SSRI Fraud and Kickbacks

• Drug Makers “Bamboozled the FDA” – Sen. Grasssley

THANK YOU SENATOR GRASSLEY FOR YOUR EFFORTS!!!

The following information should go out to every reporter and every other human on the planet. Please. Please. Please help us get this information out to as many as possible as a warning.

[BUT in doing so always remember to warn of the extreme potential danger of abrupt withdrawal with the FDA warning that such can cause suicide, hostility or psychosis. Please give them our 800 order line or website to download or order my CD, "Help! I Can't Get Off My Antidepressant!" so that they will have the formula for safe and almost painless withdrawal and methods of recovery from the damage they have suffered.]

Now if you have read my book most of this will sound all too familiar and old. But now the cold hard facts are coming out to the public with Iowa’s own Senator Grassley leading the way because these drugs grabbed his attention after overseeing many of the hearings on children and antidepressants.

#1 US HIGHEST USER OF ANTIDEPRESSANTS & ANTIDEPRESSANTS ARE AMERICA’S MOST WIDELY PRESCRIBED DRUGS:

“Antidepressant prescribing is more rampant in this country than any other. The US accounted for 66% of the global market in 2005, compared to 23% in Europe and 11% for the rest of world, according to a December 2006 report by Research and Markets. “A June 2007 survey by the Centers for Disease Control of doctor and hospital visits in 2005 showed that the most commonly prescribed drugs were antidepressants, with 48% of the prescriptions issued by primary care physicians. They have remained in the number one position ever since. In 2007, 232 million prescriptions were filled for antidepressants worth nearly $12 billion, according to a March 2008 report by IMS Health. . . .

#2 YET THE MANUFACTURERS KNEW AND HID THE FACT THAT THESE DRUGS INCREASE THE RISK OF SUICIDE:

“For fifteen years, the SSRI makers fought against adding a warning about an increased risk of suicidality, knowing all the long that the risk existed. [We had the data in court cases for years but could not get the press to cover it.] Now, the companies are making the irresponsible argument (in defense of lawsuits claiming they failed to warn doctors and the public of the risk) that the FDA did not require them to add a warning, so they are immune from liability. . . .

#3 SINCE 1989 THE MANUFACTURER OF PAXIL KNEW THAT THIS DRUG INCREASES SUICIDE ATTEMPTS BY EIGHT TIMES MORE THAN PLACEBO!

“The report shows that Glaxo [makers of Paxil] knew in 1989, long before Paxil was FDA approved, that people taking the drug were 8 times more likely to engage in suicidal behavior than people given a placebo, or sugar pill. Now, it stands to reason that even the most depressed person would decline to take Paxil if given these facts. Also, parents certainly would decline if they were told about the risks. . . . “The FDA approved Paxil on December 29, 1992, with no warning to doctors or patients of the significant increased risk of suicidal behavior,” he writes. . . .

#4 SENATOR GRASSLEY FINDS THAT PAXIL MAKER “BAMBOOZLED” THE FDA PUTTING PATIENT SAFETY AT RISK “

Senator Grassley has also asked the FDA to go back and review the clinical trial data submitted on Paxil. In a statement on the Senate floor on June 11, 2008, he said: “Essentially, it looks like GlaxoSmithKline bamboozled the FDA.” “We cannot live in a nation where drug companies are less than candid, hide information and attempt to mislead the FDA and the public,” he stated. “These companies are selling drugs that we put in our bodies, not sneakers.” “When they manipulate or withhold data to hide or minimize findings about safety and/or efficacy they put patient safety at risk,” Senator Grassley said. “And with drugs like Paxil, the risks are too great.” Now I need to note here that the only reason Paxil is taking so much heat and the only reason we have all of this inside information on Paxil is because of the information obtained during the Wyoming murder/suicide case of Donald Schell. Before that these companies were settling cases so that they did not have to go to court and disclose all of this information to the attorneys working in our behalf. After waiting three long years for one attorney to decide if he would take the case, it went to Andy Vickery’s office. Andy took the case and Glaxo allowed it to go all the way into court instead of settling the case. The jury heard and saw enough to rule that the two pills of Paxil that Donald Schell took before getting up one morning and shooting his wife, his daughter and his baby grand daughter before shooting himself was the main cause. Glaxo did all they could to seal that information back up again, but it was too late. The cat was out of the bag. And it is long past time to let the cat out of the bag on all these other antidepressants as well!

#5 THE RESULTS OF SENATOR GRASSLEY’S INVESTIGATION OF THE LARGE PAYMENTS AND KICKBACKS TO DOCTORS BY DRUG MAKERS

“According to Senator Grassley’s June 4, 2008 statement in the Congressional record, although conflict-of-interest disclosure forms make it appear that the Harvard psychiatrists only received a couple hundred thousand from drug companies over the past 7 years, the true figures show Dr Biederman received over “$1.6 million,” Dr Spencer “over $1 million” and Dr Wilens “over $1.6 million” in payments from the drug companies. “Based on reports from just a handful of drug companies,” he states, “we know that even these millions do not account for all of the money.” “Senator Grassley also notes that Dr Schatzberg owns stock worth more than $6 million in one drug company. Ed Silverman reports on Pharmalot that there are “30 or so physicians at two dozen universities which the Senate Finance Committee is probing concerning disclosure of grants from drug makers.” The names of those 30 doctors, along with the research mills they operate out of, need to be made public. . . . .

#6 RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS AND ACADEMIA ON THE TAKE FROM DRUG MAKERS AS WELL ACTING AS “APOLOGISTS FOR COMMERCIAL SCIENTIFIC FRAUD” – SENIOR ACADEMICS PROSTITUTING MEDICINE.

“It is no longer a case where Americans need only be concerned about the amount of money the academics are pulling in. The pharmaceutical industry also has a stronghold on most major research institutions in this country. Many could not exist if the drug companies withdrew all their research funding, a state of affairs that did not occur by accident. “In fact, according to Dr Aubrey Blumsohn, who publishes the Scientific Misconduct Blog, when all is said and done: “The chief villains remain our academic institutions and medical leadership. They have colluded with and have acted as apologists for commercial scientific fraud. They have tolerated the telling of lies by senior academics. They have encouraged the prostitution of medicine. They have allowed abuse of the most fundamental safeguards of science. Most importantly, they have set terrible examples for our students.”

#7 WHO TOOK THE MONEY TO PUSH ANTIDEPRESSANTS TO CHILDREN? “

While Dr Keller took the lead on pushing Paxil for children and adolescents, Dr Emslie was the main man on the Prozac trials, and Dr Wagner was the queen bee on Zoloft studies. The co-authors of papers that appear in the medical literature encouraging the use of SSRI’s for kids include Drs Biederman, Schatzberg, Wilens and, of course, Charles Nemeroff. “Dr Nemeroff was recently forced to resign as chairman of Emory’s psychiatry department after Senator Grassley’s investigation revealed that he failed to disclose to his university more than a million dollars in drug industry income. All total, Nemeroff had earnings of $2.8 million from drug companies between 2000 and 2007, but failed to report at least $1.2 million. . . . .

#8 YET AMAZINGLY ENOUGH . . . .

“Shrinks on the take are so addicted to industry money that it’s impossible to embarrass them. Last year, the press ran major stories when this report came out, highly critical of how much money they were making. This year, the average amount rose by 25%. Now for some hard questions. . . . *** When Glaxo knew in 1989 that Paxil was inducing suicide at a rate EIGHT TIMES HIGHER than with a placebo and did not warn, is that not at least negligent homicide? Or is it not in some way contributing to a premeditated loss of life? How often do we read in criminal cases where someone has died and someone else did not assist that person in need but instead allowed the death to happen and that person has then been prosecuted and given a prison term? What is the difference here?

The only difference I see is that these people at Glaxo made a lot of money by keeping quiet and allowing these deaths to continue!! *** I have been asking this question for a very long time. Why is it okay for our academic institutions to peddle drugs and use our students as guinea pigs in studies? Why is it okay for them to make so much money from drug companies?

Much of their operating expenses come from this drug company’s blood money. Why would anyone be surprised, when seeing this financial entanglement with the drug companies and the academic institutions, that so many students are placed on these same drugs by campus health centers often addicting them to the drugs for many years to come? ***

How can shrinks be so stupid, or just plain “in your face” with it, as to take even more money from these companies while they are already in the process of being investigated for doing so???
Oh, that’s right we already know the answer to that one – they take more of these mind altering drugs than just about anyone else! The psychiatric nurse attending my lecture last year estimated that at least 75% of her colleagues are on these drugs. And why are they on these drugs?

Because the drug reps are telling them all that they are in a stressful profession and that sooner or later they are going to be hit by the anxiety or depression that comes with the stress . . . so they need to start on the drugs now so as to ward off “the pending inevitable” anxiety or depression.

Of course then we need to ask the question, “How could they have fallen for that old sales pitch?” That alone makes you wonder about their sanity! But then you must ask if it is okay for a drug user to then be a drug pusher even when we are discussing “legal” drugs? Because that is exactly what we are seeing happen with this situation with antidepressants – doctors on the drugs pushing them to others – no different than what you see in street drug use where those hooked on the drugs are the ones pushing them to others. When you see how similar in action these antidepressants are to LSD or PCP that whole scenario becomes totally transparent.

Ann Blake-Tracy, PhD, Executive Director, International Coalition for Drug Awareness

Learn More