GlaxoSmithKline and Thalidomide…

When I first created this blog over 5 years ago, I sub headed it with “Seroxat – The Mental Health Thalidomide. The reason I made a reference to Thalidomide in regards to Seroxat is because I believe that Seroxat is also a defective and dangerous drug, that not only harms those unfortunate enough to be prescribed it but I also suspected that it could damage the unborn. This suspicion has long been verified as an accurate prediction. Seroxat does harm the unborn. But, what I was primarily trying to illustrate by correlating the Seroxat scandal with the Thalidomide scandal was the sheer number of people who have been damaged by this medication. Yes, Thalidomide caused physical defects which are obvious and noticeable, but the damage from Seroxat, as well as being physical, also was highly psychological. The mental scars from Seroxat cannot be seen, but they can be accounted for.

Anyhow, little did I know, GSK were also involved in the Thalidomide scandal…
This from 2011..

The thalidomide tragedy is now and always will be a part of Grunenthal’s company history,” according to its website. “Grunenthal and its family shareholders greatly regret the consequences of the thalidomide tragedy.”

Money for Damages

The company said in 2008 that it would pay 50 million euros ($70.9 million) to people injured by the drug.

Smith, Kline & French, now part of Brentford, U.K.-based GlaxoSmithKline, allegedly knew of the defects as early as 1958.

“The allegations in the complaint involve events dating back over 50 years and relate to actions by a predecessor company,” Mary Anne Rhyne, a Research Triangle Park, North Carolina-based spokeswoman for GlaxoSmithKline, said today in an e-mailed statement.

The suit’s allegations are without merit, she said.

“SmithKineFrench never manufactured or sold Thalidomide in the U.S. or elsewhere in the world,” she said. After conducting animal studies and a limited clinical trial, SKF determined the drug was ineffective as a sedative and never sought regulatory approval, Rhyne said.

The case is Yeatts v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 003316, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County (Philadelphia).

–Editors: Peter Blumberg, Charles Carter

To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Harris in Chicago at

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s