Friday, November 27, 2009

The new and unimproved lobotomy unveiled in NYTimes

The new and unimproved lobotomy unveiled in NYTimes



expert academic in the field says: "Because psychiatry is the religion of modern America, and as faith in psychiatry has eroded lately, our thought leaders are dredging up old psychiatric idols that might re-energize the faithful..."

a must read from: Alliance for Human Research Protection
NYTimes Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/27/health/research/27brain.html
________________________________________________

Psychosurgery Promoted by NYT: Here We Go, Again

Friday, 27 November 2009

"Only 3 patients were in remission without adverse effects at long-term follow-up." True to an ignoble tradition of lending its "authoritative" front page to promote psychiatry's most radical experimental approaches to dealing with patients disabled by mental illness, today's front and center article in The New York Times, "Surgery for Mental Ills Offers Both Hope and Risk," by Benedict Carey, sends an optimistic positive spin on psychiatry's current spade of experimental brain surgeries.

A large photograph--rather than compelling evidence--attempts to lend the story significance.

The article acknowledges that the new surgeries are not backed by new scientific evidence of their benefit to justify the serious risks involved:

"The great promise of neuroscience at the end of the last century was that it would revolutionize the treatment of psychiatric problems. But the first real application of advanced brain science is not novel at all. It is a precise, sophisticated version of an old and controversial approach: psychosurgery, in which doctors operate directly on the brain."

Indeed, Paul Root Wolpe, a medical ethicist at Emory University, acknowledges the high risk experimental procedures that patients are being put through:

“We have this idea — it’s almost a fetish — that progress is its own justification, that if something is promising, then how can we not rush to relieve suffering?”

But, Dr. Wolpe reminds readers, "It was not so long ago, he noted, that doctors considered the frontal lobotomy a major advance — only to learn that the operation left thousands of patients with irreversible brain damage. Many promising medical ideas have run aground, and that’s why we have to move very cautiously.”

Despite "large gaps" in the neurosurgeons' understanding of the brain circuits they are operating on, several surgeries are currently being promoted:
cingulotomy, capsulotomy, brain stimulation (DBS), and radiation (gamma knife surgery)
--all pose high risk for patients with little demonstrable evidence of success.

In cingulotomy, doctors drill into the skull and thread wires into an area of the brain called the anterior cingulate.
"There they pinpoint and destroy pinches of tissue that lie along a circuit in each hemisphere that connects deeper, emotional centers of the brain to areas of the frontal cortex, where conscious planning is centered."

"This circuit appears to be hyperactive in people with severe O.C.D., and imaging studies suggest that the surgery quiets that activity."
The evidence to justify the risks does not exist: neurosurgeons proceed on what "appears" and imaging studies that "suggest" but do not demonstrate.

In capsulotomy, "surgeons go deeper, into an area called the internal capsule, and burn out spots in a circuit also thought to be overactive."

Surgeons who perform DBS, sink wires into the brain but leave them in place. "A pacemaker-like device sends a current to the electrodes, apparently interfering with circuits thought to be hyperactive in people with obsessive-compulsive disorder (and also those with severe depression). The current can be turned up, down or off, so deep brain stimulation is adjustable and, to some extent, reversible."

In the technique described in the Times article, called gamma knife surgery.
"Doctors place the patient in an M.R.I.-like machine that sends beams of radiation into the skull. The beams pass through the brain without causing damage, except at the point where they converge. There they burn out spots of brain tissue..."

Underscoring the danger these latest neurosurgical procedures pose, Dr. Darin D. Dougherty, director of the division of neurotherapeutics at Massachusetts General Hospital and an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard, put it more bluntly.

" Given the history of failed techniques, like frontal lobotomy, if this effort somehow goes wrong, it’ll shut down this approach for another hundred years.”

The evidence, from a small long-term follow-up study, reported by the respected Swedish Karolinska Institute in the Archives of General Psychiatry, [1] found that 50% of 25 patients treated with any of the commonly used surgeries for OCD, showed that response rates did not differ significantly between surgical methods.

"Only 3 patients were in remission without adverse effects at long-term follow-up."

"One of the 9 patients undergoing radiosurgery (patient 20) developed a right-sided radiation necrosis with subsequent apathy, memory problems, and executive dysfunction. Another (patient 10) developed a brain edema that reached its peak size 1 year after surgery; the patient was hospitalized with symptoms of apathy, incontinence, and seizures. At long-term follow-up, urinary incontinence, apathy, and executive problems persisted. In both cases, complications may have been caused by too high a radiation dose. Another patient who underwent multiple thermocapsulotomies (patient 8) had persistent urinary incontinence at long-term follow-up. Symptoms of apathy and poor self-control for years afterward."

"A mean weight gain of 6 kg was reported in the first postoperative year. Ten patients were considered to have significant problems with executive functioning, apathy, or disinhibition. Six of these 10 patients had received high doses of radiation or had undergone multiple surgical procedures."

Conclusions: "Capsulotomy is effective in reducing OCD symptoms. There is a substantial risk of adverse effects, and the risk may vary between surgical methods. Our findings suggest that smaller lesions are safer and that high radiation doses and multiple procedures should be avoided."

The invariably positive claims made by proponents of neurosurgery are likely explained by the inherent bias of these stakeholders. As Dr. Christian Ruck, the lead author of the Swedish paper, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry correctly notes:

"An inherent problem in most research is that innovation is driven by groups that believe in their method, thus introducing bias that is almost impossible to avoid."

So why, did the New York Times once again, see fit to publicize admittedly high risk, radical surgical procedures that demonstrably cause at least half of the patients serious long-term debilitating adverse effects that undermine their quality of life? [2]

**The answer to that question comes to us from an expert academic in the field:

"Because psychiatry is the religion of modern America, and as faith in psychiatry has eroded lately, our thought leaders are dredging up old psychiatric idols that might re-energize the faithful..."
_____________________________________________

Who really needs God or Faith anymore: we have those Second to God Psychiatrist, Pharmaceutical drugs, and Modern Medicine to fill that void.


Philip Dawdy @ Furious Seasons psychosurgery_and_the_problem_of_severe_ocd
Wrote a post related to this NYTimes Article - You might find the conversation in the comment section worth reading on this topic.


Wednesday, November 25, 2009

The Greedy Foxes are invited into the White Hen House - Health Care Reform Corporate Style

The Greedy Foxes are invited into the White Hen House - We End Up With Health Care Reform Corporate Style



Why should the following story concern you, and come as a huge red flag warning to every American.

Is "Health Care Reform" really about reform and providing the American People with better and more affordable health care; or is it all about the corporations that have their wallets open and unfettered access to the White House.

From everything I have been able to grapple from reading sections of this so called "Health Care Reform"; it is far more about an already greedy and out of control industry "pharma and health insurance giants" gaining even more power and profit through forcing 100% participation, with built in uncontrolled profits ceilings; without all the nasty business of proper oversight and regulations in place to secure not only the safety, but legal recourse against these entities.

If words like "PREEMPTION" and "TORT REFORM" doesn't ring any warning bells with you; its the way our government is removing all legal recourse from your hands when a drug company poisons you or your loved one with their latest quick fix gimmick, or when some medical corporation commits blatant medical malpractice and injury.

As you skim through this list of lobbyist and corporate power brokers who have have helped shaped this massive 2000 page "Health Care Reform"; you might want to ask our government directly; "who they are really representing and working for now a days?"

You want to look at "Reform" government style; just ask any injured worker in California how great reform is after the Government "FIXED" the Workers Comp System so Insurance Companies raked in profit and Injured Workers were forced into suffering poverty and many times out of thier homes and state by one of the most industry driven corrupt systems in a America. If Nancy Pelosi could turn her back on California Injured Workers and Voters; Can anyone trust her with National Health Care Reform.

It appears it's more about big fat lobby checks, reelection campaign funding, and power brokering among the elite.

Think about it! When was the last time the federal government really was looking out for you and your best interest?

________________________________________________

Updated November 25, 2009

Lobbyists Find Door Open
At Obama White House

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/25/obamas-aides-met-health-care-lobbyists/

Obama's Top Aides Met Often With Health Care Lobbyists

AP

President Obama's top aides met frequently with lobbyists and health care industry heavyweights as his administration pieced together a national health care overhaul, according to White House visitor records obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

President Obama's top aides met frequently with lobbyists and health care industry heavyweights as his administration pieced together a national health care overhaul, according to White House visitor records obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

The records disclose visits by a broad cross-section of the people most involved in the health care debate, weighted heavily toward those who want to overhaul the system.

The list includes George Halvorson, chairman and CEO of Kaiser Health Plans; Scott Serota, president and CEO of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association; Kenneth Kies, a Washington lobbyist who represents Blue Cross/Blue Shield, among other clients; Billy Tauzin, head of PhRMA, the drug industry lobby; Richard Umbdenstock, chief of the American Hospital Association, and numerous lobbyists.

The AP in early August asked the White House to produce records identifying communications that top Obama aides -- including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, senior advisers David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett and Pete Rouse, and 18 others -- had with outside interests on health care. The AP in late September narrowed its request to White House visitor records for those officials on the topic of health care.

The White House on Wednesday provided 575 visitor records covering the period from Jan. 20, when Obama was inaugurated, through August. The records give the name of each visitor to the White House complex to see people on AP's list, the date of the visit, the White House staffer they were supposed to see and, in some cases, the purpose of the visit. The records do not identify the visitors' employers, say on whose behalf they were there or give any specifics of what was discussed.

The records list the kinds of people usually involved in Washington policymaking: business, union and trade association executives, lobbyists and political strategists. Wednesday's disclosure was significant because of Obama's campaign promise to change business as usual in Washington, and because he voluntarily released records showing the access of special interests as the administration crafted national health care policy.

Earlier this year, the White House announced agreements under which hospitals and the drug industry promised cost savings in return for the overhaul's expected expansion in the number of insured patients. The arrangements were hammered out in private meetings, drawing comparisons to Vice President Dick Cheney's secret talks with the energy industry as he helped President George W. Bush draft a national energy policy. In that case the Bush White House steadfastly fought efforts to have visitor records released.

Obama recently began releasing visitor information on a rolling basis, and the White House put out another batch Wednesday afternoon apart from AP's request. The president "vowed to run the most transparent and ethical administration in our history, and our release of this records underscores our commitment to following through on that," said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin. He added that the list demonstrates how the president is listening to voices from across the health care spectrum.

Several lobbyists for powerful health care interests, including insurers, drug companies and large employers, visited the White House complex, the records show:

-- Laird Burnett, a top lobbyist for insurer Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., and a former Senate aide. Kaiser has spent some $1.7 million lobbying Congress over the past two years.

-- Joshua Ackil, a lobbyist whose clients include Intel, U.S. Oncology Inc., and Knoa Software Inc., all of which have reported lobbying on the health care overhaul. Ackil met with Dan Turton, the White House's deputy legislative affairs director who works with the House, in August.

-- Peter Orszag, Obama's budget chief, met in late March with representatives for Blue Cross/Blue Shield, including chief executive Serota, in-house lobbyists Alissa Fox and Kris Haltmeyer, and Kies, one of its outside lobbyists and a former top GOP congressional tax aide.

-- Amador "Dean" Aguillen, a former aide to Nancy Pelosi but now with Ogilvy Government Relations, appears to have attended the same Aug. 21 meeting with Turton that Ackil did. At Ogilvy, Aguillen works on behalf of clients including pharmaceutical companies SanofiPasteur and Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Pfizer Inc., and Amgen USA Inc., all of which reported lobbying on health care issues this year.

-- Joel Johnson, a lobbyist with close ties to Rahm Emanuel, appears to have met with his friend one-on-one in May, according to the logs. Johnson, a partner at the Glover Park Group, lobbies for several health interests including United Healthcare Services Inc. and Kinetic Concepts Inc., a medical products maker.

-- Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health care ethicist, special White House adviser on health care and brother to Rahm Emanuel, met in late March with lobbyists and executives from the pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. Inc. The meeting included the company's chief executive, Richard Clark, and a vice president, Richard Pasternak, as well as in-house lobbyist Jane Horvath. Also attending was Jonathan Hoganson, a lobbyist at an outside firm who represents Merck as well as PhRMA, the drug industry's major trade association, and several other of its large members including AstraZeneca and Abbott Labs.

-- Rahm Emanuel had an early July meeting with two labor leaders, John Sweeney, then the president of the AFL-CIO, and Gerald McEntee of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and their top lobbyists, Bill Samuel and Chuck Loveless. Sweeney and the AFL-CIO's Samuel also had a visit with Emanuel in March.

The logs show a late-July meeting between Nancy-Ann DeParle, the director of Obama's Office of Health Reform, and lobbyists from the Business Roundtable, the association representing chief executives of major U.S. firms. The group has spent $9.3 million lobbying over the past two years and is keenly interested in the outcome of the health overhaul debate. Among the attendees were the group's top lobbyist, John Castellani, and Antonio Perez, the CEO of Eastman Kodak Company.

White House officials met repeatedly with the American Medical Association, which has pushed hard -- over the objections of some physicians -- for the health overhaul and a corresponding pay hike for doctors. Ezekiel Emanuel included Dr. J. James Rohack, the AMA's president, in a large meeting in March. DeParle met in August with the association's top lobbyist, Richard Deem. That same day, she also huddled with Richard Trachtman, who lobbies for the American College of Physician Services Inc., which represents internists.

Ezekiel Emanuel met in March with executives and lobbyists from Trinity Health, a Michigan-based company that bills itself as the country's fourth-largest Catholic health system. Listed as attending the meeting were Joseph Swedish, the company's chief executive, and Paul Conlon, another top executive, as well as in-house lobbyists and two from the Washington firm Alston & Bird LLP. The lobbying firm is professional home to several former senior health officials in Congress and past administrations, as well as former Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle, who served as majority leader and was Obama's original pick as health and human services secretary.

Representatives of the seniors lobby AARP also met repeatedly with White House officials, the records show. Obama's senior adviser Valerie Jarrett met in June with Barry Rand, the group's chief executive, and two of his top lobbyists, John Rother and Nancy LeaMond. Rother and LeaMond were back the following month with a third lobbyist, David Sloane, to meet with Orszag.

AARP in early November endorsed the House Democratic health care bill, giving the legislation a major boost.

The broader White House disclosures Wednesday -- beyond the health care discussions -- showed just over 2,000 visits from the time of Obama's inauguration until the end of August, for all purposes.

They show the expected, eclectic parade of administration officials, economists, consultants, dignitaries and guests to special functions. Oprah Winfrey's two visits are logged. Reflecting the tenor of the times, the most frequent visitor was Lee Sachs, the Treasury Department's point man on the financial crisis, who came to the White House more than 60 times.

__________________________________________________



Update March 2010

Monday, November 23, 2009

Pharmaceutical Corporations - The Mystery Unlocked - It's all about the MONEY Stupid

Pharmaceutical Corporations - The Mystery Unlocked - It's all about the MONEY Stupid



Yes folks, when you have pharmaceutical corporate entities involves in so called "Health Care Reform" while being one of the largest lobby powers in Washington DC (including direct access to the White House); It's not Rocket Science to see what's this is all about in the end game. Pharma wants a bigger piece of the money pie.


It's not enough to corrupt, control, and skew the FDA with pill after worthless pill coming to market for that manipulative famous "Quick fix" approach to your Health . Pharma wants to make sure they have all the major political players in their pocket as well.

This will not only ensure they keep those hefty profits rolling in; but that you either remain and become their next life time addict in this greedy and corrupt business scheme.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From PharmaGossip - attention-usa-milking-has-turned-into

Attention USA - the milking has turned into gouging!

US drugmakers have reacted with fury to two separate calls by Members of Congress for official inquiries into allegations of industry “price gouging” in anticipation of health care reform.

Leaders of two powerful House committees have asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) for “an expedited report on recent trends in prescription drug pricing” and a proposal for monitoring pricing practices, after recent studies and a report in the New York Times suggested that drugmakers may be artificially raising prices ahead of the health reform legislation now going through both houses of Congress and which could adversely affect drug price growth.

New analyses suggest that brand-name drug prices rose more than 9% last year and over 35% since 2006, say Democratic Representatives Charles Ranger, Henry Waxman, Pete Stark and John Lewis, in their letter to the GAO. “These price increases cannot be explained by increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which fell last year. Pharmaceutical manufacturers used the same tactic before the start of Medicare Part D, raising drug prices dramatically in anticipation of gaining millions of new insured customers,” add the legislators, who lead the House Committees on Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce.

And in the Senate, Democrat Bill Nelson of Florida has written to the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requesting “an immediate and thorough investigation into drug industry pricing and recent increases, and the extent to which these increases may affect the Medicare and Medicaid programmes.”

“I want to know if there's a back-door move under way by the drugmakers to recover some of the concessions they’ve promised for health care reform,” he said.

The legislators’ demands follow the publication of a report last week by the seniors’ group AARP which claims that manufacturer prices for widely-used branded drugs have increased 9.3% since October 2008, considerably higher than the average 5.8%-8.3% of the past seven years, and against a 1.3% decline in the CPI. 96% of brand-name drugs’ prices have gone up in the last year, it adds.

“The pharmaceutical industry should be embarrassed when it sees its own price increases put side-by-side with the general inflation rate. Even as the cost of most goods and services drops, a person taking just one brand name drug now pays $200 more per year than a year ago,” said AARP executive vice president John Rother.

The NYT article quoted both the AARP study and new research by Credit Suisse analyst Catherine Arnold, who reports that the list prices of drugs made by the USA’s eight biggest drugmakers rose 8.7% on average during the 12 months ending September 30.

These price increases will add more than $10 billion to the US drug bill, which is forecast to surpass $300 billion this year, and at least one analysis puts this as the highest annual rate of drug price inflation since 1992, says the NYT.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America has fired off a number of angry responses these claims, accusing the AARP of “trying to muddy the waters for its own political gain” and of having “a skewed view of the world in which medicines are always looked at as a cost and never seen as a saving.”

“It’s pretty obvious that the calls to hold hearings or involve GAO are based on the misleading use of statistics and sensationalised media reports,” says PhRMA executive vice president Ken Johnson. In fact, he adds, the CPI shows prescription drug prices grew 2.7% in the 12 months to September, not 5.4% as cited by AARP, while prices posted on medicare.gov shows that average annual growth for the products identified by the Association as top-selling was 3.3% over the last three years, less than half the 7.4% annual average cited by AARP.

The group’s conclusions are based on incomplete information because they do not take account of discounts and rebates which can significantly lower the cost of many brand-name drugs, benefiting patients nationwide, “but you wouldn’t know it by looking at pharmacy prices – or reading the New York Times,” he says. The newspaper article “only tells half a story, using selected statistics to make a flawed assumption that an increase in drug prices must somehow be tied to health care reform.”

“Here’s the real truth: financial results for nearly a dozen of our companies show zero revenue growth in the third quarter and -3% year to date. And it doesn’t appear to get much better down the road,” says Mr Johnson.

By Lynne Taylor
PharmaTimes



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes even the Far Leftest wake up to smell the coffee burning.



If that isn't enough bad news and evidence; please go read this @ Bloomberg.com broke the law by promoting drugs for unapproved uses

Big-Pharma-offers-savings-but-only-after-increasing-prices

Pretty much every major Pharma corporation is following this exact same behavioral profile and pattern

Friday, November 20, 2009

British National Health Service (NHS) - Stop going after the kids with your propaganda and poisons

Pharma and British National Health Service (NHS) - Stop going after the kids with your poisons and propaganda







Pediatric Zyprexa Brochures Embarrass British Health Service

By Martha Rosenberg

opednews.com

For OpEdNews: Martha Rosenberg - Writer"Your medicine is called Olanzapine. Pronounced 'o-lan-za-peen,'" says the lime green kids' brochure for the antipsychotic Zyprexa, published by Britain's National Health Service (NHS). "Many children, teenagers and young people need to take medicines prescribed by doctors to help them stay well and healthy," says the text amid cartoons of happy children skating, roller blading and playing soccer.

Similar brochures educate children about "ris-perry-done" (Risperdal), another antipsychotic and "ato-mox-e-teen" (Strattera), an ADHD drug. But when mental health advocate Ben Hansen tried to "educate" US children further by posting the brochures on his web site bonkersinstitute.org, he got a love letter from the NHS "I have been informed that you are using our leaflets on your web-site," wrote Deputy Chief Pharmacist with the Central and North West London NHS Trust Sue Eccles in an email this month. "Our objective is [sic] provide written materials to support the verbal counselling given by healthcare professionals -- they are not meant to stand alone as sources of information," says Eccles requesting that only the "front page and our contact details," be shown.Unfortunately, the NHS caught Hansen on a day he didn't take his meds. "We posted the NHS leaflets to stimulate public scrutiny of your agency," replied Hansen, who writes under the pseudonym Methodius Isaac Bonkers, MD. "We call upon the NHS to stop promoting harmful psychotropic drugs for children. In a spirit of full disclosure and transparency, we have now posted your letter as well."

No wonder Hansen's four-year-old site, the Bonkers Institute, is considered a leader in sunshine activism. Hansen's zeal for unearthing and posting pharma sleight-of-hand even landed him on the front page of the New York Times two years ago in an article called,

"In Some States, Maker Oversees Use of Its Drug."

Twenty states take advantage of the Pharmacy Quality Improvement Project, a "free" program from Eli Lilly that shows states how to save money on...drugs from Eli Lilly. But Hansen, says the Times "obtained documents through a Freedom of Information request that showed a Lilly account executive had asked to take part in planning sessions and offered to have Lilly representatives brief doctors."

Lilly dropped the program in states daring to require doctors to seek permission to prescribe Zyprexa which at $300 a month is the single biggest drug cost for state Medicaid budgets according to the Times.

Hansen also received FOIA documents from the state of Michigan showing the number of psychiatric drugs prescribed to children under 6 and the number of Medicaid patients on 5 or more psychiatric drugs but they did not name the drugs.

How does pharma vault a drug only indicated for the one percent of the population with schizophrenia and four percent with bipolar disorder to be the biggest line item in the Medicaid budget? As in your tax dollars? Just good off-label marketing--promoting a drug for a non-FDA approved use which is illegal in the US.

And speaking of non-approved uses, how can Britain's National Health Service produce a brochure for kids taking Zyprexa when kids are not supposed to take Zyprexa? "ZYPREXA is not for patients who are under 18 years," says the prescribing information. "Keep out of the reach and sight of children."

Are the healthy, active kids shown in the cartoons "befores" since 30 percent of Zyprexa patients gain 22 pounds or more, 16 percent, 66 pounds or more and some gain over 100 pounds according to Lilly's own published data? Zyprexa "may make you feel like eating more food," says the NHS brochure in what might be considered classic British understatement. "If this happens, try not to eat more than usual and talk to an adult or your doctor about this." Any questions?

And how about Zyprexa's notorious soporific effect or zombie factor? "It is a good [sic] to take olanzapine at bedtime, as it can make some people feel sleepy," says the brochure.

Hansen's war on pharma disease mongering comes from first hand experience. He was misdiagnosed with "bipolar disorder" and denied release in a Michigan hospital after a reaction to the death of his father and a suicide of a friend on the same day. "The psychiatrist refused to treat me without drugs," says Hansen and "I was held in the hospital involuntarily for the next 39 days, totaling a bill of $23,000."

Take one look at the Bonkers Institute's gallery of vintage psychiatric drug advertising, the Nearly Genuine and Truly Marvelous Mental Medicine Show--one of the best on the web--and you see the roots of today's pediatric bipolar/depression/ADD/ADHD "epidemic" decades ago. Thorazine syrup was given for vomiting in kids, antidepressants for bedwetting and Ritalin for "mischief" and "juvenile pranks." Like the NHS brochures, kids are shown happy and playing with soccer balls.

_________________________________________________________________

These hideous brochures were developed and distributed by the British Health Service "NHS".
They asked the Bonkers Institute to remove them from their site. You can read the email exchange for yourself at the BonkersInstitute.

I have some sobering news for the British Health Service; these brochures are going to be plastered all around the Internet; so everyone can see how a government entity joins hands with Pharma in promoting an outrageous, false, and extremely dangerous drugging modality to Children, and the greater world community at large.

More thoughtful insight on this topic: nhs-goes-after-american-website

BNET - nhs-loses-fight-over-publication-of-antipsychotic-meds-brochures-for-kids

News Blaze - Pediatric Drug Brochures Embarrass British Health Service


Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Pharmaceutical Corporations May Take the Money and Run? - Stock Holders Beware


Pharmaceutical Corporations May Take the Money and Run - Stock Holders Beware


I hope every one remembers what happened with ENRON, and like Corporations/industries before their prosperous golden bubble burst. Could we be seeing another mortgage crisis pharma style looming upon the horizon?


In the Health Care Reform Package recently presented before Congress, there is a mandated discount being placed upon the Pharmaceutical Industry and drugs prices that could effect their Monstrous Profits in the future. So they have decided to circumvent the process, and started raising drug prices now; while stock piling cash and profits for those supposed coming leaner times. Could this spark the end to the "Greed Bonanza" that Pharma has had going in recent decades?


Maybe as with GM (Government Motors, Banks, AIG), we can just dump a trillion tax dollars Pharma's way when the going gets tough, and call it a "stimulus package"?


This has at least one watchful eye in Washington DC blinking at this preemptive strike by the Big Pharma greed machine.




From Fox News:
____________________________________________________
senator-calls-investigation

Updated November 18, 2009

Senator Calls for Investigation Into Report That Drugmakers Sharply Raised Costs

by

FOXNews.com

Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida is urging the Department of Health and Human Services inspector general to investigate reports that prescription drug makers are raising prices ahead of Congress' sweeping health care overhaul.


Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida is urging the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services to investigate reports that prescription drug makers are raising prices ahead of Congress' sweeping health care reform bill.

In a letter sent to Health inspector Daniel R. Levinson on Wednesday, Nelson said he is proposing an amendment that would force the country's biggest pharmaceutical companies to offset more of the costs.

Nelson cited a recent AARP study that found that drugmakers have dramatically upped the cost on commonly used brand-name drugs.

"I want to know if there's a back-door move under way by the drugmakers to recover some of the concessions they've promised for health care reform," Nelson said.

The analysis by AARP's Public Policy Institute released Monday found that the price of many prescription drugs used by Medicare beneficiaries rose by 9.3 percent from October 2008 to September 2009 -- a rate that's higher than usual when compared to previous years.

The study reported that prices increased for 96 percent of brand-name drugs over the last year -- despite a negative general inflation rate.

"This report confirms what most older Americans already know: drugmakers are raising their prices and enjoying windfall profits, even as the rest of the economy is suffering," AARP Executive Vice President John Rother said in a press release Monday.

"The pharmaceutical industry should be embarrassed when it sees its own price increases put side by side with the general inflation rate. Even as the cost of most goods and services drops, a person taking just one brand-name drug now pays $200 more per year than a year ago," said Rother.

Nelson called the increase "troubling" and is pressing Levinson to fully investigate AARP's findings.

"As you know, President Obama reached an agreement with the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, which pledged $80 billion in support of health reform efforts," Nelson wrote in his letter to Levinson.

"A significant portion of this support was in the form of rebates to the Medicaid program and discounts offered to seniors in the Medicare Part D coverage gap," he wrote.

____________________________________________________




I guess when the President of America makes Secret White House back room deals with known criminal entities such as so many in the Pharmaceutical Industry; what else would you expect.


After all, it is all about the MONEY; and Very Seldom about Health Care or your quality of life Dear Citizen of the USA.

Monday, November 16, 2009

AstraZeneca's Tony Jewell - the voice of evil and spin

AstraZeneca's Tony Jewell - the voice of evil and spin


Tony Jewell Senior Director, Issues & Policy Communications ASTRAZENECA

Tony Jewell is that pitch fork toting head spokesperson for AstraZeneca Pharmaceutical Corporation. He is the person that is really in charge of damage control over at AZ.

When News Breaks about AZ burying studies, pimping poison, and other documented illegal practices; Tony is the guy that is paid to spin the truth in our press and public eye.

In Tony's most recent effort; he wrote the Chicago Tribune at AZ's behest defending some fairly damning evidence and articles they carried in their Newspapers this past week.

I encourage everyone to read these linked articles from the Chicago Tribune

Doctor-drugmaker ties: Psychiatrist Dr. Michael Reinstein received nearly $500,000 from antipsychotic drug's manufacturer--Chicago Tribune:

the Chicago Tribune article, here.

So let's break down Tony's response to the
Chicago Tribune here on this blog; so everyone can understand where he's actually coming from with his "damage control" point of view.

__________________________________________________
from the chicagotribune:

Effective and appropriate treatment

In a series of recent articles, the Tribune incompletely characterizes the benefits and risks associated with Seroquel, a medicine that has been on the market for more than a decade and has been prescribed to millions of patients in the United States.

Since first approved in 1997 for the treatment of schizophrenia, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved Seroquel as safe and effective for three indications in bipolar disorder, as well as in a new formulation for additional treatments in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Today Seroquel and Seroquel XR are the only medicines approved as monotherapy by the FDA to treat both the acute depressive and manic episodes associated with bipolar disorder.

The safety and efficacy of Seroquel has been evaluated in clinical trials with thousands of patients and AstraZeneca has shared all required data with the FDA, both before and after the agency approved it as safe and effective.

AstraZeneca believes the totality of the science around Seroquel -- including company-sponsored studies, research sponsored by the federal government and physician experience -- confirms it is an effective and appropriate treatment choice for many patients who suffer from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

The company has worked diligently with the FDA to ensure that the safety profile of Seroquel is reflected appropriately in the prescribing information so that health care professionals can weigh the risk and benefit of medicines when making treatment decisions.

- Tony Jewell, senior director, Corporate

Communications, AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Del.

Media Contacts: Tony Jewell, AstraZeneca: 302-885-4594

________________________________________________________

Tony really pressed hard on the fact of FDA approvals in his fragile defense propaganda letter; ignoring the facts that AZ buried damning studies, illegally promoted off label use, and manipulated the real science behind this drugs effectiveness to the FDA.

As we know in fact; an FDA approval does not constitute drug safety by any wild stretch of the imagination.

Do we need to list the drugs the FDA approved and then had to recall or alter safety warnings over in the form of "BLACK BOX" affiliations or remove from the US Market.


________________________________________________________


Questions from the public we would like Tony Jewell and AZ to answer:

So please tell us all how an FDA seal of approval makes a drug safe for the American consumer?

When you slip into the lake of fire in the evening to relax with a martini Tony: do you calculate the body count with a correlation to profit margins?

Pharmalot AstraZeneca, A Psychiatrist And Big Seroquel Bucks

What is the actual price tag AZ has placed on human suffering, perminant injury, and ending a human life in your cost/benefit/profit/legal/marketing analysis at this time Tony?

furiousseasons

If this "Seroquel" is as beneficial as you claim; why is your employer in the final stages of paying $520 million penalty, while pleading guilty to a whole host of crimes related to this drug?

AstraZeneca Pays $520M To Settle Seroquel Probes

from http://pharmagoss...

Story

One small problem Denise!

Would you like to tell us all about the infamous study #15 AZ buried from just about everyone?
soulful sepulcher: Study 15, silence was not golden: Seroquel: you ...

furiousSeasons- Seroquel Documents: Study 15 Shows Seroquel Not Efficacious ...


You do remember Wayne McFadden of (I'll spank you hard fame)? Would you like to go into detail about how unethical behaviors, ghost writing, skew studies and bad science work at AZ?


Can you tell everyone reading this, why AZ would give the Japanese drug regulatory body warning about metabolic issues (including weight gain and diabetes) and other dangerous side effects related to Seroquel; yet somehow deny those problems exists when presenting data to the FDA and American Public?

AstraZeneca Denied Seroquel Diabetes Link After Warning Of It In Japan

Seroquel Documents: AZ Issues 2002 Warning In Japan, But Insists All Is Well In The US

Why has AZ not lived up to the last CIA (Corporate Integrity Agreement) they signed with the DOJ (Department of Justice) over their admitted criminal actions?

64-million-criminal-fine-paid

Would you like to reveal for the American Citizens the complete and whole truth for once Mr. Jewell; or will you just continue to lie to us over and over again?

After all, that's what you are in fact, a paid liar and manipulator?








Here is just a partial list of drugs that have either been removed from the US market by the FDA, or have outstanding litigation proceedings over their adverse effects pending. Read it and weep some of those crocodile tears for the victims, Tony.

• Accutane
• Advair
• Ambien
• Aranesp
• Aredia
• Avandia
• Baycol
• Bextra
• Botox
• Byetta
• Carbamazepine
• Cefepime
• Celebrex
• Children's Cough and Cold Medication
• Cialis
• Cipro
• Cold-Eeze
• Complete Moisture Plus
• Crestor
• Cytotec
• Depakote
• Digitek
• Duract
• Duragesic Fentanyl Patch
• Ephedra
• Epogen
• Femara
• Fen-Phen
• Fluorquinolone
• Fosamax
• Gardasil
• Gadolinium
• Hismanal
• Heparin
• Hydroxycut
• Ketek
• Lamisil
• Leukine
• Levitra
• Levaquin
• Lotronex
• Meridia
• Metabolife
• Mifeprex
• Mirapex
• Mobic
• Normal Saline Flush Syringes
• Nuvaring
• Ortho Evra
• Paxil
• Permax
• Phenergan
• Pondimin
• Posicor
• Prempro
• Prilosec/Nexium
• Procrit
• Propulsid
• Provigil
• Prozac
• Quinine
• Raplon
• Raptiva
• Raxar
• Redux
• Reglan
• Renu MoistureLoc Lens Solution
• Rezulin
• Risperdal
• Ritalin
• Rituxan
• Seldane
• Seroquel
• Tequin
• Trasylol
• Tysabri
• Viagra
• Vioxx
• Vytorin/Zetia
• Xolair
• Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella
• Zelnorm
• Zencore Tabs
• Zicam
• Zoloft
• Zometa
• Zyprexa

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Is the DOJ, Department of Justice Fine (500M) CIA (Corporate Integrity Agreement) with AstraZeneca another case of a coverup and sweetheart agreement

Is the DOJ (Department of Justice) Fine & CIA (Corporate Integrity Agreement) with AstraZeneca another case of a cover-up/sweetheart deal to avoid further penalties

Pharmalot has reported this week the news that AZ is in the final stages of completing a deal with the government over their shady and criminal actions with the drug Seroquel

AstraZeneca Pays $520M To Settle Seroquel Probes

AstraZeneca has agreed to pay $520 million to settle two federal investigations and two whistleblower lawsuits over its Seroquel antipsychotic.

Antipsychotics, you may recall, have become extremely controversial in recent years as the pills were more widely prescribed for young children and the elderly for indications not approved by the FDA (see this). In some nursing homes, for instance, seniors are experiencing tremors and a higher risk of harmful falls or even death while on the meds, which are known to cause weight gain and diabetes.

The investigation, which was underway at the same time that AstraZeneca has been battling numerous lawsuits over allegedly undisclosed Seroquel side effects, was led by the US Department of Justice’s Philadelphia office. Interestingly, the investigators reviewed not only Seroquel sales and marketing practices, but some physicians who participated in Seroquel clinical trials.

Separately, at least 34 states are pursuing separate investigations of AstraZeneca’s marketing practices as part of a joint investigation and others may be conducting their own probes. In other words, AstraZeneca may have to dole out more money for its practices.

An AstraZeneca spokesman says the drugmaker “is committed to strong, effective compliance programs, both in the U.S. and globally, to embed a culture of ethics and integrity in all our business practices. It has been and remains a key goal.”



Past and Present AstraZeneca - Seroquel Marketing and Senior Management Team

______________________________________

What we see is missing with glaring regularity in these news reports; is how these "sealed" proceedings effect ongoing civil litigation for injuries incurred from the use of Seroquel by patients. To date there are an estimated 12,000+ civil complaints filed against AZ over Seroquel's metabolic effects on users (including massive weight gain, diabetes, and a whole host of other adverse side effects including death).

You would rationally and logically believe the DOJ would be forth coming with all the evidence they have accumulated in these matters? But this may not be the case here.

AstraZeneca has been down this road before; pleading guilty to criminal activities and signed an CIA agreement with the DOJ. They then continued to go about engaging in the same/like criminal behaviors without hesitation.

So will the DOJ hold them accountable for the first agreement they made to clean up their act? It appears they will not in all truth; DOJ will just have them sign another CIA, pay a small fine (in comparison to the massive profits they have made while conducting criminals activities), and AZ continues shady business as usual.

Let me attempt to put this into some type of normal speak context for everyone here:

Let's say you are arrested for a DUI (driving under the influence). You plead guilty and are assessed a fine, sign an agreement to attend some alcohol abuse classes, and are given probation in lieu of jail time if you agree to not engage in this illegal activity again.

A month later you are again arrested for another DUI. Now normally the court would not look to kindly upon such a behavior; probably revoking your license, levee even a larger fine, and you would probably spend some time in jail while picking up trash alone the interstate.

Now let's say you do your jail time and are arrested once more for another DUI. This time you are involved in an accident that caused serious injury to another. You would rationally expect the court to throw the book at you so to speak. You would probably face not only some serious prison time for your actions; but also be liable for paying considerable damages to the injured parties.

This analogy could be considered a rational response to an illegal act in these cases by most.

Yet if you happen to be a giant Pharmaceutical Corporation doing business in America this rational and logical argument does not appear to apply.

AstraZenena entered into a CIA agreement before with the DOJ in 2003.

_______________________________________

from soulful sepulcher

FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 2003

WWW.USDOJ.GOV

CIV
(302) 573-6277

ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP PLEADS GUILTY
TO HEALTHCARE CRIME; COMPANY AGREES TO PAY
$355 MILLION TO SETTLE CHARGES
____________________________________________

Yet here we are again with our government (acting in the capacity of the DOJ) allowing a repeated criminal offender to walk away from their crimes that have injured and maimed thousands upon thousands of innocent parties with little more than another backroom deal to avoid real punishment.

The people must demand better accountability from are judicial and enforcement bodies in relationship to repeat corporate offenders. We need to demand transparency and rational penalties; or these crimes against all American's will continue unabated with unimaginable cost to each and everyone of us.

Why you might ask? It's quite simple really; For these large corporations its more profitable to continue criminals activities, sign agreements they have no intention of following, and pay unsubstantial fines; than it is to be ethical, moral, and conduct honest business practices. The built in financial incentive is to not play by the rules of law or operate with responsible integrity.

We the People expect and demand more from the justice system. I write this post to let the DOJ know, we the people are watching and reporting upon your actions.

Read more and connect the dots yourself at these and many more links to great sites/information located on my sidebar:

pharmagossip-google-sidewiki

PharmaGossip's Google Sidewiki entry about AstraZeneca's Seroquel Scandal:

http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fpharmagossip.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F10%2Fastrazeneca-to-pay-520-million-to.html&usd=1&usg=AFQjCNFv_8pYTbZVYUI8cXWuKhre7PRGVQ

Friday, November 13, 2009

NBC NEWS Does not post comments that would disagree with their sponsored promotion of drugging children, adults, and the elderly


NBC NEWS Does not post comments that would disagree with their sponsored promotion of drugging children, adults, and the elderly

_________________________________________________

Glenn Close shines light on mental health

Posted: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 3:36 PM by Daily Nightly Editor
Filed Under:

http://dailynightly.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/11/11/2124838.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

By Anne Thompson, NBC News chief environmental affairs correspondent

"If something goes wrong with your body... you break a bone, get the flu, or something more serious, sympathy and help abounds. But what if something goes wrong with your brain?"

"Mental illness affects one in six Americans and yet it is still an illness people are reluctant to talk about, let alone admit that they have."

_______________________________________________________________

After reading about NBC News running an interview with Glenn Close on their nightly national news program.

I decided to leave the following comment on their blog honestly questioning the NBC News approach to reporting Mental Health Issues. They did not let my comment be posted on their blog.

They did however post a whole series of comments that attempted to validate an NBC News view that Mental Health Conditions are in fact Biological Diseases (genetic and biological chemical imbalances of the brain). They, as the comments they filter, censor, and allow tend to follow in lock step with their programing opinions.

So since NBC News Refused to post and Rejected my comment; I will post it here for everyone to read.

The facts are; NBC News, along with all the Major News Networks will not expose the corruption in the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatry because it would be biting the very hand that feeds them. Major Media Corporations are not about the "NEWS" or "TRUTH" anymore; and they have not been telling us the truth for quite some time.

They are little more than opinion, spin, and propaganda machines feeding the public lies and their own version of what they want you to believe is the truth; while being to afraid to do real investigative reporting, since it would offend some of their most profitable and loyal sponsors.

___________________________________________________________

Dear Anne Thompson NBC News:

When is main stream media going to start discussing the corruption across the board in this Pharmaceutical based mental health modality and begin connecting all dots together?

BringChange2Mind is just a nice front group for CABF. CABF has on their advisory board many of the most corrupt and controversial doctors practicing medicine today. They are pushing an aggressive modality that is labeling record numbers of children diseased; while pushing on them dangerous medications that will have catastrophic consequences on our society for many generations to come.

NAMI (a like organization and supporter of both BringChange2mind and CABF) draws upwards of 75% of its budget directly from the Pharmaceutical Industry.

These like organizations actually advertise and lobby for Pharmaceutical Interest. Why? Because it is their bread and butter, while they move in lock step or else. I ask you to please do the research.

An astonishing reported 4000% increase in the diagnosis of childhood bipolar (not to mention the vast increases in ADHD/ADD and other so called diseases like Defiant Behavioral Disorder; which are all being treated with powerful and dangerous drugs as young as preschool age) over the past decade.

The real story behind all these groups is that they all are pushing the biochemical imbalance/genetic disease paradigm that must be chemically/Drug treated for life; this paradigm does not have the science to back up the outrageous claims. Again, I ask you to do the research.

I would suggest NBC News starts doing some hard journalism, and begin looking at this issue from a much boarder and skeptical angle.

You might wish to begin with reading Pharmalot, Furious Seasons, and soulful sepulcher blogs (easy Google searches with a massive amount of information). Then you might want to also pick up a telephone and interview Robert Whitaker author of "Mad in America", or Talk to Dr. Peter Breggin.

There is another huge and important story here; a true story full of heart break, destroyed children and families, corruption, greed, misinformation, politics, and power.

I wonder what Major News Organization will be brave and courageous enough to report the darker side of this topic and issue which will affect not just millions of America lives, but the economy of the Nation for decades to come.

I know very well that the Pharmaceutical Industry is one of the most powerful advertisers in all Media, including TV, and Cable.

I guess my question for you is this; who’s going to challenge that kind of clout with some Hard News Worthy Integrity?

Stan


FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.

ALL CONTENT ON THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED TO YOU ON AN "AS IS," "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. Stan MAKES NO WARRANTY AS TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, CURRENCY, OR RELIABILITY OF ANY CONTENT AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS WEB SITE.

In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.

NO WARRANTIES “Is Something Not Quite Right With Stan - A Mental Health Blog” MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES THAT USE OF THE WEB SITE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ANY CONTENT YOU MAY OBTAIN FROM THE WEB SITE IS FREE OF VIRUSES.

This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.