaviour, meant that the

overall benefit-risk balance could not be positive for use in under-18s. At

the time, there were an estimated 7-8,000 under-18s being treated with

Seroxat in the UK. " For strictly political reasons, the MHRA declined to

recommend prosecuting the company and those involved in concealing the

truth. However, in the court of public opinion the reputation of the

company and its high ranking employees are deservedly sullied.

What do GSK executives think they gain by intimidating a blogger in the UK?

Do they seriously think they can suppress the evidence of their wrongdoing?

See:

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/04/its-groundhog-day-for-bullying\

-by.html

http://clinpsyc.blogspot.com/

http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav

veracare@...

212-595-8974