This post should be read in conjunction with Are Journalists the Answer to Clinical Medicines Cause and Effect Problem which is on davidhealy.org, or will be, and last weeks Clinical Details Confuse Expert Doctors along with Royal College of Psychiatrist’s Suicide Note.
Several months ago, I agreed to review an article by John Read analyzing the hundreds of antidepressant suicides catalogued on the AntidepAware site. John did an elegant job making it clear that the drugs had likely caused many of these suicides. He was hampered by the fact that the coroners had not returned drug induced suicide verdicts – British coroners have no box to tick for a prescription drug induced death.
My review introduced readers of John’s article to a horrifying idea. When a doctor gives someone an antidepressant and they commit suicide days later, if the doctor thinks the drug caused the problem, as Dr Adams seems to have done in the case of Samuel Morgan, his medical insurer will tell him not to blame the drug.
If the doctor is uncomfortable with this, the lawyer for the insurer will attempt to do the talking for the doctor and will blame the illness not the drug. See Will Medical Insurers Stop Killing People.
The Medical Protection Society had a video demonstrating what insurers can do for doctors facing an inquest about a suicide – this has now disappeared with a shorter version only on their Facebook page.
The role of insurers helps explain why, even if he had a box to tick, it is almost impossible for a coroner to blame the drug
The editor of the journal publishing Johns Article, Don Marks, suggested turning my review of John’s article, into an article in its own right – Diagnosis and Causality. It contained details of Sam Morgan’s case and Romain Schmitt’s – outlined last week in Clinical Details Confuse Expert Doctors.
We are EMA and We are Here to Help You
A few weeks later I got an email from EMA. Or so it seemed.
The email was odd. It asked for some trivial details about Sam and Romain – their weight for instance. There was no interest to make contact with Sam or Romain’s parents to find out what really happened.
Dear Dr David Healy,
I am writing to you on behalf of the European Medicines Agency’s Medical Literature Monitoring service, regarding the following article which you recently published: Healy D. Diagnosis, Verdict Conclusion, and Causality. Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry. 2023; 25: 29-37.
The European Medicines Agency is the agency of the European Union (EU) responsible for the scientific evaluation, supervision, and safety monitoring of medicines in the EU, working with the regulatory agencies in all EU Member States and the World Health Organization.
We monitor the medical literature for reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), turn these into ADR reports and transmit them to regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies in the EU and to the World Health Organization. These are used in detecting possible signals that could lead to a change in the understanding of the risk-benefit balance of the medicines.
In your article, you describe a patient who experienced SSRI-induced suicidality and suicide associated with citalopram and more disorganized, aggressive, trouble sleeping, irritability, violent attacks, mood disorders, thought disorders, emotional instability, disinhibition, impaired discernment, suicidality, steady decline in his mental state and committed suicide associated with usage of unapproved paroxetine.
To aid our pharmacovigilance assessors in their understanding of the reactions caused by these medicines, we would be grateful if you could provide a little more information regarding the [patient, drug and the reaction(s).
Any information that you can give us would help. Even approximate information is useful, so, for example, if you only know that the patient was overweight, rather than their exact weight, then that would still be helpful.
We would be grateful if you could send your response by return email to MLM@kinapse.com.
Thank you in advance for your contribution to the ongoing safety surveillance activities of this product.
With best regards, Ankitha Gongalla, EMA Medical Literature Monitoring service
Kinapse and Syneos
Ankitha works for Kinapse, a medical-writing company. Her email to me was copied in to two employees from Syneos.
A now hidden website says: Kinapse is a global leader in post-approval clinical trial transparency services for both EMA and pharmaceutical companies. For companies, Kinapse offer “Marketing authorisation holders’ monitoring and reporting requirements” (Phogat and Vishist 2018).
EMA selected Kinapse in 2010 to provide EudraVigilance data management services (Pharmafile 2010). Kinapse also fill EMA’s demands for plain-language summaries for clinical trial results that can be understood by anyone, which as Pharmafile outlines could create new challenges for sponsors.
The Kinapse profile on LinkedIn states that Kinapse, a Syneos Health company, is recognized as a leading advisory and operational services provider to the global life sciences industry. Founded by professionals from the biopharmaceutical sector, the company provides its services across the full clinical and commercialization lifecycle, collaborating with its clients to improve the lives of patients, through a unique Advise – Build – Operate Delivery Model. Many of the top 20 global biopharmaceutical companies rely on the breadth of Kinapse’s world class advisory and operational services to analyze, implement and perform a wide range of projects and programs across global markets, delivering quantifiable business benefits and operational success. Headquartered in the U.K., Kinapse has over 600 staff located in Europe, India and the U.S.
Syneos Health (formerly InVentiv Health Incorporated and INC Research) is a Nasdaq listed American multinational contract research organization based in Morrisville, North Carolina. It specializes in helping companies with late-stage clinical trials. In January 2018 INC Research acquired inVentiv Health, the parent company of a subsidiary, Syneos, and the resulting company was named Syneos Health. In April of 2021, Syneos partnered with Medable to leverage DCT technology solutions to expand patient access to clinical trials.
On May 10, 2023, an investment consortium comprising Elliott Investment Management, Patient Square Capital and Veritas Capital, agreed to take Syneos private in a deal worth $4.46 billion, or $7.1 billion including debt. Michelle Keefe, the current CEO of Syneos Health, was previously a Pfizer Vice-President of sales, and regional president.
It was time to write to EMA – whose CEO is Emer Cooke.
Dear Emer Cooke
I am puzzled by the email below that came my way. I am used to pharmaceutical companies getting in touch when their drug is linked to an adverse event. I am not used to a regulator like EMA or MHRA getting in touch and even less so when the EMA/MHRA function seems to be contracted out to a private company.
It is usually clear that the pharmaceutical company is ticking a few bureaucratic boxes with no interest in the lives or deaths of those affected by treatment and no interest to establish causality or to think about how to put things right.
I ordinarily give company emailers the contact details and invite them to contact the surviving relatives of patients and to engage in an effort to establish what is going on.
I can remember a time when pharmaceutical companies took seriously what they viewed as a legal obligation to establish causality in the case of adverse events but this changed around 2000 and now companies like Pfizer ‘report’ adverse events, cutting and pasting almost irrelevant details like patient weight into a report that is sent off to EMA or FDA or whoever.
Things appear to have developed even further in this direction following the Dolin case where companies are manoeuvring to avoid liabilities from generic products. They are outsourcing liability.
I didn’t expect what appears to be something similar from EMA. I have the details being asked for in the report below but there seems to be absolutely no point in sending them on to whoever Kinapse really is
I have copied the families of those affected in scenario 1 and 2 into this email – the Morgans and Yoko Motohama and Vincent Schmitt. I expect they would be happy if EMA were to contact them, even though I have already let them know that EMA’s standard operating procedure – the removal of names from accounts of events – makes it impossible for EMA to establish cause and effect in the case of any adverse event (making the irrelevant details being asked for doubly irrelevant).
I found out about this aspect of EMA’s SOP – removal of names – some years ago when engaging with EMA about a problem called PSSD.
(I have cut a mention that I was copying three journalists in here).
The emergence of Kinapse into this story may have provided all three journalists with what might be an important element in the stories of what happened to the two boys who died in these cases. Perhaps I should have said an important element in the stories of why nothing ever happens following terrible events like these.
David Healy MD
To be Continued:
The research on Kinapse and Syneos was done by Yoko and Vincent who found out a lot more detail, forwarded to EMA, about contributions from pharmaceutical companies to Syneos and disbursements from Syneos to French institutions supposedly keeping French citizens safe.
This sequence of events illuminated what is going wrong in pharmacovigilance which will be summarized in the next post.
Dr Pedro says
EMA – Kinapse – Syneos – Pfizer – EMA: One big happy family with no conflicts of interest.
Syneos Health Signs New Service Agreement With Pfizer
July 13, 2020
MORRISVILLE, N.C., July 13, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Syneos Health® (Nasdaq:SYNH), the only fully integrated biopharmaceutical solutions organization, today announced that it has signed a new three-year agreement with Pfizer Inc. (NYSE: PFE) to deliver global product development solutions to support Pfizer’s portfolio. Under the terms of the agreement, Pfizer has the right to extend the term for up to an additional two years. Financial details of the agreement were not disclosed.
https://www.investor.syneoshealth.com/news-releases/news-release-details/syneos-health-signs-new-service-agreement-pfizer
chris says
“In your article, you describe a patient who experienced SSRI-induced suicidality and suicide associated with citalopram and more disorganized, aggressive, trouble sleeping, irritability, violent attacks, mood disorders, thought disorders, emotional instability, disinhibition, impaired discernment, suicidality, steady decline in his mental state and committed suicide associated with usage of unapproved paroxetine.
To aid our pharmacovigilance assessors in their understanding of the reactions caused by these medicines, we would be grateful if you could provide a little more information regarding the [patient, drug and the reaction(s).”
To Emer Cooke
If your pharmacovigilance assessors wish to aid their understanding why don’t they induce akathisia in themselves. This is not a flippant reply – I’m being totally serious.
annie says
‘an important element in the stories of why nothing ever happens following terrible events like these.’ – We are EMA and We are Here to Help you
Medical literature monitoring service –
“We monitor the medical literature for reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), turn these into ADR reports and transmit them to regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies in the EU and to the World Health Organization.
These are used in detecting possible signals that could lead to a change in the understanding of the risk-benefit balance of the medicines.”
Procès fédéral 2012
https://antidepeffects.wordpress.com/le-role-des-regulateurs-fda-mhra-ema-afsaps-ansm-has/
Rappel du contexte. En 2012, GSK est condamné par la justice fédérale américaine, pour entre autre: promotion de médicaments hors AMM et dissimulation de données de sécurité.
Paxil: In the criminal information, the government alleges that, from April 1998 to August 2003, GSK unlawfully promoted Paxil for treating depression in patients under age 18, even though the FDA has never approved it for pediatric use.
The United States alleges that, among other things, GSK participated in preparing, publishing and distributing a misleading medical journal article that misreported that a clinical trial of Paxil demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of depression in patients under age 18, when the study failed to demonstrate efficacy. At the same time, the United States alleges, GSK did not make available data from two other studies in which Paxil also failed to demonstrate efficacy in treating depression in patients under 18.
The United States further alleges that GSK sponsored dinner programs, lunch programs, spa programs and similar activities to promote the use of Paxil in children and adolescents. GSK paid a speaker to talk to an audience of doctors and paid for the meal or spa treatment for the doctors who attended. Since 2004, Paxil, like other antidepressants, included on its label a “black box warning” stating that antidepressants may increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in short-term studies in patients under age 18. GSK agreed to plead guilty to misbranding Paxil in that its labeling was false and misleading regarding the use of Paxil for patients under 18.
PRESS RELEASE. GlaxoSmithKline to Plead Guilty and Pay $3 Billion to Resolve Fraud Allegations and Failure to Report Safety Data. Department of Justice, 2012.
La pharmacovigilance selon EMA
EMA sous-traite la gestion de la db pharmacovigilance à un groupe privé Kinapse/Syneos
Le rôle des régulateurs FDA, MHRA, EMA, AFSSAPS/ANSM, HAS…
annie says
BBC iPlayer
Disclosure
Are My Antidepressants Worth It?
Anton Ferrie investigates the impact of antidepressants on the minds and bodies of the thousands of young people who take them.
Editor Shelley Jofre
9 August 2023
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0g4b9q5/disclosure-are-my-antidepressants-worth-it
“What lies beneath” …
mary H says
Annie, thank you very much for sharing this link with us. I haven’t had time to listen in full as yet but the snippets that I have listened to sound encouraging.
What took me immediately to it was the name of the Editor – we all remember Shelley Joffrey, I’m sure, from the Seroxat revelations. Of course, the present young people may not have a clue about her excellent work and courage in speaking out.
I shall share this link with our Facebook group “Feeling Blue?” which we geared towards the parents/ carers of the younger generation.
I shall also direct the members of our withdrawal zoom group to it too.
If I may just add here that anyone, interested in joining our discussions about the horrors of withdrawal, the lack of ‘professional’ acceptance of our difficulties etc., would be made very welcome if they decided to join us. We meet fortnightly for a couple of hours and more info is available if you email me – ellen.hennessey@btinternet.com. We are in Wales – but this offer is open to the WORLD ( as long as you are able to link to 6pm BST!). Come along, give us a try – I guarantee you that we most certainly LISTEN and BELIEVE in your suffering – but also wish to move on to DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT. The latter being the puzzle of the moment!
chris says
If any of the people engaging with yourself try B6 P5P especially with benzodiazepine drugs and sleeping tablets withdrawal. It would be very helpful if you could let us know how they get on.
What I can’t grasp is why prescribers don’t do the obvious and taper stop the medication especially when there is a quick reaction instead of just change from one SSRI to another and ask them to wait 6 weeks plus and then bombard them with polypharmacy when they are in a terrible state. Why can’t they see the wood for the trees?
tim says
Thank you for alerting us to this informative broadcast Annie.
I have studied and learned much about SSRI/SNRI/Atypical Antidepressant Adverse Drug Reactions: ADRs during the last 12 years. This has been whilst observing the unrelenting suffering – (due to multi-systems, psychotropic dug injuries) – endured by my daughter as a result of serial misdiagnosis of antidepressant induced AKATHISIA.
Emotional Blunting and Disinhibition were not recognised, acute nystagmus was ignored. Both the akathisia and multi-systems disfiguring and painful injuries were then dismissed, not investigated. Suffering was exacerbated by serial psychiatric misdiagnosis of each one of a cascade of ADRs. Those we trusted to help, cruelly abused and mistreated, apparently devoid of empathy, and appearing to enjoy adding to suffering with scorn, contempt and humiliation.
Serial indefensible detention for ADRs in the complete absence of any mental illness at any time is unforgivable.
Might there be a common denominator underlying the suffering and tragedy so comprehensively documented in the posts and comments on RxISK?
Is the possible?/ apparent absence of Fair, Full and informed consent at the initiation of the causative prescription drug the critical initiating event?
Even after decades as a prescriber myself, in a field where I was not required to prescribe psychotropic drugs, I was ignorant re AKATHISIA and would have found the concept of prescription drug induced suicidality difficult to accept and understand.
So I now find myself asking: What material risks of antidepressants would I need explaining to me in order for me to give valid informed consent for this Medical Intervention?
1) I need to be warned about AKATHISIA, about changes in thoughts, feelings and emotions. I need to be made aware of Emotional Blunting and Disinhibition and aware of risk of harm to myself or others. I would need to be told to alert my family to these risks in the hope that they could protect me if necessary.
2) I wish to be informed that I may loose genital sensation rapidly and that this genital numbness may be a part of a wider sexual dysfunction. I need to know that for some this PSSD may be apparently lifelong. I need to have the chance to discuss this with my partner before I can make a fully informed decision.
3) I must be informed that for some people, attempting to withdraw from these drugs may induce intense and disabling withdrawal syndromes. In some cases withdrawal induced akathisia may be life threatening.
I am allowed to understand that not everyone suffers from all, or any of the above ADRs but it is not possible to predict who will do so.
I am certain that I will be advised not to suddenly cease taking the antidepressant drug.
4) I should recognise that my prescriber is genuinely wishing to help me and I should be aware that these ADRs are disputed by some Key Opinion Leaders. Some prescribers have only seen favourable outcomes.
If I am correct, and it is appropriate for me to receive the above information in order to give consent, then the prescriber is in an impossible situation.
She/He may be sincerely concerned that I need this treatment urgently and they only have some ten minutes to complete a stressful consultation (stressful for both prescriber and for patient).
This raises the question:
Can fair full and informed consent be achieved in this time-frame, and if not how could increased consultation time ever be achieved within the unrelenting time pressure currently experienced in Primary Care where so much antidepressant prescribing is initiated?
“If I were you I would take them” appears more likely to be coercion rather than consent?
mary H says
Tim, I feel that your comment is exactly what we need to read at the moment.
To be able to give both sides of the problem is something that very many of us are unable to do.
Most of us would agree with your definition of the knowledge necessary for full informed consent to be possible. Unfortunately, many would see your points of view, as a prescriber, as being, somehow, your fault – you were the one who failed to listen, you even refused to believe in their suffering; you fobbed them off with prescription after prescription for higher doses or a change of drug; you put their medications on a repeat prescription so that you now don’t even meet them in person. Through all of this, your patients suffered, so they then decide to taper their medications. Some turn to you for support there too only to find that you really have very little idea how to support them in this part of the journey either.
As a result of these strong feelings that many patients have, they turn away from their GPs. Dr. Google, they find, seems to understand their needs far better than you do.
This is such a sorry state of affairs for all concerned. Patients, in their suffering, NEED someone to trust. In these days of problems appearing on all fronts, they NEED to be consoled. Doctors, too, I would imagine, would love to have the trust of all their patients; they too seem to be over-worked and failing to cope with the pressures of their ‘calling’.
I believe that “fear ” plays a part on both fronts – the patients fear that they will be hospitalised and force-drugged if they stand up to their doctors; doctors fear that their patients will create a case against them if they fail to provide them with prescriptions that will ‘make them better’.
If only we could get doctors and patients to be united against such things as ‘ghostwritten articles’ etc. which fool doctors into believing that what they prescribe really are ‘miracle drugs’. As matters stand at present, the two sections are as far apart as ever, with the so-called regulators thinking up more and more potions with which to poison society. Poisoning the majority by using false promises; poisoning the unlucky minority by creating horrific injuries and then denying a connection between that suffering and their ‘new’ products.
We need a revolution in all matters medical!
tim says
Thank you Mary H.
Once antidepressant Adverse drug reactions as serious as akathisia have been misdiagnosed as ‘Serious Mental Illness’ and wrongful detention has lead to life changing injuries via forced drugging in an environment which is cruel and anti-therapeutic, the ‘Fear Factor’ is overwhelming.
No one will listen to your desperate concerns, even as an experienced physician.
As a father I was considered to be a trouble maker. As a doctor my correct and important clinical observations were ignored and discussion swiftly terminated on the grounds of ‘patient confidentiality’.
“If only we could get doctors and patients to be united against such things as ghostwritten articles -” Yes indeed.
Your observations of prescriber responses to these ADRs have all been experienced. It is devastating not to be believed as the cascade of avoidable ADR injuries unfolds, and all life’s chances, opportunities and joys are destroyed.
The apparent absolute trust in data-manipulated, ghostwritten clinical trials, and the belief that these trials provide ‘Evidence Based Medicine’ and Evidence Based Guidelines increases the prescriber disbelief and rejection that is so painful for the patient and their family when reporting and seeking help for prescription drug induced injury.
During my first three years of post-registration training I was taught in a system which promoted the philosophy that doctors and patients are ‘Equals of Different Experience”.
We were taught that ‘active-listening’ was a critical factor in a successful consultation.
The patient should leave the consultation knowing that they had been listened to.
This was completely absent with regard to the ill-advised and unnecessary prescribing and enforcement of multiple psychotropic drugs.
As Sir William Osler advised his students early in the last century:
“Listen to your patient, he is telling you the diagnosis”.
mary H says
Indeed, Tim. You and I would also like to add “and listen to their family too” wouldn’t we.
I experienced the refusal to be seen as an “equal” many times – to be labelled as “a fussy mother” and those glances which gave the message “I’m the expert here – you know nothing!”.
My background is not in the medical world but in Primary education. As the special Needs Coordinator for the school for a good number of years, I was well used to standing up for children and their parents against the “experts” in that field. Their cry was always “but there is no money”. That didn’t sit much better than the medical “you know nothing” but, due to working through that fight, I was prepared to fight for the right to be heard by the MH experts too. Pity help those who have noone to stand up for them for they will so easily be trampled by these “experts” who fail miserably in basic manners!
How to change things is a huge problem, of course. If only we could ensure that the latest intake of medical students were kept away from the grips of pharma and given the correct information about all that, at present, seems to be presented to them as gospel knowledge, then maybe there would be the chance of change. That is unlikely to happen since the ‘grip’ has spread way beyond medical knowledge. A return to basic, common sense, decency of listening and believing must prevail. That does not only apply to the professional bodies but also to the general public. I really had hopes of a breakthrough when so many problems were directly connected to the Covid vaccine. I honestly thought that the public would see how easily difficulties can attach to any one of us. The Covid Injured’s campaigns seemed to be so successful – but where has it all led? To a further determination to close down proper discussions regarding the problems endured by a minority, added to which we now have a steamrolling of further vaccines using similar techniques. And what about the public voice? – well, it seems “I’d better get protected …. just incase”. Gone will be the voice of reason, of a pause for further trials etc., drowned by a majority that seems hellbent on the destruction of all who don’t listen and comply with their ideals.
chris says
Senator Malcolm Roberts asks
Did the Medical Countermeasures Consortium run #COVID? in 10min video
https://twitter.com/MRobertsQLD/status/1689188177779851265
Wonder how many people were terrified into going to their GP and given SSRI’s as a result of the above worldwide . Well I do know three of my relatives were given Sertraline, no history of depression anxiety.
annie says
The question, are you suicidal, is loaded and when asked by a psychiatrist can seem deeply insulting, if this is your first introduction to psychiatry. Particularly inane, when everything about you is so completely ‘normal’, or even better than normal…
I suppose each and every psychiatrist has his own approach to establishing, with his clipboard, how and where you stand in the ‘suicide stakes’.
This seems to be going a step too far –
Vancouver hospital offered ‘medical assistance in dying’ to suicidal 37-year-old woman who was told it would take too long to see a psychiatrist
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12393501/Vancouver-hospital-offered-medical-assistance-dying-suicidal-37-year-old-woman-told-long-psychiatrist.html
Vancouver Coastal Health, which operates the hospital, confirmed that the discussion took place but said the topic of MAiD was raised to assess Mentler’s risk of suicidality — not to suggest that she receive a lethal injection.
Vancouver Coastal Health spokesman Jeremy Deutsch says the hospital followed protocols.
‘During patient assessments of this nature, difficult questions are often asked by clinicians to determine the appropriate care and risk to the patient,’ Deutsch told the newspaper.
‘Staff are to explore all available care options for the patient, and a clinical evaluation with a client who presents with suicidality may include questions about whether they have considered MAiD.’
Some people are very impressionable.
What a ludicrous position to put a patient in…
mary H says
This question of “Are you suicidal?” makes my blood boil!
It is so often asked in a flippant way and rarely do they listen to anything beyond the “Yes” or “No” reply. They could just as easily be asking “Are you wearing comfortable socks?”, as the question nor its answer bring about a different result nor an acknowledgment of concern.
The outcome of this, each time that I encountered it in A&E, was a leaflet filled in and signed by a MH worker and countersigned by the patient.
It would read along the lines of ” I have discussed how I feel today. I have agreed to keep myself safe overnight. I will contact my doctor tomorrow morning. MH services will be informed of my visit here today.”, signed by the patient who was then sent home without any further ado. Sometimes without even checking how that journey “home” was going to be possible after a few hours’ wait in the A&E department.
For those of us who have undertaken these trips, with loved ones, more times that we’d like to recall, the final insult is finding out, that once out of the relevant ‘safety’ of the hospital building, those suicidal feelings are still there as strong as ever and that, suddenly, your role is to cater for that patient in a way that THEY WHO ARE TRAINED TO DEAL should have done so in the first place. To add insult to injury, you then find out the following day that NOONE has been informed of the hospital visit and all the promises made by the ‘professional’ have been as short lived as the ones encouraged out of the patient.
Suggesting ANYTHING – whether it be MAiD or the slightly less challenging “you’ll cope until tomorrow’ – to a patient who is already in a fragile state IS WRONG. To say that they are using it to explore the condition of the patient IS BEYOND BELIEF.
annie says
Chris recently brought up the Sackler family.
A new release on Netflix is Painkiller, the Oxycontin Scandal.
A ‘shirty’ review
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/review-netflixs-oxycontin-drama-painkiller-131517139.html
Actually, I thought anything at all that brings up ‘dodgy drugs’ is worthwhile viewing.
GlaxoSmithkline, often talks about family, and although the Paroxetine Scandal wasn’t a Sackler Family, in that sense of the word, there was a distinct smell around the culmination and prescribing of Paroxetine.
The film showed the hype around Oxycontin at their Sales Conference
GlaxoSmithKline did exactly the same thing, at the Paxil launch
https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS024110/SMITHKLINE-BEECHAM-PAXIL-US-SALES-REACH-135-MIL-IN-FIRST-10-MONTHS-ON-MARKET-COMPANYs-1993-US-PHARMACEUTICAL-SALES-INCREASE-11-TO-242-BIL
The Plot, the fraudulent clinical trial, robustly defended by RIAT, Study 329, the $3 billion fine, the bribing of doctors in various countries and an Ian Hudson deposition. The murder of a family in the Schell Court case, the demise of Stewart Dolin in a Court case.
And like the Sacklers, Andrew Witty, Patrick Vallance and others, escaped to live another day.
Panorama is long gone, but Paroxetine/Seroxat has a case to answer.
chris says
Think this is the latest on Sackler
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/10/politics/supreme-court-purdue-pharma-opioid-settlement/index.html
GV says
‘They contacted to ask for his weight’
There you see how ignorant and stupid they really are. They don’t have a clue.
This happens in people, thin, anorexic, fat, obese, average, athletic etc etc. They just look for things to blame. There’s only one thing to blame, those defective mind altering and life ruining harddrugs.