Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Is this for real, or just more smoke and mirrors - Big Pharma Executive being prosecuted by DOJ for obstruction of justice & lies


Is this for real, or just more Bravodo, Smoke, & Mirrors - Big Pharma Executive being prosecuted by DOJ for criminal obstruction of justice & lies

The Big News coming out of Pharma-land is that the DOJ is going after a former GSK lawyer/Exec for a myriad of crimes which could lead to a Fashionable Federal Prison Jump Suit & a very long stay at a Martha Steward Foo Foo Club Fed. The question still remains if this scum bag exec does go to trial and is convicted (or sings like a Canary); what effect this might have on the World Wide Pharmaceutical Drug Cartel Criminal business as usual model?

From the rumblings being heard around the Pharma CEO world it appears this maybe a circle the wagons moment, with ensuing strategy orgy session which would include a huge PR campaign of "we need to be more open and listen themes" while prospects of huge corporate take overs, turf wars, and more profits shine like stars in their beady & greedy CEO eyes ( read here--> AstraZeneca CEO: Pharma Must Be Open, Work With Stakeholders - FoxBusiness.com and here Glaxo sees more industry consolidation - Pharma Not Well Equipped to Handle a PR Cyber Storm-VOX

For a little back story)



This all sounds like a big wonderful hug fest & one giant "can't we all just get along" moment for all those that have been watching these corporate crimes being waged against society and humanity go unchecked for decades now. But the caution bells are ringing in distance as we have learned the hard way many times before with Big Pharma; words are always cheap, while honesty & accountability is something of an abomination to the holy pharmaceutical corporate stone tablet creed.

So as they say, the proof will lay/lie in the pudding. Will AstraZeneca finally do the right thing when it's comes to the many thousands injured by Seroquel, will J&J make good on the Risperdal crime settlements and get clean/sober, will GSK come in with a apology mop with groveling pledges of restitution and pay outs for damage caused by Paxil, Wellbutrin, Avandia, as we just name a few of the many ongoing Big Pharma Cartel horrendous criminal actions that have seriously harmed or killed consumers.


If you believe the sweet smell of change is in the air, you might want to ask/consider why is Big Pharma trying to close the honesty door at the same time they are saying they want it to be wide open? read here-->And Here Is The SEC Whistleblower Program

Now if one was to place this in the framed context that Big Pharma is still pumping huge amounts of money into the drug influence game involving doctors and research here---> http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/ and here-->http://www.madinamerica.com/madinamerica.com/Leo/F7BDF895-0DE9-4605-8C73-A25177CBA9FE.html

Or here where they continue funding front marketing groups - AstraZeneca Funds DBSA
http://www.speakaboutdepression.com/ and AstraZeneca funds NAMI -http://www.namimi.org/astrazeneca-bipolar-journey-exhibit-appearing-2010-nami-walks as stellar examples.

One might/would get the distinct impression that Big Pharma has no intention of changing their profitable criminal ways, or their seedy business as usual model.
Definitely give us all some food for thought as the DOJ finally appears on it's face to be taking some substantive action against the world largest criminal organization.



____________________________________________________

via coreynahman.com & pharmagossip

Former Glaxo Lawyer/Exec Indicted For Obstruction

Move telegraphs DOJ's posture regarding going after execs:
Former Glaxo Lawyer Charged With Obstruction of Probe … lying to obstruct a U.S. investigation into whether the pharmaceutical company illegally marketed an antidepressant as a weight-loss drug. …[Wall Street Journal]
Former Glaxo lawyer accused of marketing cover-up … concealing evidence and falsifying documents to influence a federal agency, four counts of making false statements to the FDA, as well as one count of obstructing an official proceeding …[MM&M]
Ex-Glaxo Lawyer Indicted for Role in US Drug Probe … withholding slides that were used by doctors who were paid by Glaxo to promote the drug and that she prepared a memorandum about …[US News]
DOJ charges former Glaxo lawyer with obstruction … rare case of the Department of Justice targeting a specific executive, rather than an entire company … obstructing justice and making false statements in an effort to conceal illegal promotion of a company drug …


It's titillating she is a lawyer but the real take home point is that the US Attorney has indicted a former V.P. (She is retired). The shit is going to hit the fan when they offer her immunity to tell on her friends. (And you know she will because there is no parole in Federal prisons). Worst case scenario would be that she implicates her former compadres in a manner that morphs this headache into a full blown RICO case.

___________________________________________________________

And bnet-pharma Jim Edwards has his take on this developing news

http://www.bnet.com/blog/drug-business/indicted-glaxo-lawyer-8217s-choice-cooperate-with-feds-or-stay-silent/6391?tag=content;load-all-news

Indicted Glaxo Lawyer’s Choice: Cooperate With Feds or Stay Silent

A vp/associate general counsel at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) was indicted for lying to the FDA in a signal that the feds have finally begun their long-awaited quest to prosecute individual drug executives for wrongdoing in the drug business. Previously, prosecutors relied on multimillion dollar settlements in their attempts to discipline drug companies. Those settlements merely became part of Big Pharma’s revenue model, however, so now they’re going after management.

Prosecutors have started at Big Pharma’s weakest point: GSK. The company recently settled a $750 million case in which the feds discovered workers at its Paxil factory in Puerto Rico were running a black market drugs operation, shipping contaminated or mixed-up pills, and filing reports in Spanish so that management couldn’t understand them. The Paxil fiasco is still under scrutiny: Congress has demanded a probe of the FDA in Puerto Rico to understand why the agency was asleep at the wheel during the 10 years that the GSK facility ran of the rails. At the time of the Paxil settlement, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston said the Paxil probe was still “ongoing.”

Which brings us to the accused GSK lawyer, Lauren Stevens, and what will happen next. Stevens has been indicted for alleged misstatements she made to the FDA about GSK’s promotion of the antidepressant Wellbutrin. GSK paid 2,700 doctors to give promotional talks about the drug and Stevens knew 28 of them were using materials promoting illegal, “off-label” uses of the drug for purposes such as weight loss, the indictment claims. The probe began in 2002, according to page 144 of this GSK disclosure.

_____________________________________________________

No comments:

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.