Ben Goldacre… Running With The Pharma Hares (Or Whores?) And Hunting With The Hounds..


“…Now it is unfair to say that if Ben Goldacre didn’t exist, Andrew Witty, the CEO of GlaxoSmithKline, might have had to invent him.”..

Professor Nutt worked as an advisor to the Ministry of Defence, Department of Health and the Home Office.[9] He served on the Committee on Safety of Medicines where he participated in an enquiry into the use of SSRI anti-depressants in 2003. His participation was criticised as, owing to his financial interest in GlaxoSmithKline, he had to withdraw from discussions of the drug Seroxat.[31

Ben Goldacre really gets on my wick.

He runs with the hares and hunts with the hounds, and that grates on me.

His recent tweet made my blood boil, but I’m not going to get too deep into it now, it’s a post for a another day (and I am supposed to be on a break), but what I will say is, I used to dismiss comments on other blogs about Ben Goldacre being some sort of shill for the pharmaceutical industry, but having observed him the last few years, I’m really not so sure anymore…

His recent promotion of Prof David Nutt’s utterly reductive and unhelpful comments on SSRI’s is enough to cause alarm to anyone who knows that these drugs can be harmful. The truth about these drugs is now widely accepted amongst many in David and Ben’s profession: These drugs can be seriously dangerous and damaging, and in some cases they can cause death. That’s a fact. A well established fact.

David Nutt has been pushing his pro- SSRI agenda for years, and most of what he sprouts is misinformation.

The Seroxat Secrets blog has been drawing attention to Nutt’s bullshit for years. Nutt has done work for nearly every pharmaceutical company, and he even apparently has (or had) shares in Glaxo! And this is a guy who is supposedly considered a key opinion leader on mental health issues and SSRI’s?

Gimme a break…

If Ben agrees with Nutt, then Ben clearly sees no wrong in Seroxat, GSK or the blind promotion of SSRI’s..

If he is of David Nutt’s ilk where these issues are concerned then he just cannot be a genuine patient advocate.

Ben might not be a shill (as many claim) but he certainly is not on the side of patients, and definitely not on the side of those who have been injured by defective pharmaceutical drugs. He speaks a lot about ‘unpublished trials’ but little about the devastating effects that defective drugs like Avandia, Vioxx, Seroxat and Zyprexa have on those who suffer serious adverse reactions.

Any morsel of respect I might have had for him gets less so the more I delve into what he really thinks..

This article (quoting David Nutt), about Statins and SSRI’s, that Ben promoted on his blog, does a shameful disservice to anyone who has been harmed by SSRI’s. Furthermore, I reckon a good percentage of Ben’s readership (of Bad Pharma etc) were likely suspicious of industry already and many of them probably think Ben is on the good side of the debate because Ben presents himself as an ‘industry critic’, however I don’t believe that Ben is sincere in that regard.

His Alltrials agenda (however well intentioned it may seem) is going to give Big Pharma even more power, and sway.


Read Healy’s take on it here, and find out.

David (Nutt) believes there is still a great deal of stigma around mental health, which is why sensationalized headlines are still written. The suffering associated with a diagnosis of depression is not valued in the same way as, for example, that of a heart attack, and David believes that by perpetuating the idea that depressed people don’t need medication, their suffering is devalued further.

If the quote above is a clear reflection of what Ben himself thinks about Depression and medication then it’s obvious to me why Ben is not a sincere patient advocate. The pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry have stigmatized people with labels like depression for decades, and patients were further duped by nonsense such as chemical imbalances theories, and the medication for life angle etc. Those with ‘mental’ disorders under any kind of psychiatric regimen, or medication regime, have been treated appallingly for decades. If this is the type of article that Ben endorses then he clearly agrees with Nutt and is completely on the side of biological psychiatry.

However, he is shifty, because, he doesn’t just come out and give his views clearly, he relies on promoting these kinds of articles in order to articulate his own opinions without having the balls to actually say them himself. He refuses to debate with mental health awareness activist bloggers ( and ex-SSRI users) like me, and he uses his popular persona to spread these misinformed (and dangerous) ideas. It is quite clever really, you have to hand it to him, he has a lot of people fooled..

“…But are SSRIs dangerous? David discussed a recent spate of lawsuits regarding the harms from overdosing on SSRIs. However, evidence from the UK Office of National Statistics suggests that the older tricyclic depression medications are far more harmful, but continued to be prescribed due to the confusion in the public mind about the harms of SSRIs, potentially leading to unnecessary deaths…”

If Ben agrees with Nutt here about SSRI’s being confused with Tricylic’s in the public mind then he is even more disingenuous than I thought, and if these views are similar to Ben’s views then it doesn’t surprise me that he was so condescending and dismissive of my previous attempts to engage with him about Seroxat. The SSRI’s are just as harmful as the Tricylics, and in many ways they are more harmful. I’d like to see Ben debate Prof David Healy or Prof Peter Gotzsche  on these issues, but Ben wouldn’t have the balls to do that because he’s too busy self promoting, and running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.

Pick a side Ben, grow some balls, and start giving your readers, and patients, the respect they deserve..

Promoting the rubbish views of the quack Prof David Nutt is an insult to depressed patients and those who have been prescribed toxic SSRI’s…

Of course Ben will just react to a blog post like this with some attack on David Healy, and draw attention to Healy’s past work for Pharma. Healy did do some work for Pharma early in his career, but when he saw how they were hiding trials, which resulted in killing patients, he decided to speak out and stake his career on speaking his mind (that’s a sincere and true patient advocate, something Ben is clearly not).

I know which side Healy is on, with Ben, it’s not so transparent, actually it’s far from clear where Ben is concerned. His positions on issues of patient harm from pharmaceutical drugs are extremely unclear, which is ironic considering all Ben bangs on about lately is ‘transparency’ (which is another post for another day too).

If Ben is the patient advocate that he claims to be then why not debate me, or Bob Fiddaman, or Leonie Fennell, or Prof David Healy, or any number of people who have experiences of SSRI’s, psychiatry and corruption in the pharmaceutical industry? Why not engage with us? Let’s have a recorded debate Ben, with today’s technology we could do it from our laptops…

Seroxat does not work in majority of depressed patients says latest study – Prof Nutt disagrees

Seroxat does not work in majority of depressed patients says latest study – so writes The New Scientist – old news you might think: The antidepressant Prozac and related drugs are no better than placebo in treating all but the most severely depressed patients, according to a damaging assessment of the latest generation of antidepressants. SSRIs, or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, were supposed to revolutionise care of depression – by treating symptoms without the side effects of older drugs, such as tricyclics. But despite selling in vast quantities, a new meta-analysis of these drugs, from data presented to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), appears to suggest that for most patients they do not work. A previous study had indicated that the benefits of antidepressants might be exaggerated. UK and US researchers led by Irving Kirsch of Hull University, UK, studied all clinical trials submitted to the FDA for the licensing of the four SSRIs: fluoxetine (Prozac), venlafaxine, nefazodone, and paroxetine (Seroxat or Paxil), for which full datasets were available. They conclude that, “compared with placebo, the new-generation antidepressants do not produce clinically significant improvements in depression in patients who initially have moderate or even very severe depression”.

However not everyone agrees with these new findings – in the UK, Professor David Nutt has been speaking out against the Kirsch study – using reasoned, scientific argument: “Anti-depressants work in clinical practice,” says Nutt. “Everybody knows they work.” And there’s more – he says the study [Kirsch] itself is rubbish. He says failed drug trials often remain unpublished because their design is shoddy or their results uninteresting. He criticises the PLoS paper as a “mishmash of quality trials and lousy trials leading to a false criticism of these drugs”, which he maintains do help those with depression even if their effectiveness falls below the NICE’s “arbitrary” threshold

Dr Nutt thinks it is misleading to compare these drugs with placebos, since what matters is that they work when compared with some alternatives, such as “talk therapy”, for which he believes there is even less evidence of effectiveness. And still he goes on: “There is good evidence of antidepressant efficacy from other types of studies, especially relapse prevention, which show significant benefit over placebo.”

I wonder why David Nutt takes this point of view? Maybe the answer lies here – Professor Nutt has acted as a consultant to Pfizer, GSK, MSD, Novartis, Asahi, Organon, Cypress, Lilly, Janssen, Lundbeck, Wyeth. He has speaking honoraria (in addition to above) with Reckitt-Benkiser and Cephalon. Grants or clinical trial payments from MSD, GSK, Novartis, Servier, Janssen, Yamanouchi, Lundbeck, Pfizer, Wyeth, Organon. He has shares in GSK (ex-Wellcome). Professor Nutt also promoted Seroxat at Glaxo’s launch of Seroxat for “social anxiety disorder”. Conflict of interest, David? More about Nutt and adult ADHD here.,


Brilliant article on James Holmes and the myriad of psych drugs he was prescribed, by his psychiatrist, prior to the cinema shooting spree in Aurora

The Best Reason to NOT Execute James Holmes: He May Have Been a Victim of Both Medical and Legal Malpractice

The Colorado

Q: If Bartenders can be Held Liable for Violent acts Committed by their Customers, Shouldn’t the Suppliers/Prescribers of Intoxicating Psychiatric Drugs be Considered Accomplices to Crimes Committed by Their Customers/Patients?

The mass murder trial of confessed “Batman Shooter” James Holmes is almost over. The grossly ill-informed jury was somehow convinced by the prosecution that Holmes’s increasingly psychiatric drug-intoxicated brain and the resultant drug-induced insanity had nothing to do with the irrational mass murders at the Aurora, Colorado movie theater on July 20, 2012.

And now this same ill-informed jury, who rejected the insanity plea a couple of days ago, will decide whether or not this victim of Big Pharma and Big Psychiatry (and the tragic “misdiagnosis and over-medication roller-coaster” that he and millions of others in America are on) will either be put to death or imprisoned for life in a non-psychiatric hospital – without possibility of parole. How the most pertinent facts of the case – and the cause of his obvious insanity have been over-looked or willfully ignored by the legal and psychiatric professionals would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. One doesn’t laugh at a comedy of errors.

It is highly possible that the most important details in the Batman Shooter trial have been willfully overlooked by the legal and psychiatric professionals involved in the case. Whether or not there is legal malpractice involved I will leave to ethical legal professionals, if any can be found; but a strong case can be made for psychiatric malpractice – or at least medical malfeasance – in the case of Holmes’s prescribing (University of Colorado health center) psychiatrist, Dr Lynne Felton.  The possibility of either legal or medical malpractice by the involved professionals has not been raised by the journalists who have been breathlessly covering the emotionally-charged aspects of the case since the crime was committed exactly three years ago.

Tough on Crime Prosecution vs. Ill-informed Defense

The lead prosecuting attorney, District Attorney George Brauchler is, as is the norm for most politically motivated, tough-on-crime DA’s, going for the death penalty. The jury rejected the defense’s assertion that Holmes was insane at the time of the infamous shootings and should not be executed Anybody who saw the dazed and drugged look on Holmes’s face at his first hearing will know that he was intoxicated with some drug at the time. Brauchler was the individual who held back the identity of Holmes’s drugs for as long as he legally could. Apparently he even had possession of the pill bottles that had been taken from Holmes’s apartment, thus derailing the defense’s ability to plea insanity or to understand what had altered Holmes’s mind so drastically.

Holmes’s lead defense attorney was Dan King. As with all court appointed lawyers, King was a poorly-reimbursed court-appointed lawyer who never denied that Holmes was the shooter but he also never had the monetary resources to obtain a well-informed psychiatrist of the stature of Dr Peter Breggin, Dr David Healey or Dr Joseph Glenmullen to testify for the defense. He stated in his closing arguments that Holmes is/was schizophrenic, is therefore “not guilty by reason of insanity” (I prefer the phrase “guilty but insane”) and should not be executed. Holmes’s understandably distraught parents agreed.

King argued throughout the trial that Holmes was insane at the time of the shootings and should have been locked up in a long-term psychiatric facility rather than in a penitentiary, where, unfortunately, he would have been subject to the same “treatment” he received before his shooting rampage. He would have been under the care of prescribing psychiatrists with beliefs and prescribing habits similar to Dr Fenton.

It is common knowledge that virtually all American psychiatrists reflexively “treat” with psychotropic drugs over 95 – 98% of their out-patients (and 100% of their in-patients) in various combinations of neurotoxic and psychotoxic, brain-altering chemicals like Holmes’s sertraline (generic Zoloft {Pfizer}, which is known to cause homicidal impulses, suicidal impulses, agitation, mania, psychosis, etc) and the benzodiazepine clonazepam (generic Klonopin {Roche}, which acts on the same brain synapses that the violence-inducing drug alcohol does).

Either one of those two drugs could have easily caused Holmes’s intoxicated brain to become psychotic and homicidally insane. Fenton had prescribed them for Holmes for the past several months, resulting in a state of chronic inebriation which likely caused his decline from a brilliant neuroscience grad student (he graduated with a 3.94 GPA as an undergraduate) into a paranoid, zombified loner who failed an important oral final exam a few weeks before the killings. His failure caused him to drop out of school, a shameful failure in his eyes and the eyes of others. Intolerable shame induces acts of violence, particularly in the isolated, the drug-intoxicated and the hopeless.

In my research about this case (of court records, media reports or testimony from “expert witnesses”) I have found not the slightest hint of anybody’s awareness of what is commonly known about the cocktail of drugs that Dr Fenton had prescribed for Holmes. In addition to the sertraline and clonazepam, Fenton had also prescribed propranolol [generic Inderal, a “beta-blocker” drug which can cause depression and should be used with extreme caution with psychotropic drugs], drugs that Dr Fenton testified under oath that she had increased (to toxic levels, in the case of sertraline) at Holmes’s last clinic visit a few weeks before he did the deed.

Holmes’s Irrational “Under-the-Influence” Weapons Purchases – a Sure Sign of (Probably Drug-Induced) Insanity

Wikipedia detailed the weapons and ammunition that the psychiatric drug-intoxicated Holmes had irrationally purchased in the two months before the massacre. This is clear evidence of how abnormal was the neurological-psychological state of his brain.

On May 22, 2012, Holmes purchased a Glock 22 at a Gander Mountain shop in Aurora. Six days later, on May 28, he bought a Remington 8870 Express tactical shotgun at a Bass Pro Shop in Denver. On June 7, just hours after failing his oral exam at the university, he purchased a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi-automatic rifle from a Gander Mountain store in Thornton, and bought a second Glock 22 pistol in Denver on July 6. All the weapons were bought legally and background checks were performed.  In the four months prior to the shooting, Holmes also bought 3,000 rounds of ammunition for the pistols, 3,000 rounds for the M&P15, and 350 shells for the shotgun over the Internet. On July 2, he placed an order for a Blackhawk Urban Assault Vest, two magazine holders, and a knife at an online retailer. He also purchased spike strips, which he later admitted he planned to use in case police shot at him or followed him in a car chase.

Every So-called Expert in Court, Except Holmes, Was Clueless About the Brain/Drug Connection

Among all the “smartest people in the room” only Holmes seems to have suspected that his psych drugs could have been part of the problem. In a pre-trial interrogation (and in a tone that sounded like he was offended by Holmes having the temerity to suggest that the psych drugs had anything to do with the murder spree), an investigator asked about that notion. Holmes replied: “I’m only saying that I think it is a possibility.”

If there was any thought of Holmes being accused of never showing remorse after having his drug doseages reduced in jail, the jury was shown a videotape of Holmes saying “I kind of regret that she (Dr Fenton) didn’t lock me up so that everything could have been avoided.”

Nobody in a position of authority in the courtroom, the legal “experts” or the psychiatric “experts”, seemed to have a clue about some of the most important issues. And therefore the laypeople on the jury are about to make another life or death decision about the fate of the publicly despised Holmes, who is just another one of the millions of innocent victims of involuntary drug intoxication. How can we feel good about the first of their verdicts if they haven’t been given all the facts?

Justice is not going to be done. And the accomplices to these murders (Big Pharma and the American Psychiatric Association, for starters) will probably go scot-free.

Alarmingly, none of the above “experts” seem to comprehend the serious consequences of Dr Fenton’s decision to, first of all, prescribe three (!) psychoactive drugs to a stressed-out grad student who was suffering a traumatic breakup with his girlfriend; and then, secondly, incrementally raise the doses to increasingly toxic levels (rather than lower them) when the previously brilliant Holmes was losing his cognitive abilities and, suffering the final insult, failing to pass his oral exams.. Dr Fenton testified that, at the last visit, she increased the dosages of all three of Holmes’s drugs, admitting to actually bumping up the sertraline/Zoloft dose to150 mg per day, a potentially lethal dose!! (The normal starting dose for Zoloft is 25 – 50 mg per day.)

Dr Fenton (who was a board-certified specialist in psychiatry) obviously hadn’t heard of (or at least failed to consider) the well documented possibility that a significant minority of Caucasians (10%) are deficient in one of the Cytochrome P 450 liver enzymes that metabolizes/degrades SSRIs into supposedly less potent forms of the chemical. Therefore, not having tested the already suicidal/homicidal, drug-intoxicated Holmes for the possible absence of that enzyme (and the predictable increased toxicity of the drug), there was a 10% possibility that she was lethally poisoning her patient’s brain and body.

But Fenton was very likely an over-busy and therefore a likely over-prescribing psychiatrist who was unaware of the “pure and uncontaminated” (non-pharmaceutical company-influenced) neuroscience literature that has established the above facts.

One wonders if even the budding neuroscientist James Holmes (or his intelligent RN mother and scientist father) was aware of what the drugs were doing to his brain and how dangerous they could be. He showed some awareness of the toxicity of psych drugs in that he refused to accept a fourth prescription for Seroquel offered by Fenton. (Seroquel [AstraZeneca] is a heavily sedating so-called “antipsychotic” drug that is commonly prescribed for insomnia, mania and psychotic symptoms like hallucinations.) Holmes refused this fourth drug because he didn’t want to be too sedated when he was studying for the oral exams that were coming up.

Choosing to not take the witness stand (standard advice given by many lawyers for fear of having their clients chewed up by opposing attorneys) we may never know what serious drug effects he was suffering.

Foolishly Trusting the Corrupted Science of the Multi-national Pharmaceutical Corporations

Instead, Fenton, like the vast majority of her psychiatric and medical colleagues around the nation, believed (and blindly trusted) the corrupted science of the cunning multinational psycho-pharmaceutical corporations who pay for the rat lab experiments (as well as all of the human clinical trials) that lead up to the huge profits the companies hope to make selling their dependency-inducing (aka addictive) blockbuster drugs at criminally inflated prices.

Dr Fenton was probably a true believer in the well-propagandized (and mistaken) notion that Big Pharma’s highly profitable psych drugs (and their equally profitable vaccines) are safe and effective and can be passed out like candy. She, like all the other court psychiatrists (apparently even those that testified for the defense!) did not seem to be aware of the sobering fact that no combination of two or more psych drugs has ever been tested – even in the rat labs – for either long-term safety or efficacy.

Tragically, for the drug-intoxicated brain of James Holmes, Dr Fenton had placed her trust in the psycho-pharmaceutical industry’s pseudoscience – and Holmes will be the one who will suffer from her willful ignorance and misplaced trust. (It should be mentioned that there are charges pending against Fenton for her failure to properly alert authorities about Holmes’s clearly expressed homicidality.)

In Defense of Dr Fenton and Mr Holmes

If being a too-busy doctor is any defense (in a court of law [it is not]), Dr Fenton probably can be forgiven for not taking the time to read between the lines of Big Pharma’s powerful disinformation campaign that affects both prescribers and American consumers of drugs.

The ubiquitous attractive pharmaceutical sales reps that often get in to see the doctors ahead of patients are often able to seduce opposite–sex physicians to prescribe their unaffordable new miracle drugs, by giving them free samples, pizzas, pens and post-it notes that reinforce the messages of the absurd but seductive drug commercials on TV. (By the way, America is only one of two nations on the planet where it is legal to advertise drugs directly to consumers; New Zealand is the other one.) Those commercials create many dumbed-down patients to trust in the drugs that they are then advised to obediently swallow by their equally dumbed-down physicians. Of course we physicians are also easily influenced by the equally absurd medical journal advertising that cunningly shapes our belief systems and prescribing habits.

Was an Informed Consent Form Signed by James Holmes?

There is no reason to think that James Holmes was fully warned by Dr Fenton that taking high doses of sertraline (with or without clonazepam and propranolol) could result in violence, aggression, psychosis, apathy, suicidality or homicidality. Failure to obtain fully informed consent – about serious adverse effects of a drug – is grounds for a medical malpractice lawsuit.

Similarly, because Holmes was a struggling student under the neurotoxic and psychotoxic influence of three brain-disabling drugs, he also may have lacked the time, inclination or cognitive ability to be sufficiently suspicious of his cocktail of synthetic chemicals that were obviously disabling his brain.

If any person was inebriated, sleep-deprived, stressed-out, malnourished and strung out by months of daily ingesting some combination of illicit drugs (that were once upon a time legal substances) such as alcohol, amphetamines, methamphetamine, Ecstasy, heroin, cocaine, morphine, Quaaludes, barbiturates, rape drugs or LSD (with all the adverse effects that could be expected to occur), nobody would question the role of such intoxicating substances if the inebriated person perpetrated some act of aggression.

But Holmes was swallowing legal prescription drugs (that have not yet been declared illegal, as perhaps many of them should be); but we brain-washed sheeple have been led by powerful forces to disbelieve the connections between criminal activities and legal drugs, even though the illegal drugs have molecular structures and mechanisms of action that are indistinguishable from the legal ones.

What the psychiatrist Fenton and the budding neuroscientist Holmes should have been aware of is the fact that the drug industry has never done any long-term safety or efficacy studies on the so-called SSRI (“Selective” [which is a lie] Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors) antidepressants prior to their achieving FDA approval for marketing. Certainly the combination of an SSRI and a benzodiazepine (Klonopin) were never tested in combination for any outcome, even in the rat labs – where the microscopic, neurotransmitter and immunofluorescence studies of drugged brains are done.

Readers of the non-Big Pharma-influenced neuroscience literature (including many of my Duty to Warn columns over the years (available at, are well aware of the overwhelming evidence that brain-altering psychoactive drugs like Zoloft and Klonopin can cause serious neurological/mental aberrations in the otherwise normal brains of people (who might be temporarily sad, nervous, inattentive, hyperactive, sleep deprived, shy or lonely and therefore are at risk of being labeled permanently mentally ill if they ever enter the  mental health “system”).

The range of psych drug-induced abnormalities include this short list: acts of aggression. violence, homicidality, suicidality, akathisia, restlessness, anxiety, insomnia, an “I don’t give a damn” attitude, apathy, loss of memory, dementia, disruptions in academic performance, loss of cognitive abilities, loss of IQ points, remorselessness, manic psychosis, hallucinations, delusional thinking, confusion, depression and other signs, symptoms or behaviors that are irrational or viewed by concerned observers as atypical for the person taking the drug or drugs.

No More Fake News Please

Read what Jon Rappoport, of No More Fake News ( wrote on his blog (at a couple of years ago, shortly after the Aurora shooting.

People don’t get it. The media doesn’t get it and they don’t want to get it. Billions of dollars are riding on the drugs Dr. Lynne Fenton … prescribed to her patient, James Holmes, the accused Batman shooter.

And when billions of dollars in potentially lost revenue are hanging in the balance, the interested parties take action. They’re serious about their money. They don’t screw around.

You see, if James Holmes was, for example, taking Prozac, all of a sudden no one wants to take it. If doctors prescribe it to patients, the patients say, ‘Hey, wasn’t this the drug that nutcase took before he killed all those people in the theater?’

“The bulk of American media is afraid to go after psychiatric drugs as a cause of violence. This fear stems, in part, from the sure knowledge that expert attack dogs are waiting in the wings, funded by big-time pharmaceutical companies.

For much more on the tight connections between the unique American epidemic of school shootings among our over-drugged (and over-vaccinated) males and their psychiatric drugs, go to Rappoport’s “The School Shooting White Paper” at or my column on the issue at: Also go to for a sobering list of >5000 reports of irrational behaviors among people who were taking SSRIs.

Prescription Drugs and Iatrogenic Violence

“Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Toward Others” is the title of a study that was published in 2010 in the Public Library of Science ONE.

The breakthrough study named sertraline and clonazepam as two of a group of drugs closely linked to violence, aggression, physical assaults, physical abuse and homicidality (homicidal ideation and homicidal actions). Dr Fenton probably didn’t read it, nor, in her defense, did many of her colleagues in the industry. If any of them did see the paper, most of them may have deferred to the opinion of their trade organization, the American Psychiatric Association that would likely discredit it.

The authors of the study (Thomas J. Moore, Curt D. Furbert, and Joseph Glenmullen [author of “Prozac Backlash”]) reviewed nearly 2000 cases of violent adverse drug effects that had been reported to the FDA from 2004-09. They found that 31 commonly prescribed drugs, including sertraline and clonazepam, accounted for 79% of all reported cases of violence.

Twenty of the violence-inducing drugs were psychiatric drugs (11 so-called antidepressants (including sertraline), 6 sedative/hypnotics (including clonazepam), and 3 drugs for so-called ADHD). (See my Duty to Warn column on the subject, which includes a ranking of the 31 culprits at

The authors concluded, “These data provide new evidence that acts of violence towards others are a genuine and serious adverse drug event that is associated with a relatively small group of drugs.” If Dr Fenton and Mr Holmes – and perhaps James’s parents – had been aware of this peer-reviewed study, there may have been no Batman Shooting. We need to find out why this study was not widely circulated, why was it suppressed and who did the suppressing?

In 2007, Health Canada, the Canadian drug regulatory authority issued a warning on clonazepam. The agency warned that clonazepam (nearly identical in molecular structure as the notoriously addictive Valium) can make addicts of patients within weeks or months of its use. The agency emphasized that the benzodiazepine drug’s “adverse” effects included hallucinations, delusional thinking, confusion, loss of memory, and depression, all symptoms that James Holmes suffered from.

Dr Fenton and her colleagues probably missed (or ignored) this warning as well, but so did Holmes, his parents, his lawyers, the psychiatric “experts” and all of the journalists covering the trial.

Of course, many other international agencies have issued warnings about psychiatric drug-induced mania, psychosis, aggression, violence, homicidality, suicidality, etc, notably those agencies in the United States, the European Union, Japan, United Kingdom, Australia and Canada. The information is usually ignored by busy or inattentive medical professionals (who may NOT want to know about such unwelcome truths, which then fails to be forwarded to their drug-consuming patients. Big Pharma, with the help of the corporate-controlled media and the medical and psychiatric industries, sees to it that such information stays submerged.

Join me in mourning the totally preventable tragedy of the Aurora mass murder and the loss of a once-brilliant neuroscience student who got tied up in an unforgiving psychiatric system, whose brain was severely disabled by legal neurotoxic drugs and who is now unjustifiably the most hated man in America. And please join the efforts to save James Holmes’s life by forwarding this information widely, especially to ethical lawyers and healthcare journalists who might send it to responsible persons involved in the case.

Dr Kohls is a retired physician who practiced holistic mental health care for the last decade of his career. He writes a weekly column for the Reader Weekly, an alternative newsweekly published in Duluth, Minnesota, USA. Many of Dr Kohls’ columns are archived at

A Few More Things .. Before I Take a Long Break From Blogging…

What the hell were these idiot psychiatrists thinking?

“…A man with a history of mental illness killed his landlord and consumed part of his body two days after he came off his medication under the direction of a psychiatrist in Dublin..”

The Central Criminal Court has been told the medical professionals treating Saverio Bellante (36) in his native Italy believed he should remain on the medication for life.

After the dose of his anti-psychotic medication Olanzapine had been gradually lowered when he came to live in Ireland, the medication was stopped on the advice of a consultant psychiatrist on January 9th, 2014.

“…I have estimated in my book, ‘Deadly Medicine and Organized Crime’, that just one of the many preparations, Zyprexa (olanzapine), has killed 200,000 patients worldwide.”

-Peter Gøtzsche (Internationally respected Danish Professor of the renowned Cochrane research group in Denmark).

Is it no wonder that this guy had a complete psychotic break-down? Did the psychiatrist not realize that Zyprexa (Olanzapine) is one of THE most horrific psychiatric medications out there? I’d go as far as to say it’s just as bad as Seroxat.

In fact, it might even be worse.

I worked with a woman who was prescribed it and I witnessed her literally change into a shell of herself before my very eyes over a period of a few months. She turned into a zombie, her tongue would dart out of her mouth like a lizard, she looked like she was startled all the time, her face would contort, and spasm when she tried to do facial expressions, and her eyes were like pins, she was hallucinating half the time, half asleep the other half of the time and basically out of her head all the time on that disgusting drug. Long term psychiatric patients get worse from this type of psychiatric treatment because the drugs turn them into zombies, I saw it with my own eyes, and I was on Seroxat too, so I understand these drugs. I know the damage they cause. They are lethal! Absolutely lethal!

Robert Whitaker has written extensively about psychiatric meds literally killing patients every goddam day, when is the mainstream media going to wake up to this fact!

“The jury were told that two days before the murder he had attended an out-patient appointment at a Dublin clinic where the anti-psychotic medication Olanzapine he had been on was stopped. The psychiatrist for the prosecution Dr Stephen Monks said Mr Ballante had told him he had attended the clinic since arriving in Ireland in 2011. He attended every two months. Mr Bellante said he had been told that he would have to remain on medication for the rest of his life by doctors in Italy. However, medical records show that between January 2012 and January 2014 Mr Ballante’s anti-psychotic medication was gradually reduced in 2.5 milogramme steps up until 9 January 2014 when it was reduced to zero. Mr Ballante was also on a second medication: a mood stabiliser, sodium valproate. Following blood tests after the murder this was found to be lower than the therapeutic measure generally given. However, Dr Conor O’Neill, psychiatrist for the defence, told the court that one or more doses had perhaps been missed and this medication isn’t the one that keeps psychotic symptoms in check.

Secondly, what the hell was he being prescribed an Epilepsy drug for on top of his Zyprexa withdrawal? Sodium Valporate doesn’t stabilize moods (like it says in the article). The brand name is Epilim, the chemical name is Sodium Valporate- I know this because my younger brother was prescribed it when he was a child. My mother had the good sense to get him off it because he was having fits of rage on it, and mood swings. He was like a demon, and we were all actually terrified of him even though he was just a small child! He would go nuts on EpliIm and it made his fits worse! Now he’s ultra healthy, eats only a very specific healthy diet of whole foods and he goes to the gym most days, and guess what? he doesn’t need meds anymore and has no Epileptic fits anymore.

It seems to me that psychiatry is hell bent on using people for their sick agenda of human experimentation. We’re all just lab rats to them, and the result is- murders, suicides, murder-suicides, and life long psychiatric patients on drug merry go rounds, who never ever get better. Why? Because these drugs are toxic poisons that’s why!

The cure for all ‘psychiatric illnesses’ is not psychiatry, psychiatry compounds the traumas through psychotropic drugs and creates customers for life, and in many cases those customers have a short life, because these meds are killers.

All so called ‘psychiatric disorders’ come from trauma, and you cannot medicate trauma away with mind bending, health damaging, psychotropics! If you could then we’d all be on them and we would be getting better wouldn’t we? but guess what? Nobody ever gets better on long term psychiatric drug treatment. In what other medical specialty would you find that people actually get worse the longer their treatment goes on!

Only in psychiatry do you find that, because psychiatry is a fraud.

Some notes on the horrific Zyprexa drug…

Like Seroxat- Zyprexa causes similar symptoms- and like Seroxat- the withdrawal syndrome is horrendous, cruel and inhuman…

Zyprexa Withdrawal Symptoms: List of Possibilities

Below is a list of symtpoms that you may experience when coming off of Zyprexa. Keep in mind that not everyone will experience every single symptom listed below. You may experience a few of the symptoms or many and the severity of withdrawal will be influenced by individual factors.

  • Anxiety: Many people report very extreme anxiety when they quit Zyprexa. This is a drug that many people find calming and when taken away, a person can feel extremely anxious. Do your best to practice relaxation exercises and recognize that the anxiety is part of withdrawal.
  • Appetite changes: While on Zyprexa, many people experience significant increases in appetite. A person may feel as if they are never full and/or are transforming into Hulk as a result of the food that they eat. When coming off of Zyprexa, most people experience decreased appetite.
  • Bipolar symptoms: Some people may experience a reemergence of Bipolar symptoms (e.g. mania) when they quit taking this drug. If you have Bipolar disorder and are on this medication, proceed slowly and with caution when withdrawing.
  • Concentration problems: If you find it very difficult to concentrate on tasks such as reading, writing, and/or work, you are not alone. Many people have major difficulties with focusing when they are going through withdrawal. This symptom tends to improve over time as your brain adapts to functioning without the drug.
  • Confusion: When you experience a bunch of uncomfortable physical symptoms accompanied by foggy thinking, concentration problems, and emotional disturbances, this can result in a state of confusion. If you feel confused often, just know that this will improve over time.
  • Crying spells: The depression that people experience when quitting an antipsychotic like Zyprexa can be very tough to deal with. This may result in a person crying excessively because they feel so down in the dumps.
  • Depersonalization: Do you feel unlike your old “normal” self? This is because your neurotransmitters are out of balance and have changed since you took the medication. It will likely take your brain some time to reset its homeostatic functioning.
  • Depression: Many people report extreme depression when they stop taking this drug. The depression is thought to be a result of lowered levels of dopamine and serotonin. You should eventually experience some lift in mood after some time off of the medication.
  • Diarrhea: Some people experience diarrhea when they discontinue this medication. This isn’t an extremely common symptom, but one that has been reported. If this is the case, you may want to consider some over the counter Imodium.
  • Dizziness: Among the most common withdrawal symptoms from any psychiatric medication is that of dizziness. It is common for people to feel very dizzy, especially if the tapering was done too quickly. Dizziness will eventually lessen over time as the brain functioning readjusts.
  • Fatigue: Most people report excessive tiredness and general fatigue when they come off of Zyprexa. You may have a difficult time performing everyday tasks because your energy level is so low. Just know that your energy level will eventually return as time passes.
  • Hallucinations: There is evidence pointing to the fact that some people experience psychotic symptoms as a result of withdrawal. This is thought to be a result of changes in dopamine receptor functioning and dopamine levels.
  • Headaches: Some people experience splitting severe headaches when they come off of this medication. Having headaches accompanied by dizziness can be a very difficult one-two punch. Just know that these should subside after your body restores proper functioning.
  • Insomnia: This drug tends to calm people down and in many cases makes them sleepy. When coming off of it, the opposite can be true. Some people report such intense anxiety and an inability to fall asleep.  Insomnia may persist for quite some time after your last dose.  It should improve as you make some lifestyle changes and your neurotransmitter levels change.
  • Irritability: Do you notice yourself becoming increasingly irritable? If you feel more irritable than normal and little things set you off, it may be a result of withdrawal. Neurotransmitter levels are in fluctuation, which is thought to lead to people feeling irritable.
  • Memory problems: It is very common to experience poor memory functioning upon drug discontinuation. It isn’t well known as to why these drugs can lead to memory problems. With that said, most people do experience improvements in memory with time off of the drug.
  • Mood swings: Some people experience pretty severe mood swings upon discontinuation. One minute you may feel as though the withdrawal is over, the next you may feel swamped in a state of deep depression. For this I’m not referring to “bipolar” mood swings, rather just unexpected changes in mood.
  • Muscle cramps: Those who have taken this medication over the long term may experience muscle cramps and/or weakness during the withdrawal process.
  • Nausea: Many people report intense nausea during the time in which they discontinue their medication. The nausea can be severe to the point that a person also vomits. In general, the nausea after the last dose shouldn’t last more than a couple weeks.
  • Panic attacks: Some individuals report experiencing heightened anxiety to the point of panic attacks. In other words, a person experiences such high arousal that everyday activities lead to intense feelings of panic.
  • Psychosis: It has been documented that withdrawal from antipsychotics can cause psychosis. It is not very common to experience this upon withdrawal, but it does happen. Obviously this may signify the reemergence of schizophrenia, but in those without schizophrenia, it can be part of withdrawal.
  • Restlessness: If you feel especially restless for no apparent reason, it is likely due to the withdrawal that you are experiencing. The changes in neurotransmitters, elevated level of arousal, and anxious thinking can make a person restless.
  • Suicidal thinking: It is extremely common to feel suicidal during your withdrawal. You may experience suicidal thoughts that seem as if they will never subside. Over time, these should gradually subside. If you feel suicidal and cannot cope with these thoughts, please seek professional help.
  • Sweating: Many people sweat intensely when they withdraw from psychiatric drugs – this antipsychotic is no exception. If you notice that you are sweating profusely throughout the day and wake up sweating in the middle of the night, just know it’s part of the process.
  • Vomiting: Feel flu-like to the point that you are nauseous and keep vomiting? Some people have reported intense vomiting spells during the first week or two when they initially quit this medication. To reduce this symptom, be sure to wean off of Zyprexa as gradually as possible
  • Weight loss: Taking this drug is known to increase appetite and slow metabolism, which leads to many people gaining weight. Zyprexa is one of the worst drugs for trying to keep weight off – most people eat way too much food on this drug in particular. When you stop taking it and stay off of it for awhile, you should also lose the weight that you gained.

More than half a million people age 65 years or older die every year in the West from psychiatric drug use, and the worst part is that these death pills aren’t even effective at treating either mental illness or depression. Researchers from Denmark’s Nordic Cochrane Centre found that the benefits of psych drugs are minimal at best, and that most people who currently use them would be better off just ditching them entirely.

Published in The BMJ (British Medical Journal), an eye-opening paper by Professor Peter Gotzsche reveals that most antidepressants and dementia drugs are generally useless when it comes to providing tangible relief. The drugs are also vastly overprescribed, he says, and they come with such a high risk of adverse effects that it isn’t even worth it for the average person to try them.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people are dying every year from the normal and prescribed use of psych meds like selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which are linked to causing extreme depression and provoking users towards suicide or even homicide. Add to this the fact that most psych meds have never been shown effective, matching or not even reaching placebo in terms of their efficacy, and there’s no legitimate reason for their continued use.

The other thing I wanted to blog about before I take a rest is GSK’s latest corruption scandal in Romania which is just hitting the headlines.

This article from Reuters sums it up nicely:

Drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline, which was fined a record 3 billion yuan ($483 million) for corruption in China last year and is examining possible staff misconduct elsewhere, faces new allegations of bribery in Romania.

GSK confirmed it was looking into the latest claims of improper payments set out in a whistleblower’s email sent to its top management on Monday. A copy of the email was seen by Reuters.

The company is already probing alleged bribery in Poland, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and Iraq.

The latest allegations say GSK paid Romanian doctors hundreds, and in one cases thousands, of euros between 2009 and 2012 for prescribing its medicines, including prostate treatments Avodart and Duodart and Parkinson’s disease drug Requip.

According to the email, the doctors were notionally paid for speaking engagements, but in three out of six cases, including the most highly paid one, they did not give any speech. The other three medics gave only one speech each, despite receiving multiple payments.

GSK also provided doctors with many international trips and made payments to them under the guise of participation in advisory boards, the email said.

The company said it would look “very thoroughly” into the claims, which cover a period before its pledge in December 2013 to stop paying doctors to speak on its behalf or to attend international conferences.

“We do receive letters of this sort from time to time. We welcome and support the opportunity for people to speak up if they have any concerns,” GSK said in a statement. “Sometimes we do find things and we act on it; sometimes our findings do not substantiate the matters being raised.”

The China scandal, which involved alleged bribes totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, hit GSK’s sales in the country, although Chief Executive Andrew Witty, reporting quarterly results on Wednesday, said its Chinese business was stabilizing.

The sender of the Romania email said its contents would be passed on to the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which are investigating GSK for possible breaches of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

An SEC program provides cash incentives for whistleblowers to report corporate malpractice.

Now why is the media not mentioning the fact that GSK are operating under a so called corporate integrity agreement since 2012; a pact which was originally initiated by the US department of Justice because of GSK’s record breaking 3 Billion dollar fine for fraud (you can read the hundreds of pages of fraud and corruption in the Dept of Justice complaint here).

And you can read through the 122 page corporate integrity agreement here.

I haven’t read though all of it, but I’d be pretty damn sure than the gist of the agreement was that GSK would agree that they would stop being a corrupt, sociopathic, fraudulent company, and start to behave themselves. I reckon that’s reasonable considering they just don’t seem to be able to police themselves, and they also have a knack of destroying patient’s lives with dodgy drugs. It’s only right that they should be forced to comply isn’t it?

So did they behave? No of course not, because GSK are systemically corrupt as all these multiple corruption scandals over several years clearly illustrate.

Corruption IS their business model!

They’ve been doing it for decades, and these fines are just the cost of doing business!

They don’t give a rats ass about patient health, fines, corporate integrity, ethics, or anything else..

They care only for profit!

I expect more GSK scandals over the coming months (they are never ending), but I am taking a break for while. I just wish that more people would speak out, and maybe some journalists would grow some balls and take this rat infested corrupt cartel to task and not leave it to us bloggers to do all the hard work all the time!

So, did GSK break its corporate integrity agreement?

The following articles are worth reading in regards to a possible answer to that question:

Bribery, Business Strategy and Plausible Deniability

Can business strategy in itself be a red-flag of corporate corruption?
In one word,  yes, and I discuss how in a recent guest blog (May 19, 2014) in Ethic Intelligence’s “Experts Corner.” 
I ask, if strategy is pulled back at the C-Suite, does it expose an executive message of strict anti-bribery compliance, while the economics of the sales forecast and corresponding personal incentive packages speak to a “win over everything else” mentality?

A gap in the debate As I shared in the Q and A, I am concerned about the lack of discussion with respect to the corruption risk that front line international sales and marketing personnel face. Specifically, I draw attention to how corporate business strategy can directly contradict, through sales growth plans and incentive compensation packages, the messages of anti-bribery compliance. Such a situation leaves the sales force to decide “what does management really want, compliance or sales?”  While in past  writings I have discussed “compliance as bonus prevention” in the context of  incentive compensation, in the Q and A with Ethic Intelligence, I discuss the role of business strategy as a stand alone red-flag, of which compensation is a sub-set.

I am not alone While I might have thought I was alone in expressing this concern, I recently came across an article by Professor Mak Yuen Teen, published in the Singapore Business Times on May 21, 2014, but also on his blog Governance for Stakeholders, titled “Plausible deniability and graft by MNCs.” By way of background, Professor Mak is an Associate Professor of Accounting at the NUS Business School, Singapore. For his full (and impressive) CV, see here.

In his article, Professor Mak first calls attention to  the recent reports of GSK bribery in China, and GSK’s public reaction as calling the conduct “outside of our processes and controls…” (The Guardian, July 22, 2013). However, Professor Mak goes onto demonstrate the  reporting relationship between Mark Reilly, former head of GSK China (and subsequently charged by Chinese officials), and his supervisor, Abbas Hussain, President of Europe, Emerging Markets and Asia Pacific, who is part of the “corporate executive team of GSK.

As Professor Mak states, with this relationship “direct involvement in the scandal has moved up the chain of command of GSK.” However, notwithstanding the discussion and relevancy of  the “rouge employee” GSK script, there is a far more interesting element to Professor Mak’s writing as relating to corporate strategy.

“Did you wake up from a 10-year nap?” Professor Mak references an on-line comment to the GSK allegations as above, and asks “whether he (GSK CEO Andrew Witty) and the board ought to have at least asked some probing questions when GSK China was reporting strong sales growth over the years proceeding the scandal.” And that is where compliance gets separated from the reality of international sales growth.  Clearly, GSK executives were aware of two basic facts:

  • There was a robust anti-bribery program in place at GSK, as referenced in  public statements. Professor Mak makes reference to a 29 page anti-corruption document, and Tom Fox discusses the GSK Corporate Integrity Agreement (here).
  • There was high sales growth in China.

Therefore, was it in fact what I have called a “zero-sum” game of compliance and sales?  Could those two factors have co-existed?  In other words, and I don’t think is unique at all to GSK, “was it a case of don’t ask, don’t tell,” at the C-Suite, as Professor Mak remarks. When the regional sales numbers were reported into management was it all “high fives,” or did someone ask “hey, how did you get there?” I would ask the same of those who read this, who have been in those rooms, when the sales figures are shared.  What is the message?

Professor Mak focuses on complex multinational corporations (MNCs), where corporate executives are separated from the front line of sales by a deep and wide organizational chart. He asks, “should only executives such as Reilly take the fall while senior management and the board escape accountability…” and “can they really claim that they did not know what was going on…?”  I completely agree with Professor Mak, in that it is a long way from the C-Suite, where compliance programs commence, to the front line of international sales and marketing; however, does that distance justify the escape from accountability in not challenging the “reporting of strong growth in markets well known for corruption.”

Professor Mak thinks not, and makes a compelling case, which is reflective of my own view.  I repeat his conclusion in  its entirety and in bold (just to make sure you get the message):

“It is time for senior management and boards of MNCs to stop hiding behind business conduct codes and anti-corruption and compliance programs, and a “plausible deniability” defense, and address more fundamental questions about the benefits and costs of doing business in highly corrupt countries, their business practices, and how they reward, retain and promote their employees.” From my perspective, it would appear that the “default” for compliance and sales growth in low integrity countries, remains “zero-sum.” Maybe it is time that GSK listen to its own Chief Medical Officer James Shannon whom I referenced in a prior post, when he stated (in an interview with Reuters) that “sometimes you have to step backwards to move forward..” and that it is time for “an entire rethink about our business practice.”

Friday, November 4, 2011

GlaxoSmithKline: Born Again Ethically?

GlaxoSmithKline, a drug company based in the E.U., agreed in 2011 to pay $3 billion to settle the U.S. Government’s civil and criminal investigations into the company’s Medicaid pricing practices and sales practices, including illegal marketing of Avandia, the diabetes drug linked to coronary problems. The settlement amount surpassed the previous record of $2.3 billion paid by Pfizer in 2009. Even so, it is doubtful that $3 billion proffered enough of a punch to motivate either Glaxo’s board or CEO to do what would be necessary to extirpate a corporate culture perhaps too comfortable with cutting corners.

Although $3 billion is a lot of money, the settlement removed “legal uncertainty”—something particularly important to investors. Les Funtleyder, a health-care strategist at a brokerage firm, explains. “I know $3 billion sounds like an astronomical number, but when you live in the world of worst-case scenarios, like investors do, $3 billion is a welcome relief. At least you have certainty.” Accordingly, the drug company’s stock rose 2.96% on the day of the announcement (November 3, 2011) to $44.55 (near its 52-week high) amid a broader market advance of about 2 percent, according to the New York Times.

The market’s verdict may give one pause in believing the statement of the company’s CEO, Andrew Witty. He said that the matters that had been under investigation no longer “reflect the company that we are today.” He went on to say, “In recent years, we have fundamentally changed our procedures for compliance, marketing and selling in the U.S. to ensure that we operate with high standards of integrity and that we conduct our business openly and transparently.” So why did a spokeswoman for the company say on the very same day that negotiations were continuing with the government over whether to include a corporate integrity agreement in a separate case regarding complaints about manufacturing quality at a plant in Cidra, P.R. that had since closed? To be sure, the agreement could provide further penalties for other violations in manufacturing, but prime facie, why should a company’s management that had come to see the light on the importance of business ethics not also see the importance (from at the very least a PR standpoint!) of embracing an integrity agreement?

Just one year before that of the $3 billion settlement announcement, the U.S. Justice Department had accused Lauren Stevens, vice president and associate general counsel of the company, of obstruction of justice and making false statements. To be sure, Stevens was subsequently acquitted of all six charges, but the charges alone point to the possibility of a corporate culture existing that disvalues business ethics. It is very unlikely that such a noxious culture can be eviscerated and replaced wholesale in a year without an extensive replacement of executives on down.

Suggesting that the company’s management would not have had sufficient incentive to radically challenge the operative values at the company, Patrick Burns, the spokesman for Taxpayers Against Fraud, asked, “Who at Glaxo is going to jail as a part of this settlement? Who in management is being excluded from doing future business with the U.S. Government?” For a company with a market value of more than $110 billion and sales of $43 billion in the year ending September 30, 2011, $3 billion with “legal certainty” does not proffer the sort of disincentive that is necessary to get major stockholders on the backs of a board to clean house in terms of a new management. To expect an existing staff (including upper echelons) to suddenly value integrity contradicts the nature of the human personality; replacing the managers wholesale would be necessary. So rather than settling for “legal certainty” on one of the legal matters then facing the company (questions of whether Glaxo violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act were still at issue), investors should have taken note of whether Glaxo’s board had demanded a corporate cleaning of management or simply taken the CEO’s words of least resistance at face value, as if adding procedures and announcing a newly discovered interest in integrity were sufficient.

How often do corporate boards prioritize, much less even mention the need to do what is necessary to radically change a sordid corporate culture? Given that the financial benefits of an ethical climate can be fuzzy while the costs of unethical practices can be discounted mentally due to their apparent low probability (which hides the high risk, which includes bankruptcy), a real kick is typically needed to commence real change sufficient to shift a corporate culture to a new ethical equilibrium. Typically, this requires a transfusion of new blood in and old blood out. Merely adding new blood while retaining even just some of the old can enable the stygian infection to spread to the new. Given what is required to expunge a squalid culture, it is indeed much easier to simply accept at face value the PR-ready asseverations of a seemingly-contrite “born-again” CEO and be done with the matter.

Click to add a question or comment on GlaxoSmithKline regarding its legal settlement and corporate culture with respect to business ethics.

Source: Duff Wilson, “Glaxo Settles Cases with U.S. for $3 Billion,” The New York Times, November 4, 2011. Additional Info on the Cidra plant settlement:

And one last thing..

What do former US Attorney General Eric Holder, GSK, and the firm- Covington & Burling- have in common?

One big huge stinking- revolving-door- syndrome, that’s what!

More on this when I return..

He was one of President Obama’s longest-serving cabinet members. Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will return as a partner at the law firm he had left to become the nation’s top law enforcement official, his new employer said in a statement.

Holder, who led the Justice Department from 2009 to 2015 and was one of President Barack Obama’s longest-serving cabinet members, will return to Covington & Burling, where he was previously a partner from 2001 to 2009, the law firm said.

At Covington & Burling’s Washington, D.C., office, Holder will focus on complex cases “including matters that are international in scope and raise significant regulatory enforcement issues,” the law firm said.

Justice Department scores victory for health consumers

July 3, 2012
British drug maker GlaxoSmithKline didn’t have much to cheer about this week with its guilty plea to criminal charges of illegally marketing drugs and withholding safety data from U.S. regulators.

But Glaxo didn’t have to endure a lot of gloating from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, whose Justice Department extracted the record settlement. Just as his staff was settling the record-breaking fraud case, Holder became the first Attorney General in U.S. history to be held in contempt of Congress. Holder was taken to task by a congressional committee for withholding documents relating to a botched gun trafficking operation known as “Fast and Furious.’’ On Monday, Holder said the contempt charge was a sham, claiming Republicans have made him a “proxy” for President Obama as the election year heats up.

As The Washington Post reported, Holder said the congressional panel was seeking “retribution against the Justice Department for its policies on a host of issues, including immigration, voting rights and gay marriage. He said the chairman of the committee leading the inquiry, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), is engaging in political theater as the Justice Department tries to focus on public safety.’’

Whatever the views on those hot-button issues, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that Holder’s Justice Department has been consistently aggressive in pursuing cases against Big Pharma.

“In 2009, Pfizer Inc. agreed to pay $2.3 billion to settle a federal investigation into whether it promoted the painkiller Bextra off-label,’’ the Wall Street Journal reported. Eli Lilly & Co. agreed to pay $1.4 billion to settle similar charges involving its antipsychotic medicine Zyprexa.’’ And this week’s Glaxo settlement, which still needs judicial approval, was the company’s fourth settlement in the past few years.

Glaxo officials said “we have learned from the mistakes that were made.”

The settlement amounts to another victory for health-care consumers after last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the Obama administration’s landmark health-care reform act.

October 26, 2010 6:48 PM
Covington Advises GlaxoSmithKline on $750 Million FCA Settlement

Posted by Brian Baxter

GlaxoSmithKline has agreed to pay $750 million to settle criminal and civil complaints accusing the company of selling tainted drugs from a shuttered Puerto Rican factory, The New York Times reported Tuesday afternoon. The settlement, which is the fourth-largest ever paid by a pharmaceutical company in U.S. history, calls for GSK to pay $600 million in civil penalties and $150 million in criminal fines as a result of quality control problems at the plant between 2001 and 2005.

Covington & Burling litigation partners Geoffrey Hobart and Matthew O’Connor and special counsel Mona Patel represented GSK in the matter. The firm is longtime outside counsel to the company, having advised GSK on its $253 million acquisition of Laboratorios Phoenix this past June.

The federal government began its own investigation of GSK in 2004 after Cheryl Eckard, a former global quality assurance manager at GSK, filed a qui tam (whistle-blower) suit under the False Claims Act against her employer in U.S. district court in Boston.

“She came to our law firm after having heard about our success in other qui tam lawsuits,” says Neil Getnick, Eckard’s lawyer and a managing partner of New York’s Getnick & Getnick. One of those suits was the $257 million Medicaid settlement Getnick helped extract from Bayer Pharmaceuticals in 2003.

Getnick, who advised Eckard along with partner Lesley Skillen, says that Eckard’s case against GSK stands on its own. While previous whistle-blower settlements against large pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer and Novartis focused on the pricing and marketing of drugs, Eckard’s suit involved claims of how those drugs were made. (Scott Tucker of Boston’s Tucker, Heifetz & Saltzman served as local counsel to Eckard.)

“This is the first whistle-blower recovery for pharmaceutical manufacturing violations,” Getnick says. “This case is far more serious because it focuses on the quality of the drugs that were being produced, and specifically says that what was once the largest plant in the world for GSK was producing and releasing adulterated product. So this is not only a case of financial concern, but also one of patient safety, and that’s what separates it from every one up until now.”
Eckard stands to receive $96 million from the settlement paid by GSK, according to a Justice Department statement. Skillen notes that that GSK’s factory in Cidra, Puerto Rico, produced about $5.5 billion in pharmaceutical products annually for the London-based drug giant.

The GSK subsidiary pleading guilty to the charges, SB Pharmco Puerto Rico, entered a guilty plea on Tuesday. Getnick says that the state governments and the District of Columbia covered under the settlement will now execute their own 51 agreements, which could add to the whistle-blower windfall Eckard stands to receive.

The Justice Department filed its notice of intervention in the case on Tuesday, adopting the complaint filed by Eckard’s lawyers.

“This is one of the rare, if not unique, situations in a case of this size and dimension that the government did not feel the need or desire to substitute their complaint on top of the one that the relator and relator’s counsel filed,” Getnick says.
Covington’s Hobart did not respond to a request for comment.

GSK outside Counsel Eric Holder- now Attorney General ?

Discussion in ‘GlaxoSmithKline‘ started by Anonymous, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:18 AM.

  1. Anonymous
    Anonymous Guest
    OK, GSK– thought you were wise asses, getting Daniel Troy formerly Cheif Counsel for the FDA, who pissed on patients rights on the governments dime. Now you rold attorney, Eric Holder comes from defending you to go to the AG office. Sources close to Holder say that even though he may have prostituted himself for big Pharma, including also Merck and Pfizer…that he now knows the ins and outs of how you do business. It does not look good for you hopefully under Holder as AG. He has seen the corruption, knows what you do and how you do it. If you are being investigated as alleged by the Department of Justice, he will be watched by all groups interested in cleaning up the industry.
    The fraud and corruption….and yes murder for big bucks and market share will come to a halt. If it does not and he goes easy on the crooks like GSK…it will be a rough road for him. Many Senators know what he did in private practice and all are pushing for criminal as well as civil punishments that finally fit the crimes. WE will see if the small multimillion dollar fines continue and then companies go about business as usual, making money and showing that crime does pay. Hopefully some Senior Executives responsible for gross unethical, illegal and immoral conduct will be jailed and the “death sentence” given to companies who have defrauded Medicare and other Federal programs for billions of dollars.
    Only time will tell what Eric Holder will do, but look out, he seems to be honest and follows the letter of the law. If he does that, patients and payors alike will be well served… and you, GSK should be up the proverbial creek. There is not a single drug that you sell that this country cannot do without, period.

Former General Counsel of GlaxoSmithKline Joins Covington & Burling as Senior Of Counsel


March 6, 2002 – LONDON, U.K.- International law firm Covington & Burling is pleased to announce that James Beery, who recently retired as Senior Vice President and General Counsel of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world and the UK’s second largest company, will join the firm as Senior Of Counsel from 18 March.
    Mr. Beery practiced law in London, New York and Tokyo for more than twenty years before joining SmithKline Beecham plc (SB) as General Counsel in 1994. Following SB’s £114bn merger with Glaxo Wellcome in 2000, he served as General Counsel of the combined company, with more than 500 legal staff and global responsibility. GSK operates in more than 100 countries.
    Mr. Beery, a graduate of Harvard College and Stanford Law School and a former US Marine, says “Covington attracted me as a firm with a strong academic tradition and an unmatched life sciences practice.” During his break following retirement from GSK, Mr. Beery helped teach a course at Stanford Law School, and he intends to continue his relationship with Stanford while at Covington. “As a general counsel, one gains a different perspective regarding both business and the practice of law. I hope that my industry experience will bring value to Covington and its clients.”
   “Jim’s arrival is wonderful news for our clients and the firm. He would have been a great asset at any international firm, particularly one like ours which focuses on Life Sciences” says Stuart Stock, managing partner, “ We are delighted Jim chose Covington.” “Jim is joining our London office as it enters a new stage of growth and development. Our expanding corporate and regulatory Life Sciences lawyers will enjoy calling on his industry expertise”. says Kurt Wimmer, Managing Partner of the London office.

Time Out..

It’s that time of the year where my energy for blogging is just completely sapped so I think it’s time for a break. It’s been a long long road, these last 8 years, and it gets hard sometimes to keep up the pace. I have invested a lot of time and energy in blogging about GSK and Seroxat and to be honest, I’ve had some real bad experiences along the way too. I have learned that you can trust very few people in this kind of arena, and some people are not what they seem at all. There are, however, people such as Bob Fiddaman and Leonie Fennell who I would literally trust with my life. These two people are fearless, selfless mental health campaigners who have undoubtedly saved lives through their activism. We all have. I have no doubt about that now.

There are many more people, who I have met along the way, who have been inspiring; too many to list here now.

The information that we (as mental health bloggers, pharmaceutical critics, and activists) have provided over the years has done a lot of good. However, activism can also be very draining. I don’t often talk about my own personal problems, or issues, and I’m not going to start now, but what I will say is, nobody ever fully recovers after being through something like Seroxat, particularly if you took it long term and had a protracted withdrawal. There is nervous system damage, and strange long term symptoms (which only others who have experienced it would understand). Sudden noises still make me jump, the nightmares never went away, and there is always that dark  void (which nearly 4 years on Seroxat is bound to cause) rumbling away in your psyche.

You don’t get sympathy for drug damage and there really is no cure, or even treatment, because the medical profession just doesn’t want to acknowledge it. It’s a can of worms which they dare not open. So in affect, you are punished twice, once on the drug and then forever after it for the damage. You’re kinda left feeling a bit like a freak (and I’m sure some of my ‘enemies’ out there would love to hear that- but it’s true so there you go).

The damage can’t be undone, but I need to rest for a while, and maybe turn my mind to other things.  I don’t have a lot, but I do have my soul, it’s often all I have to keep me going, and I need to protect it for a while, at least until I am stronger. The blog always pulls me back in because getting the word out about all this stuff is just too damn important, and I’m sure I’ll get sucked back in sometime in the future, but I’m definitely taking a break for now.

Thanks for comments, follows and tweets  (they are all valued), but most importantly, thanks for reading. Catch you all soon 🙂

GSK Announces New Breakthrough Drug..

GSK have announced a new breakthrough drug ‘Stoopidaprix’ for the treatment of Sociopathy- a terrible affliction which affects up to 3% of the population…

Page_1 Page_2 Page_3 Page_4 Page_5 Page_6 Page_7 Page_8


Just kidding of course.. that was just some satire and parody…

However GSK have got a new drug called Mosquirix approved (which is for the treatment of Malaria).

The press is gushing sycophantic praise for it by the shed full however some of us aren’t so easily convinced. GSK’s Seroxat and Avandia drugs were both hailed as wonder drugs but they ended up being anything but..

When I think of Mosquirix, I think of Pandemrix and the havoc which that vaccine has caused…

We won’t find out the full effects of this vaccine for a few years, and by then millions of Africans will already be vaccinated with it..

Let’s hope for their sakes it’s not another Seroxat, Avandia or Pandemrix..

It’s a GSK drug and you just can’t trust their trials, their ability to be ethical, or their propaganda..

“…The latest results, published in the Lancet medical journal in April, showed that the vaccine works better in children from the age of five months than in younger babies. This means it cannot be added to the routine infant vaccination schedule. Another drawback is that it is a multi-dose vaccine, and its effect wanes over time so a booster shot is needed…”

Brian Greenwood, professor of clinical tropical medicine at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who has been involved in the project for two decades, has described the vaccine as “imperfect”..”

RIP Jane

I don’t often put personal stuff on my blog, but I just wanted to do a small tribute to my grandmother who passed recently. She had a great send off, her wake and funeral were both beautiful. She was much loved, and cherished, for all of her 86 years on this planet. She was the kindest, most gentlest soul, generous to a fault, and she never had a bad word to say about anyone. She really was like a Buddha.

In her late 40’s, she gave birth to twins (her 10th and 11th children). She suffered post-natal depression, was subsequently hospitalized and given electro-shock -in the late 70s. She was also prescribed all sorts of meds over the years. I know this affected her health, particularly in later years, as she developed memory loss and then dementia, however her spirit was so strong and she fought long and hard right up until the very end. She bore 11 children,  and she had 36 grandchildren plus 16 great grandchildren (and I’m sure there are many more to come). She was a remarkable lady, we all loved her dearly, and will miss her so much. Her strength and generosity of spirit, her sense of charity, humor, and her kindness and character, will forever inspire me. She loved animals, her family, children, and music. In particular she loved Leonard Cohen, and this one was one of her favorite songs.

RIP Gran.

See you on the other side xx

Andrew Witty’s Zyban Drug Linked To Dozens Of Deaths

LONDON, UK — January 16, 2007

“Wellbutrin XR is an important new medicine for doctors and patients in Europe,” comments Andrew Witty, president, GSK Pharmaceuticals, Europe. “Depression can be a crippling condition that is often difficult to treat. With its unique mode of action, Wellbutrin XR offers a real alternative to the depressed patient. We hope its profile will help patients stay on their therapy, which would address a significant unmet need in the area of antidepressants.”

Many people are unaware that Zyban (the so called ‘anti-smoking pill) is an antidepressant which is also marketed by GSK as Wellbutrin. It is the same chemical compound but its marketed for different things. When GSK CEO Andrew Witty was woking his way up the slimy corporate ladder at GSK, he had a role as head of marketing, and Wellbutrin (Zyban) was one of the big drugs which he was involved in promoting. Is it no wonder then that Witty has never addressed the Seroxat Scandal? Perhaps he doesn’t care much for people damaged and dead from anti-depressants? maybe we’re just human road kill on the greedy GSK profit seeking super-highway. Maybe he just doesn’t give a damn- because it seems he has no problem pushing anti-depressants on the public, even if those anti-depressants eventually end up in the news for all the wrong reasons…

GlaxoSmithKline Admits Zyban
Linked To 35 UK Deaths
Since Last June
By Paul KelsoThe


GlaxoSmithKline, the world’s second largest drug company, conceded yesterday that the anti-smoking drug Zyban was suspected of causing adverse reactions in 35 people who have died in the UK since it was introduced last June.

The acknowledgement came at the inquest of Kerry Weston, 21, a British Airways air hostess who was found dead in a hotel room in Nairobi, Kenya, in January, two weeks after she began taking the drug to help her quit her 15-a-day habit.

Giving evidence on behalf of the pharmaceutical giant, Dr Howard Marsh, senior medical adviser on Zyban to Glaxo, said that while there had been 35 deaths following adverse reactions to Zyban, there was no conclusive proof that any were directly linked to the drug.

“Although there has been this number of reports of fatal events, it has to be said these are suspected adverse reactions,” he told the inquest at Hertford coroner’s court. “We are very keen to look at each and every one of these cases very, very carefully to see if there is a contribution from Zyban to any of these deaths. But the contribution of Zyban to any of them remains unproven.”

Zyban, which is taken in pill form, has been prescribed to 360,000 patients in the UK. Of that number, 5,352 have reported adverse reactions. Zyban is a “black triangle” drug, meaning it is new to the market and has therefore to be monitored closely.

The Committee on the Safety of Medicines (CSM), which monitors the introduction of new drugs and has scrutinised Zyban use, said these figures where consistent with its expectations.

“Zyban is used in a population of patients who are put at risk because of smoking and, therefore, reports of deaths of patients receiving Zyban are to be expected,” said Professor Alasdair Breckenridge, CSM chairman.

“Where information is available, the majority of patients who died had underlying conditions that provide an alternative explanation. The CSM considers that the reports received are in line with the known safety profile of Zyban, which is fully reflected in the product information for health professionals and patients.”

The inquest into Ms Weston’s death heard that in addition to Zyban she had taken non-prescription anti-malarial tablets and a sleeping compound on the day she died. Dr Marsh told the court that in future Glaxo would be warning that Zyban should not be taken in conjunction with anti-malarial drugs.

He said people with a history of seizures, epilepsy, manic depression or liver disease were already warned not to take the drug.

Ms Weston was prescribed the drug by the BA cabin crew GP, Dr Mark Andrew.

“She described great difficulty with the problem of smoking,” Dr Andrews told the inquest.

“She requested help with this … and what she called the pill for smoking.”

Aware that the drug was under scrutiny, Dr Andrews prescribed a fortnight’s supply and told Ms Weston to return when she had taken the pills.

Her mother, Eileen Weston, told the court that shortly after her daughter began taking Zyban she passed out at Gatwick airport after returning from Baltimore.

“She remembered feeling unwell and then all she remembered was waking up on the bathroom floor as if she had gone to sleep,” Mrs Weston said. “Her words were that she thought she had fallen asleep in the bathroom but her head was very sore when she stood up.”

Shortly afterwards, Ms Weston flew to Nairobi. Colleagues on the plane said she seemed well, but became concerned when she failed to turn up for a drink in the cabin crew’s hotel.

Steward Philip Stuart said hotel staff had to force open the door to her room. He said: “We could see Kerry inside lying on the floor with her head close to the door. “We put our hand in and felt her neck. She was still warm and clammy.”

When the group entered the room they discovered Kerry had vomited and that her nose and legs were turning blue.

Zyban or bupropin hydrochloride, developed as an anti-depressant, was found to ease the desire for nicotine, even in heavy smokers. It works by supressing the neurotransmitters dopamine and noradrenaline – the brain’s “pleasure centres” – which are stimulated by nicotine. Glaxo sank millions into marketing it. More than 1m Americans claim to have stopped smoking after taking the drug.

Antidepressant Wellbutrin becomes ‘poor man’s cocaine’ on Toronto streets

By Jennifer Tryon and Nick Logan Global News

Video: A popular antidepressant has found its way to the streets & become known as the “poor man’s cocaine.” Global National’s Jen Tryon explains.

WARNING: This post contains graphic images that some viewers may find disturbing.

TORONTO – The first time Marty MacDonnell injected Wellbutrin he had no idea what else was going into his veins.

He gets the drug from his doctor to treat depression. It’s one of Canada’s most popular and easily accessible prescription drugs. He also buys it on the streets, where it can go for $2.50 per pill.

In fact, some refer to it as the “poor man’s cocaine.”

Users say it gives them a crack-like high at a much cheaper price.

“I’ve got, in all my time using it, I’ve probably got a good rush maybe half a dozen times, like it was an actual cocaine high,” MacDonnell said. “The rest of the time it’s just speed. Or like a high dose of caffeine just keeps me very alert, that’s about it.”

But, on some nights he has taken as many as 10 pills.

Bupropion, the pharmaceutical name for Wellbutrin, is also marketed as the smoking cessation drug Zyban, which can be bought over the counter without a prescription.

The pill contains binding agents that make it easy to swallow. They’re harmless when the pill is taken properly, but not when it’s crushed and inhaled or injected with a syringe.


The proof of the risks associated with shooting Wellbutrin or Zyban is all over MacDonnell’s body.

You can count on his skin nearly every time he’s done it.

“Somebody asked me what happened to my arm and I told them a shark bit me,” MacDonnell said.


Toronto’s The Works Needle Exchange and Harm Reduction Supplies has seen a steady rise in skin abscesses, collapsed veins and clogged arteries attributed to injecting Zyban and Wellbutrin.

“I’m very worried about Wellbutrin right now,” Toronto Public Health physician Dr. Leah Steele told Global News. “[It’s not] on the radar of most physicians.” The first time she heard of anyone abusing it was about three years ago, when a patient spoke of a friend injecting it.

Now, it’s estimated that nearly half of Toronto’s injection drug users have now tried it.

Out of 75 patients on a methadone program at The Works, Steele said half of them have tried injecting Wellbutrin. On top of that, she said it’s readily available in the prison system.

It also worried Dr. Dan Cass, Ontario’s Chief Coroner, who issued a warning about the Bupropion in May after at least six deaths as a result of abusing the drug.

“We’re aware of cases where the injection of the drug and the damage to the tissue from that injection is what directly lead to the death,” Cass told Global News.

“When used in the way it’s prescribed it’s a relatively safe and fairly effective drug,” he said. “[But] one of the properties when it’s ground up and injected is it’s very caustic, so it tends to do a lot of damage to issues and to some of the deeper structures.”

“One death in particular involved an injection into a blood vessel in the neck,” he explained. “The subsequent damage to the tissue cased damage to the spinal cord and [the individual] bled to death.”

Cass is trying to warn physicians about the potential for Wellbutrin and Zyban abuse.

“I think the thing that surprises me most about this is that people continue to do it even after they’ve developed the most gruesome lesions that you could imagine,” Steele said. “The drug is still compelling enough for them to keep injecting it.”

“These wounds from Wellbutrin are different because they really erode the whole tissue around the injection area,” Steele said, adding the wounds can get “very invasive infections” that can lead to death.

MacDonnell has been treated for wounds on his skin, some of which have gone so deep they’ve reached the bone.


“That’s when I woke up I took a look at my arms and said ‘Oh, Jesus. You’d better smarten up and get something done with this,’” he said.

The problem for MacDonnell is that he still needs to take Wellbutrin.

“I’ve suffered depression most of my life, so I think that’s how I got on it,” he said.

Livingstone’s drug treatment has become an issue at the inquest because it has heard suggestions the rape over five hours which led to the break up of his marriage was caused by a psychotic episode brought on by a combination of the anti-smoke drug zyban and escitalopram.

Page_1 Page_2 Page_3 Page_4

Page_5 Page_6 Page_8 Page_7

Michelle McCann Took Seroxat For 20 Years…

My heart absolutely breaks when I read of cases like this. I can only imagine how utterly devastating it must have been for this woman to be addicted to Seroxat (Paxil) for 20 years. No doubt Michelle was initially probably not warned of side effects, dependence or withdrawal when she first went on the drug. None of us were warned in the 90’s and early 2000’s. The depression and anxiety which Seroxat induces is inhuman. It is only the last few years that we have seen the real truth about Seroxat’s devastating effects come to light. However there is still much we don’t know. The only way we can get the full information on Seroxat is through litigation against GSK. The Seroxat trial will likely be heard in the high court sometime over the next one to one and a half years or so, and I think it would be fitting for me to attend and blog about the proceedings. The family of Michelle McCann deserve to know the full story about Seroxat, and GSK will have to disclose the files which they have kept hidden for decades. I hope that the truth will out, and justice will prevail. RIP Michelle, and RIP to all those who died from Seroxat/Paxil induced suicide/homicide/violence over the past decades. As a Seroxat survivor it’s my duty to keep on blogging. There are many thousands of us Seroxat and SSRI survivors, and we won’t be silenced…

“She was suffering with depression and severe anxiety and was under the care of Grimsby-based mental health service Navigo at the time, having been admitted to its mental care facility Harrison House, in Peaks Lane, as an informal patient following several attempts to self-harm and take her own life, including overdosing on 40 paracetamol tablets.”

July 23 2015

MichelleMcCann42-year-old Michelle McCann (right) died in hospital on New Year’s Day in 2014. She had jumped from the top floor of a multi-storey car park in Grimsby just five days earlier, landing on the roof of a car.

Michelle, who had been taking Seroxat for 20 years, had been admitted to a mental care facility as an informal patient following several attempts to self-harm and take her life. Two days after Christmas, Michelle was collected by her father Anthony, who said that he was surprised when nurses let her go out on her own without a carer with her.

Anthony told the inquest: “She was shaky and trembling.” He said he was surprised and told staff of his concern after a previous incident when she went out shopping on her own and later returned and cut herself.

Before taking his daughter into town, Anthony questioned staff as to whether she could go alone. He told the inquest a nurse had told him that Michelle was better after taking new medication and having had a good night’s sleep.

On Monday of this week, coroner Paul Kelly recorded a verdict of suicide.

Mosquirix: GSK’s new Malaria Vaccine? .. Will it be safe?

GSK are heavily promoting their new Malaria vaccine, Mosquirix, at the moment, and of course the press are gushing sycophantic praise for it by the bucket-load. It has just been approved in Europe but personally, I’d take my chances with Malaria rather than take any GSK product. They just can’t be trusted to produce safe drugs because their safety record leaves a hell of a lot to be desired.

For example, their flu vaccine, Pandemirix, which was heavily touted for the (media generated) flu-scare a few years ago, has been shown to be extremely dodgy indeed, and many patients are now suing GSK because they have developed Narcolepsy because of this vaccine. Then of course we have the two most notorious GSK drugs of recent times, the killers – Seroxat (a dangerous anti-depressant which induces suicide) and Avandia (a diabetes drug which causes heart attacks)- the death toll, and scale of human misery, from those two drugs alone easily reaches into the hundreds of thousands.

Not forgetting of course, GSK’s Myodil dye, which has caused immeasurable pain and damage to tens of thousands of people for decades. Even with the GSK drugs which aren’t killers, GSK’s track record of inflating the positives, and hiding the negatives, when it comes to side effects, and clinical trials, is well known in the industry and beyond.

Their 3 Billion dollar fine with the department of justice consisted of a couple of hundred pages of various unethical shenanigans with various drugs over the years, and this is only the skullduggery that they were caught doing, imagine what they really get away with? They don’t call GSK, the “GLOBAL SERIAL KILLERS” for nothing, you know what I mean?

Mosquirix, no thanks.. I’ll take my chances with Malaria..

Because at least with Malaria, you know what you’re getting…

Page_1glaxo_s-avandia hqdefault nuns pandemrix_flu_vaccine_linked_to_narcolepsy_uk_study pandemrix1


120703095520-exp-early-kosik-myb-gsk-settlement-00005524-story-topF201307251557451943432574 image7171781xflu+shot+narcolepsy


the ecosystem approach to obgyn

My Life in my 60's

Finding joy in my 60's

The Vile Mint

Poetry, Short Stories and Violent Ideas



Rebel City Writers

A radical perspective on local, national and international issues from the pens of a few disgruntled agitators!

Critical Dispatches

Reports from my somewhat unusual life

~ L to the Aura ~

sustainability. compassion. inspiration.

Heroes Not Zombies

becoming not being.......

DES Daughter Network

Because Social Media increases Awareness and brings the DES Community Together

recovery network: Toronto

people can and do recover from what is sometimes called "mental illness"

Deidra Alexander's Blog

I have people to kill, lives to ruin, plagues to bring, and worlds to destroy. I am not the Angel of Death. I'm a fiction writer.

%d bloggers like this: