Guest guest Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 Great article of Arianna Huffington on Salon.com Sepp http://www.salon.com/opinion/huffington/2004/11/25/vioxx/ Bad medicine There ought to be a special place in hell for companies like drug giant Merck, whose painkiller Vioxx may have killed 55,000 people. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Arianna Huffington Nov. 25, 2004 | As Democrats continue to search heaven and earth for a moral values issue they can call their own, I have just the prescription: Why not start with the immoral behavior of giant drug companies such as Merck that continue to sacrifice the health of the public on the altar of higher and higher profits? According to last week's Senate testimony by Dr. David Graham, associate director for science and medicine in the FDA's Office of Drug Safety, as many as 55,000 patients may have died as a result of taking Vioxx. Shocking. But not to Merck, which had spent hundreds of millions of dollars convincing Americans to take its blockbuster pain pill even though the company's own studies showed that it greatly increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes. If Democrats want to appeal to voters who believe in promoting what the president calls " a culture of life, " they should make it a priority to put an end to the kind of corporate behavior that promotes a culture of death. Merck's actions throughout the entire Vioxx affair have been utterly despicable. When the company pulled the drug off the market in September, CEO Raymond Gilmartin claimed that the scientific findings that led to the withdrawal were " unexpected. " Which is like releasing a ravenous wolf into a pen full of sheep then acting surprised that lamb chops are on the menu. Because recently uncovered internal Merck documents show that as far back as 1998 -- a year before the drug was even approved by the FDA -- the drug giant had evidence indicating that Vioxx was a potential killer. But instead of going back to the drawing board, the company made the heart-stopping decision to push ahead -- using every weapon in its well-funded arsenal to put off regulators, rope in consumers, and keep the bad news from surfacing. They did a masterful job, turning Vioxx into a commercial elixir: Last year alone, sales of the drug totaled $2.5 billion. It was a huge success. Unless you were one of the people who had to be sacrificed for it. Merck's CEO also claimed that the company's handling of Vioxx showed it was " really putting patient safety first. " Which it definitely did -- if by " first " he meant right after profits and Merck's stock price. Indeed, those internal documents reveal that nothing in the Merck corporate hierarchy was more important than covering the company's backside. One offers an " obstacle handling guide " for " all field personnel with responsibility for Vioxx. " Another is titled " Dodge Ball Vioxx " and suggests ways Merck salespeople can deal with troubling questions raised by doctors concerned with the safety of Vioxx. The final four pages of the manual each contain a single instruction: " DODGE! " (I wonder if Ben Stiller has heard about this? I smell sequel!) Merck also exhibited a rare gift for putting negative findings into a positive light. When one scientific study found that Vioxx, while indeed multiplying the risk of cardiovascular complications, caused fewer digestive side effects than other pain relief drugs, the company strong-armed the FDA into displaying the good news about fewer upset stomachs more prominently on the drug's label than that pesky stuff about more heart attacks. I'm surprised they didn't try to turn this tidbit into a TV ad: " Sure Vioxx can increase your chances of cardiac arrest, but at least you won't have an upset tummy when it kills you! " Speaking of ads, the most loathsome aspect of the whole Vioxx affair is the way Merck used a $500 million marketing campaign to persuade over 20 million Americans to pop its noxious little pill. And company executives continued to run these ads long after they knew that there was big trouble brewing. I'm sure that our evangelical friends in the red states will agree that there ought to be a special place in hell for corporations that show such a wanton disregard for human life. And if any of this sounds familiar, it should. It's certainly giving me a profound sense of drug company déjà vu, with the tragic stories of Baycol, Rezulin and Duract still fresh in my mind. How many times do we have to travel down this deadly path -- the side of the road littered with bodies and the empty containers of drugs that were approved despite serious questions, and left on the market despite growing evidence of innocent lives being lost? And after each case come the inevitable calls for accountability and promises to reform the system -- promises that are then forgotten until the next killer drug hits the headlines. During last week's hearings on the Vioxx scandal, Dr. Graham, while citing an additional five drugs that he feels pose a danger to the public, said that the nation's compromised drug oversight system had left Americans " virtually defenseless " against killer drugs and warned that we are facing " the single greatest drug safety catastrophe in the history of this country or the history of the world. " And you thought our biggest problem with pharmaceuticals was President Bush refusing to allow us to get cheap drugs from Canada. Which he laughably justifies because of concerns about the safety of Canadian drugs. So why don't things ever change, even as the death toll mounts? As always, the answer can be found by following the money. The big pharmaceutical companies continue to be the 800-pound gorillas of American politics -- their power stemming from a muscular combination of lobbying ($150 million a year), campaign contributions (close to $50 million doled out to federal candidates over the past four years) and powerful friends in very high places (Donald Rumsfeld was formerly CEO of drug industry powerhouse G.D. Searle, and Mitch Daniels, the former White House budget director and new governor-elect of Indiana, was a senior vice president at Eli Lilly). In a 2000 e-mail, Merck's chief of research called Vioxx's propensity to cause heart attacks and strokes " a shame. " Something his company clearly lacks. Of course, the real shame is that we continue to have a regulatory system in which corporate greed, political timidity and a culture of cronyism have rendered the public good a quaint afterthought. Sen. Charles Grassley, the conservative Republican who chairs the Senate Finance Committee that held the Vioxx hearings, lambasted the FDA for being " under the thumb " of the very pharmaceutical companies it is supposed to regulate, saying the agency " has a relationship with the drug companies that is too cozy. " Are Democrats going to sit by while conservatives like Grassley take the moral lead on this issue? If the Democratic Party is serious about reclaiming the moral values high ground, it needs to stop trying to figure out how to triangulate on gay marriage and take a long hard look in the medicine chest mirror. Then open it up, let fly with the proper moral outrage, and start cleaning out the mess that lies inside. It's time for Democrats to become the real pro-life party. salon.com -- When the government fears the people, you have liberty; when the people fear the government, you have tyranny. Thomas Jefferson Visit my site at: http://www.unsaccodicanapa.com -- The individual is supreme and finds the way through intuition... Sepp Hasslberger My page on physics, new energy, economy: http://www.hasslberger.com/ Critical perspective on Health: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/ Antiprohibition and cannabis: http://www.unsaccodicanapa.com/ Communication Agents: http://www.communicationagents.com/ Freedom of choice - La Leva di Archimede: http://www.laleva.cc/ La Leva's news: http://www.laleva.org/ Robin Good - http://www.masternewmedia.org/ Trash Your Television! - http://www.tvturnoff.org/ Not satisfied with news from the tube and other controlled media? Search the net! There are thousands of information sources out there. Start with http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ http://www.joevialls.co.uk/ http://www.padrak.com/alt/911DD.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 Forgive the double interruption, but here is a reply from Betty Martini that ties Aspartame, the toxic sweetener, in with Vioxx and other drugs, which I found worth reading... Kind regards Sepp >Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:10:20 -0500 > " Activist List- " <Activist_List > > " Dr. Betty Martini " <Bettym19 >Vioxx, Merck and Arianna - and aspartame >Cc: Jaffe Lyle D <LJAFFE, > " DHATTAN-CFSAN.FDA.GOV " <DHATTAN, > " RXH-CFSAN.FDA.GOV " <RXH, > " inforeply-cdc.gov " <inforeply, > " AskDOJ-USDOJ.GOV " <AskDOJ > > >Remember that Merck are the people who in their home edition of the >Merck Manual says to take aspartame in pregnancy when they know it >can kill the baby or cause birth defects. I sent them twice the >articles, Aspartame Murders Infants, Genocide by James Bowen, M.D., >Dr. H. J. Roberts position paper on aspartame and pregnancy and Dr. >Louis Elsas testimony before Congress on how aspartame causes birth >defects and mental retardation. (www.dorway.com) Headache is #1 on >the FDA list of 92 symptoms and yet Merck makes a product for >headache and puts aspartame in the product. Why do you have to >sweeten a pill? If someone wanted to make a case that Merck was >working to reduce population the evidence would show they have no >defense. > >Dr. James Bowen recently wrote an article on the interaction of >Vioxx and aspartame which 70% of the population is using and 40% of >the children. He says when something damages the mitochondria or >life of the cell like aspartame it probably would interact with all >drugs. It was criminally approved as an additive when in fact they >knew it was a neurotoxic drug. The law states that an additive must >be inert or non-reactive and aspartame is about as inert as >nitroglycerin. Dr. H. J. Roberts medical text (Aspartame Disease: >An Ignored Epidemic, www.sunsentpress.com or 1 800 827 7991 ) has a >large chapter on aspartame and the drugs we know it interacts with >such as insulin, all antidepressants, all cardiac medication, >hormones, L-dopa, anti-seizure medication such as Dilantin, >Lidocaine, etc. We know this because these drugs have been used to >treat some of the problems aspartame triggers such as Parkinson's, >diabetes, seizures, behavioral and psychiatric problems, for >starters. Other reactions are listed in Dr. Russell Blaylock's books >(www.russellblaylockmd.com) . > >Attorney Keith Silverstein (ksilverstein) is taking >the Vioxx cases as well as Celebrex and Bextra. The most horrendous >reactions that we have received have involved Celebrex in those >using aspartame. > >To make matters worse aspartame is a chemical hypersensitization >agent that triggers polychemical sensitivity syndrome and interacts >with other unsafe sweeteners such as Sucralose or Splenda which is a >chlorinated hydrocarbon, acesulfame potassium, and even vaccines and >genetically engineered foods. Four support groups on line currently >handle the sick and disabled on aspartame. Lawsuits continue to be >filed. > >Wake up FDA! Eventually people are going to start calling the FDA >the Food and Death Association. If you can't do your job and >prevent approval of poisons, and continue to lie to the public and >refuse to recall them, close your doors forever. > >The Center for Disease Control did one of the most damning >investigations on aspartame ever done and then put on their web site >a summary that contradicts the investigation. The actual 146 page >investigation is on www.dorway.com This is discussed in the new >movie, Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World (contact >cori) Attorney James Turner is also in >the movie and tells the incredible political clout that caused the >approval of aspartame when the FDA said it wasn't safe and to revoke >the petition for approval. Consider that the FDA is constantly >approving poisons and even Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet said >they endanger the lives of the people and take money from industry. >Yet aspartame is so poisonous that even the FDA said no and tried >without success to have the original manufacturer indicted for >fraud. Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry is so powerful >with bottomless checkbooks because of gouging the public for drugs, >they bought the U.S. Prosecutors. Both of them, Sam Skinner and >William Conlon hired on with the defense team and the statute of >limitations expired. Now the FDA without blinking has approved >Neotame and the manufacturer has applied for an extended patent. >Because of a little known case, the fact that the FDA rebirthed the >toxin aspartame, the statute of limitations can now be eliminated on >aspartame with an informant. And US Attorneys can be called in. >The whistle blower can remain anonymous and receive quite an amount, >while doing a great service to the people of this nation and the >world. > >The point of all this is NO DRUG IS SAFE AS LONG AS ASPARTAME IS ON >THE MARKET! > >All my best, >Betty >www.dorway.com and www.wnho.net > >Dr. Betty Martini, Founder, Mission Possible Intl, 9270 River Club >Parkway, Duluth, Georgia 30097 770 242-2599 www.dorway.com and >www.wnho.net >Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:56:48 +0100 > Great article of Arianna Huffington on Salon.com Sepp http://www.salon.com/opinion/huffington/2004/11/25/vioxx/ Bad medicine There ought to be a special place in hell for companies like drug giant Merck, whose painkiller Vioxx may have killed 55,000 people. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Arianna Huffington Nov. 25, 2004 | As Democrats continue to search heaven and earth for a moral values issue they can call their own, I have just the prescription: Why not start with the immoral behavior of giant drug companies such as Merck that continue to sacrifice the health of the public on the altar of higher and higher profits? -- The individual is supreme and finds the way through intuition... Sepp Hasslberger My page on physics, new energy, economy: http://www.hasslberger.com/ Critical perspective on Health: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/ Antiprohibition and cannabis: http://www.unsaccodicanapa.com/ Communication Agents: http://www.communicationagents.com/ Freedom of choice - La Leva di Archimede: http://www.laleva.cc/ La Leva's news: http://www.laleva.org/ Robin Good - http://www.masternewmedia.org/ Trash Your Television! - http://www.tvturnoff.org/ Not satisfied with news from the tube and other controlled media? Search the net! There are thousands of information sources out there. Start with http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ http://www.joevialls.co.uk/ http://www.padrak.com/alt/911DD.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.