Tagged: GSK products

New Seroxat Videos on YouTube


There’s a ton of new Seroxat related videos on Youtube, some of them seem very good indeed, they seem to be a mix of piss take and seriousness and they are well worth a look, here’s a sample of a few of them and you can check out this new seroxat channel here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/SeroxatStuff (new Seroxat related youtube channel – 22 in total)

http://youtu.be/wQTpmhmQCS4

Seroxat Secrets asks : “Can you really believe they said this?”


Great new post over at Seroxat Secrets detailing some (quite amazing) GSK quotes about Seroxat over the years. It really is utterly remarkable how they get away with this crap….

http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/can-you-really-believe-they-said-this-2012-reprise/

Can you really believe they said this – 2012 reprise
May 12, 2012 — admin
They say hindsight is 20/20 vision.

Well, here are a bunch of quotes I’ve posted over the years for you to consider with the gift of hindsight.

It’s not possible really to measure total serotonin. We do not know with absolute certainty about how any of the antidepressants work.
Alan Metz
Glaxo Vice President for Clinical Development
source: Generation RX

No, we are not misleading them [patients]. The information in the patient leaflet and in the information we supply to doctors, is based on fact.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
10/13/02

….there have been a number of systematic studies in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence. So actually, there is data to date to negate the statement that it has not been systematically studied, because, in fact, it has been.
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services
10/19/2000

Physical and Psychologic Dependence: PAXIL has NOT been systematically studied in animals or humans for its potential for abuse, tolerance or physical dependence. While the clinical trials did not reveal any tendency for any drug-seeking behavior, these observations were not systematic…
GSK Patient Information Leaflet

If ‘discontinuation reactions’ occur in patients stopping [Paxil], the majority will experience symptoms that are mild to moderate in intensity, and are usually limited to two weeks.
Mary Anne Rhyne
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson
2005

Drugs like Seroxat [Paxil] have been around for almost a decade and help millions of people fight depression. There’s no reliable scientific evidence to show they cause withdrawal symptoms or dependency.
Alan Chandler
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson

These problems [’discontinuation reactions’] are just the body’s adjustment when you stop taking medicines. It takes more than that to be addictive.
Mary Anne Rhyne
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson
8/21/2002

The side effects [of Paxil “discontinuance”] are things like dizziness, nausea, headache, um, and are clearly labeled in the information made available to doctors and patients.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director
Source: GSK’s web site 2004

I think patients have nothing to fear from taking Seroxat.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director
6/13/2002

Experts including the FDA and leading physician and mental health organizations agree that antidepressant medications like Paxil are non-habit-forming.
David Stout President
US Pharmaceuticals
GlaxoSmithKline
10/10/2002

It was quite clear from talking to patients and as a doctor that’s very, very important to me, it’s quite clear that the phrase “Seroxat is not addictive” was poorly understood by them.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
5/11/03

I think you have to develop a culture where if there is bad news you don’t sit on bad news. Bad news does not get any better. It can only get better if it’s admitted, understood and addressed.
Robert (Bob) Ingram
Vice Chairman, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals
8/25/2002

We’re reviewing every single process at the company. The environment of the business has changed after Enron. I believe that there was a lack of trust [on the part of] the public for big business, and that lack of trust has been amplified by a few bad apples in the cart. And because of that, there has been a tremendous loss of trust in all big business not just pharma and that has implications to me as a CEO.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
10/4/2004

Obviously doctors are very busy people, and their day is packed with patients. The question is how do doctors get information about medicines and new research into treatments and disease, and one of the easiest ways is this kind of presentation [”dine and dash”]. We think this is a benefit to both physicians and patients.”
Mary Ann Rhyne
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson
11/11/2002

We don’t want to be accused of anything about the way we deal with trials.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
6/21/2004

As a knowledge-based industry we understand full well the value of information, and we want to create a climate of openness where the evidence for prescribing our products is clear.
Richard Sykes
Chairman of Glaxo Wellcome
6/19/2004

I think if, if we’ve been guilty of anything over the past few years, perhaps, um, emphasizing entertainment over education, um, we know that’s what patients really want.
Christopher Viehbacher
GlaxoSmithKline U.S. President
8/16/05

Seroxat does have side effects, but these are clearly stated in the information that’s made available to doctors and to patients.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
10/13/02

My wife thinks J.P. [Garnier] is the best thing since sliced bread.
Christopher Viehbacher
GlaxoSmithKline U.S. President
7/21/03

We are a high-integrity company. We know what the rules are and we follow them.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
6/6/2004

The vast majority of drugs more than 90 per cent only work in 30 or 50 per cent of the people, I wouldn’t say that most drugs don’t work. I would say that most drugs work in 30 to 50 per cent of people. Drugs out there on the market work, but they don’t work in everybody.
Dr. Allen Roses
GlaxoSmithKline Senior V.P.
Genetics Research
12/8/2003

If anyone thought drugs were without side-effects, hopefully that’s over. All drugs have side-effects. We are having to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on lawyers.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
4/23/2005

We follow the law, and we follow government guidelines.
Mary Anne Rhyne
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson
8/26/2005

This is a company that is reinventing itself … possibly creating a model for pharma companies.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
7/21/03

The evidence, however, is clear, these medicines are not linked with suicide, these medicines are not linked with an increased rate of self harm.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director
10/3/2004

So we always want to make sure we are serving the good, the right purpose….
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services
9/9/2004

I’ll be a hero in three years.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer GlaxoSmithKline
4/5/2004

I am sure it happens because academics are very, very busy people, and they prefer to do research than spend a lot of time writing papers. If the industry puts forward a method of relieving them of that chore, then I am sure that that does happen throughout the industry. That would be true generally. Is it a good idea? I think it can be, as long as everybody is in agreement with what is written at the end of the day, the results and what they are.
Sir Richard Sykes
former Chairman of GlaxoSmithKline
On the industry practice of “ghostwriting medical reports” and “gift authorship.” 12/7/2004

We have acted responsibly in conducting clinical studies in pediatric patients and the dissemination of the results. We would strongly disagree with any allegation that we have done otherwise.
Dr. Tadataka Yamada
Chairman of Research and Development
GlaxoSmithKline
6/19/2004

You can experience symptoms, as you can with other SSRIs and as you can with other kinds of medicines as well.
Mary Anne Rhyne
GlaxoSmithKline spokesperson
12/13/2003

What we have seen in terms of the anecdotal reports [of Paxil withdrawal] is that it happens very rarely.
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services
8/25/2000

While GlaxoSmithKline strives to produce medications that safely and effectively treat medical conditions, we’re also committed to protecting the environment.
Dr. Anne Phillips
Chief Medical Officer of GlaxoSmithKline

source: GlaxoSmithKline

As you can see here, few numbers of patients experienced any adverse event after being randomized off [Paxil] into the placebo group and the percentages are certainly very small. But these were the common adverse events seen in that small population in our attempt to systematically assess a discontinuation syndrome.
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services Excerpt from a transcript of the FDA Review of Paxil
10/5/1992

I have my iPod and my Bose headphones. You can run anywhere. I’m in a bubble. When I go home I don’t talk about my job. It drives my wife crazy because when we go out she doesn’t know anybody. Socially we see politicians we have to and she knows nothing about the issues. But that’s the way I like it. I want to go home and say, ‘hey what happened to you?’ I have a very demanding job and I don’t want to go home and discuss the same stories.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
4/23/2005

We feel strongly that we have an obligation to speak up both for the millions of patients that Seroxat allows to lead a normal life, and for our employees whose commitment to this important medicine has made such a positive difference to so many people.
Eddie Gray
General Manager
GlaxoSmithKline UK
10/10/2002

My mum, you know, she thinks her son walks on water…..
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
4/23/2005

….recognize that in the final analysis success rests on selecting the right people to work with. If you have the right people, the rest will follow.
Jan Leschly
Former CEO of SmithKline Beecham

It’s becoming too easy for many people to attack the pharma industry and hold the pharma industry to standards that are higher than anywhere else. I don’t have a problem with the standards….

Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
6/6/2004

Of course we didn’t follow this advice. Of course we didn’t selectively publicize the data. This is not a smoking gun. It’s a stupid memo and there are lots of stupid memos in every company’s file and it is really unfair to look at the company’s action through the small hole of one memo written among thousands and thousands in 1998. I do regret that those memos exist but I’m not going to lose sleep over the fact.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
6/6/2004

I utterly refute any allegations we are sitting on data, that [we] have withheld data or anything like that. We have provided all the data both relating to safety and efficacy in the pediatric population to the regulatory authorities around the world and have hidden nothing.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
6/15/2003

Corporate responsibility is not just a job for selected people at GSK, it defines the way we do business. Our ten corporate responsibility principles set thestandard for everyone, since responsible business is only a reality if it is practised by all employees at all times.
Christopher Gent
GlaxoSmithKline Chaiman
Jean-Pierre Garnier
GlaxoSmithKline CEO
GlaxoSmithKline 2004 “Corporate Responsibility Report”

The overwhelming view of independent medical experts and regulatory bodies around the world who have seen the data, is that Seroxat has a well established safety profile and is an effective treatment with experience in tens of millions of patients worldwide since launch in the UK over ten years ago.
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline 10/10/2002

Human behavior is we know so little about it, and therefore, to try to speculate on a mechanism for human behavior is very difficult.
Dr. Tadataka Yamada
Chairman of Research and Development GlaxoSmithKline 1/24/2001

Sometimes a system indeed hinders your rise up the ladder but you also have to accept personal responsibility. That translates into realizing that it’s not always someone else’s fault that you didn’t get promoted. You have to ask some serious questions of yourself before you point the finger at someone else. Ask yourself, `What have I done?’ ‘What is my role in this?’ ‘What am I willing to do?’
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services
10/26-27/1995

If we meet the test of our highest purpose nothing less than making historic contributions to human welfare then we will surely meet our important responsibilities to other GlaxoSmithKline stakeholders, to the investors who put their trust in our performance, to the communities in which we operate, to our colleagues and to ourselves.
Dr. Tadataka Yamada
Chairman of Research and Development
GlaxoSmithKline from GSK’s web site

We are all in favour of this being scrutinized all the time, because it is not in our interests to have a product on the market that is not safe or effective.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline 2/15/2002

I think fundamentally the public needs to be reassured that multinational companies and globalisation are not bad quite the reverse.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer
GlaxoSmithKline
2/18/2003

We take the safety of our medicines extremely seriously….
Dr. Alastair Benbow
GlaxoSmithKline’s European Medical Director
Source: GSK’s web site 2004

First of all let me say that we, as a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products and vaccines, take any report of an adverse event on any of our products, seriously.
Dr. David Wheadon
Senior Vice President
GlaxoSmithKline Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services
1/31/2001

Great [GSK] products, however, are not the whole story society expects companies to act responsibly in their pursuit of success. If anything, the fact that our business is about human health makes it even more important that we operate to the highest standards.
Christopher Gent
GlaxoSmithKline Chaiman
Jean-Pierre Garnier
GlaxoSmithKline CEO
GlaxoSmithKline 2004 “Corporate Responsibility Report”

I think to focus on safety is important.
Dr. Tadataka Yamada
Chairman of Research and Development
GlaxoSmithKline
3/01/05

….my experience is that most physicians don’t look at the [a drug safety] label very carefully. And I’m not certain. I personally am not certain whether it would make a difference whether something was in a black box or in a warning section or in a precaution section….
Dr. Tadataka Yamada
Chairman of Research and Development
GlaxoSmithKline
1/24/2001

Responsible business practices are also the key to a good reputation. In 2004, the pharmaceutical industry and GSK continued to come under public scrutiny on how medicines are developed, tested and marketed. To meet this challenge we must act with integrity and be open about our approach to these important issues.
Christopher Gent
GlaxoSmithKline Chaiman
Jean-Pierre Garnier
GlaxoSmithKline CEO
GlaxoSmithKline 2004 “Corporate Responsibility Report”

Our concern is people’s safety.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
3/1/2003

Anybody who suffers side effects of any sort I feel every sympathy for….
Dr. Alastair Benbow
Head of European Psychiatry for GlaxoSmithKline
5/11/03

Everybody who has looked at this the FDA, American Psychiatric Association, National Mental Health Association all those groups agree that SSRIs, like Paxil, are not addicting and not habit forming.
Andrew T. Bayman
attorney for GlaxoSmithKline
King & Spalding

GSK strongly stands behind the safety and efficacy of Paxil. Physician organizations, like the American Psychiatric Association, have stated that antidepressants are not habit-forming.
David Stout
President of U.S. Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline

GlaxoSmithKline is proud to offer physicians Paxil CR the latest treatment advance in the SSRI class.
David Stout
President, US Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline
4/19/2002

We missed something big we missed the fact that the public wasn’t going to necessarily trust us.
Jean-Pierre Garnier
Chief Executive Officer, GlaxoSmithKline
8/13/2005

Seroxat Videos : Staggering …


Bob Fiddaman has just posted links to 49 available Seroxat videos on youtube. This is a staggering amount of web video’s documenting the side effects of a very dangerous drug. And GSK still claim that this drug is effective. Many would beg to differ, GSK.

http://fiddaman.blogspot.com/2012/05/seroxatpaxilaropaxand-some-videos.html

SATURDAY, MAY 12, 2012

Seroxat/Paxil/Aropax…and Some – The Videos

Fid

ORDER THE PAPERBACK ‘THE EVIDENCE, HOWEVER, IS CLEAR…THE SEROXAT SCANDAL’ By Bob Fiddaman US and CANADA HERE OR UK HERE

AUSTRALIAN ORDERS HERE

try{ clicky.init(17508); }catch(e){}

Performancing Metrics

_gos=’c3.gostats.com’;_goa=359698;
_got=5;_goi=1;_gol=’php webstats’;_GoStatsRun();
php webstats

GlaxoSmithKline Kills Babies Like Lab Rats – Gets Fined $6,643 Per Child


Monday, January 9, 2012
GlaxoSmithKline Kills Babies Like Lab Rats – Gets Fined $6,643 Per Child

http://cherylkicksass.blogspot.com/2012/01/glaxosmithkline-kills-babies-like-lab.html

I don’t think many people are aware of how criminal U.S. corporations have become lately. For instance, pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline has been conducting deadly drug trials on little babies all over the world without parental consent. GSK only gets fined a pittance of $6,643 per baby death for its diabolical vaccine lab rat experiments on them. As a baby killing machine, GSK operates under its slogan “Do More, Feel Better, Live Longer”.
“In addition to killing the children and experimenting with human beings, the judge asserted that the corporation actually falsified parental authorizations so that babies could participate without legitimate parental permission.” – GlaxoSithKline Fined Over Illegal Vaccine Experiments Killing 14 babies – Activist Post.c

Casper : SSRI’s and Fully Informed Consent


An astounding new lecture from Dr David Healy and Award Winning medical Author, Robert Whitaker, about the dangers of SSRI psychiatric medications.

Shame on corrupt psychiatrists and psychopathic pharmaceutical companies…
And bravo to David Healy and Robert Whitaker for not selling their souls to either..

Check it out..

http://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/challenge-to-irish-psychiatry/

http://www.casper.org.nz/

Seroxat Addiction… GSK: Talking from both sides of the mouth?…


Or perhaps, yet again, they’re just speaking through the orifice at the other end? …

A very interesting post over at Seroxat Secrets high-lighting contradicting GSK statements about Seroxat addiction…

Check it out:

http://seroxatsecrets.wordpress.com/2011/08/21/seroxatpaxil-addiction-studied-by-glaxo-or-not/#comment-57880

Seroxat/Paxil addiction studied by Glaxo… or not?

August 21, 2011 — admin

This a repost – originally from March 2007. It’s worth reading again because of recent legal stuff that I can’t talk about at the moment.

You might think that after all the years of doctors and patients all around the world saying Seroxat is highly addictive and Glaxo saying “Oh no it isn’t” – that Glaxo would simply undertake the definitive study to prove us all wrong and to show the world once and for all really how safe and non-addictive Seroxat is… well, it turns out Glaxo has already done this – or maybe they haven’t….?

Confused – now read on.

Finding a copy of the Paxil Protest website once again has been great. It’s a veritable treasure trove of fantastic stories and link, such as this one:

The following exchange is from a transcript of a video deposition taken from Dr. David Wheadon, who was at the time, Vice President Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services, GlaxoSmithKline, in Philadelphia, PA on Thursday, October 19, 2000 prior to the Tobin/Schell civil suit.

Questioning Dr. Wheadon were California attorney Donald J. Farber and Texas attorney Andy Vickery.

Paxil Victim’s Attorney: I’m asking you to kind of elevate yourself above this particular paper and go to your general knowledge now on Paxil. You have been now with the company eight years, and you have studied and are aware, I presume, of Paxil’s traits in either causing or unrelated to addiction and withdrawal, and based on that general knowledge I think you probably have, do you consider as a labeling instruction today that this paragraph, physical and psychological dependence, is a good labeling instruction?

GlaxoSmithKline’s Dr. Wheadon: Well, quite frankly, it is an outdated labeling instruction, because there have been a number of systematic studies in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence. So actually, there is data to date to negate the statement that it has not been systematically studied, because, in fact, it has been.

That’s clear enough then – Paxil (Seroxat) has been studied a number of times in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence… and of course, Dr Wheadon was under oath – so he had to tell the truth – didn’t he?

The problem is that seven years later, the official Paxil prescribing information (produced by Glaxo) provides the world with a statement in stark contrast to Dr. Wheadon’s testimony.:

DRUG ABUSE AND DEPENDENCE
Controlled Substance Class: PAXIL is not a controlled substance.

Physical and Psychologic Dependence: PAXIL has not been systematically studied in animals or humans for its potential for abuse, tolerance or physical dependence. While the clinical trials did not reveal any tendency for any drug-seeking behavior, these observations were not systematic…

Just to recap:

…there have been a number of systematic studies in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence… (2000)

…PAXIL has not been systematically studied in animals or humans for its potential for abuse, tolerance or physical dependence… (2007)

So while Wheadon said one thing (under oath) in 2000, Glaxo says the EXACT opposite in its current [March 2007] official prescribing information.

One of these statements has to be a lie.

GSK tops UK reputation ratings … What a load of CRAP!


what a load of crap!

How much did GSK pay these guys to publish this absolute bullshit..
There are literally thousands of examples of GSK’s disreputable behavior..
A lot of them I have blogged over the years…

Google “GSK Ethics’ , ‘GSK Fraud’ ‘GSK Seroxat’ , ‘GSK Avandia’ or pretty much ‘GSK and Anything’ and you will see the sheer litany of corporate crimes this pharmaceutical company has committed. It is simply astounding how many ethics they have violated over the past 15 years. The only ethic GSK knows is a broken one…

I know GSK read this blog regularly, and I would just like to say, the internet has been documenting your crimes for years now, and no amount of PR exercises and propaganda can counter the top hits and key words which show up on Google about your despicable company… And everyday awareness grows.

 

http://www.pmlive.com/find_an_article/allarticles/categories/General/2011/april_2011/news/gsk_tops_uk_reputation_ratings

GSK tops UK reputation ratings

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is the most reputable company in the UK pharmaceutical sector, according to the latest UK RepTrak Pulse 2011 survey, published today by business consultancy, Reputation Institute.

GSK ranked at 44 out of all the UK companies surveyed, with 72.16 points, ahead of its nearest reputational competitor, Shire, which gained 69.29 points, in 70thplace out of 191 UK companies. Between 70 and 79 points is considered a strong/robust reputation. As a whole, the sector fell by almost four points, or just over 5 per cent.

AstraZeneca came next, in 101st place, the only other company in this consolidated sector. However, it was the biggest improver, rising by 2.5 points, or almost 4 per cent.

This year’s report was based on over 10,000 interviews with consumers across the UK conducted in January and February 2011 and gauged public attitudes to corporations based on seven dimensions: products and services, innovation, workplace, governance, citizenship, leadership and performance. Some 200 companies were assessed in the UK across 21 industry sectors.

Spencer Fox, managing director of Reputation Institute UK said: “A strong corporate reputation creates an emotional bond that enhances customer loyalty, augments consumer referrals and encourages partner loyalty. This in turn has a very real tangible and commercial benefit.

“The significance of this study for these firms is acute with so few competitors in the sector. These companies will be under particular pressure to differentiate themselves and a strong reputation will be key to this. Our research demonstrates time and time again that companies with the highest reputational scores continue to enjoy supportive behaviours from customers and partners alike.”

Companies eligible for inclusion in the survey were the largest and most visible in the UK based on published revenue data. The measured list included companies in the FTSE 100/250 and the largest privately held companies by revenue. All companies had revenues of at least £0.5bn. They engaged in commercial activities in the UK and were reasonably familiar to the general public.

GSK’s Alleged $1.9 Billion Tax Dodge Went Against Its Own Ethics Code


http://www.bnet.com/blog/drug-business/gsks-alleged-19-billion-tax-dodge-went-against-its-own-ethics-code/1621

By Jim Edwards | May 22, 2009

If you thought GlaxoSmithKline was a British company with a British corporate headquarters whose American Depositary Receipts traded on the New York Stock Exchange, you’re wrong! Turns out GSK is a Swiss company, and its U.S. unit is just a device to dodge taxes, according to the WSJ.

The U.S. government has taken GSK to court, demanding $1.9 billion in taxes owed. It alleges that in the merger of Glaxo-Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham, Glaxo became the U.S. unit of a Swiss-based parent. The newly merged U.S. GlaxoSmithKline then paid tax deductible compensation payments to its Swiss parent, thus reducing its tax bill.

The IRS — unsurprisingly — doesn’t quite understand how paying money to yourself makes it non-taxable. This battle comes after GSK lost a 2006 tax war and ended up paying $3.4 billion in unpaid taxes.

GSK is not the only corporate tax shirker on the block. Pfizer is lobbying fiercely to get out of the taxes it ought to be paying, according to Reuters:

Obama would tighten tax-code provisions that allow firms to defer paying taxes on profits they make overseas as long as those earnings are plowed back into the foreign subsidiaries.

That portion of his plan has drawn opposition from big multinational firms such as Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Oracle Corp (ORCL.O).

Merck and Johnson & Johnson are in on the act, too:

The pharmaceutical industry is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the current law. At Pfizer, for example, overseas tax deferrals cut the company’s effective rate by 20.2 percentage points during 2008, making it the single biggest factor in its effective tax rate of 17%.

Merck & Co. cut its effective tax rate by 11.7 percentage points because of its $4.8 billion in such overseas profits last year, according to its annual report.

And Johnson & Johnson ’s effective tax rate was 12.4 percentage points lower because of its $4 billion it said was earned and reinvested overseas, primarily in Puerto Rico and Ireland.

Let’s put aside the fact that both the U.S. and the U.K. (and, er, Switzerland) are in the midst of gruelling recessions, and that it would be nice if companies stepped up and paid for their share of infrastructure, education and healthcare that societies need to survive.

Rather, the most galling part of the alleged GSK tax scam is that it goes against GSK’s own public statements on what it believes its ethical duties are. Here’s GSK’s ethics statement:

We are committed to creating a strong ethical culture at GSK.

Failure to uphold high standards of ethical conduct carries significant business risk:

* Erosion of trust in GSK and our products including among regulators, doctors and patients
* Fines and litigation resulting in serious financial or legal consequences
* Damage to GSK’s reputation

So, three for three, then!

Side note: Where does that $1.9 billion number come from? The Journal appears to have noticed a line in GSK’s 20F form, filed back on March 4, which states:

The Group carried deferred tax provisions and other short-term and non-current provisions of £3,813 million at 31st December 2008 (2007 — £2,814 million) in respect of estimated future liabilities, of which £1,903 million related to legal and other disputes.

Oddly, that sentence was in the section labelled “Financial position and resources” and not the “Legal proceedings” section, where giant suits are normally listed. I wonder why?

Drugs contaminated at GSK uncovered .. (politicolnews January 2011)


http://www.politicolnews.com/drugs-contaminated-at-gsk-uncovered/

In one case the drug Paxil which is a powerful anti-depressant was found in a container with Tagamet which is used for ulcers and stomach problems. Two drugs mixed together for two entirely different groups of consumers who were unaware of what they were consuming in one drug bottle.
The outrage is clear and the FDA is again an agency too close to to drug company influence to be an effective stop gap against this type of danger to the consumer.

If a consumer was allergic to the drug Tagamet and was prescribed Paxil the problems appear to be unresolved by the FDA. As it was revealed the FDA did not demand the shut down of this Glaxosmithkline drug factory.
As the video reveals the mixture of several drugs in one prescription drug bottle, and bacteria found in an ant-bacteria medicine was uncovered in the drug factory in Puerto Rico. The Puerto Rico factory of GSK also made the diabetes drug Avandamet which was also mixed in with Paxil drugs.
As an employee of GlaxosmithKline Cheryl Eckard would know what she saw and what she documented in her reports which she relayed to the plant’s executives and to her own employer GlaxoSmithKline’s head offices. GlaxoSmithKline is the UK’s biggest drug producer hired Eckard to do a job and when she did they ignored the warnings and she wanted to shut the plant down but the higher ups refused.
The 60 Minute Video news story called Bad Medicine was aired January 2, 2011 on the CBS show 60 Minutes and the revelations are not only shocking they are disturbing.
It is not likely the head CEO did not know about what was going on at the factory level of his own company and if he did he is ultimately responsible for the damage that could be cause by such low standards. It would be like Toyota denying their products were defective and after all they tried that also. But this is a consumer product taken orally by a person who is assuming the drug is safe. Today, you can assume no drug is safe because they are not even tested anymore by the US government.
A quote from the company’s website regarding their corporate responsibility principals as they call it:
“We are committed to creating a strong ethical culture at GSK.”
They go on to say ” We do this by developing strong policies, recruiting the right people and equipping them with the information they need to make ethical decisions. Putting patients first is the core principle of being an ethical pharmaceutical company. Profit without principle is short lived.”
Failure to uphold high standards of ethical conduct carries significant business risk:
Erosion of trust in GSK and our products including among regulators, doctors and patients
Fines and litigation resulting in serious financial or legal consequences
Damage to GSK’s reputation” end quote.
Ethics? GSK claims to have ethics?
Further, Cheryl Ekard was later fired from her job but here is a misleading tidbit from GlaxoSmithKline’s corporate policy on employees:
” Employment practices We will treat our employees with respect and dignity, encourage diversity and ensure fair treatment through all phases of employment. We will provide a safe and healthy working environment, support employees to perform to their full potential and take responsibility for the performance and reputation of the business.”
It certainly sounds good, but they do not really practice fairness and responsibility towards whistleblowers.
On human rights the copy is even more laughable:
“Human rights We are committed to upholding the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the OECD guidelines for Multi-National Enterprises and the core labour standards set out by the International Labour Organization. We expect the same standards of our suppliers, contractors and business partners working on GSK’s behalf.”
The standards and ethics at GSK and this statement on their website is simply untrue and a blatant lie:
“Standards of ethical conduct We expect employees to meet high ethical standards in all aspects of our business, by conducting our activities with honesty and integrity, adhering to our CR principles, and complying with applicable laws and regulations.”
On how customers are regarded along with the standards of their product production it is hard to believe GSK abides by its own statements:
“Products and customers We will promote our products in line with high ethical, medical and scientific standards and will comply with all applicable laws and regulations.”
The lack of standards, ethics and following the law is glaringly lacking at GSK and the FDA has by it’s own failures allowed this corporation to continue operating in this manner. The FDA claims it has few inspectors however, this is simply not the case.
In 2004, Cheryl Ekard was forced hire a lawyer Leslie Ann Skillen and filed a claim against her former employer in Boston mostly since the FDA did not shut Glaxosmithkline down, or even found the errors and mistakes in their association with the drug company. The same production lines continued to pump out the wrong medications and Ekard demanded justice.
Again the failures of the FDA are a mile long list of complete ignorance and incompetence when it comes to keeping American consumers safe from the most basic errors. Two very different drugs mixed together can be deadly, can harm a person and can cause serious risks even death.
On November 26, 2010 GlaxoSmithKline ended up paying 750 million dollars for selling “adulterated drugs” and pleaded guilty.
The drug giant had to also pay medicaid program of Massachusetts eight million dollars for defrauding the government.
The GSK CEO’ boasts about their vaccine business in their quarterly profit reports -notice no mention of how they will improve their quality controls, how they will not fire whistleblowers and instead take heed that they are producing dangerous drugs.

This is laughable.
Defrauding the US government and the public is not the way to run a corporation, with such a low standard of ethics, stockholders and the Board of Directors have some say here in how this corporation runs their business. It appears GSK is more interested in profits than safety and ethics and this is a practice that is allowed by the FDA.

Editors Note: GlaxoSmithKline like many of the drug giants have a long history of violations, of producing harmful drugs, and of escaping culpability concerning jail time. A US federal habit of small fines is not a deterrent to these criminal acts which continue to endanger the lives of Americans and consumers worldwide.

Drug Companies in Bed with Government and Judges: On the Avandia lawsuit GlaxoSmithKline only paid $ 46,000.00 per person for endangering their lives with a heart attack from their product Avandia. The lawsuit was a sellout to patients who died, patients who had only diabetes but ended up with heart attacks as a result of taking a drug. The law, the courts, and the judges are all in favor of letting off these billion dollar corporations with small penal fines and settlements are far from punitive.
If you take Fosamax your jaw will be permanently damaged and your teeth will fall out, there is no proof this drug prevented osteoarthritis. Dentists are refusing to treat jaw death by Fosamax.