Tag Archive for 'Merck'

Pharma Researcher Pleads Guilty for Faked Reports

It’s being called the largest research fraud in medical history. Dr. Scott Reuben, a former member of Pfizer’s speakers’ bureau, has agreed to plead guilty to faking dozens of research studies that were published in medical journals. Now being reported across the mainstream media is the fact that Dr. Reuben accepted a $75,000 grant from Pfizer to study Celebrex in 2005. Continue reading ‘Pharma Researcher Pleads Guilty for Faked Reports’

How Vaccines Became Big Business

Dr. Ossi came to the hastily arranged gathering of health officials and academics expecting to talk to them about his company’s research into anti-viral drugs and flu vaccine. But the health experts clustered around a handful of tables were not interested in hearing about the science behind such products. They had much more pressing concerns. Continue reading ‘How Vaccines Became Big Business’

More Questions About HIV, H1N1 & Deadly Vaccines

In a story that further illustrates the disarray and confusion about the pharmaceutical industry, vaccinations and AIDS, a leading cancer researcher now blames Merck and the military for producing vaccines that spread AIDS and cause cancer. Since many nutritional, behavioral, environmental and pathogenic cofactors (including toxic vaccines) can cause an acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), this story corroborates HIV co-discoverer Luc Montagnier’s opinion that anyone can recover from HIV without AIDS drugs.

Dr. Michele Carbone, Director of the Cancer Research Center of Hawaii, and full Professor and Chairman, Department of Pathology at the John A. Burns School of Medicine, openly acknowledged HIV/AIDS was spread by the hepatitis B vaccine produced by Merck & Co. during the early 1970s.

This is the first time since the initial transmissions took place in 1972-74, that a leading expert in the field of vaccine manufacturing and testing has openly admitted the Merck & Co. liability for AIDS.

The matter-of-fact disclosure came during discussions of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40, the fortieth simian (monkey) virus discovered that caused cancer in nearly every species infected by injection. Many authorities now admit much, possibly most, of the world’s cancers came from the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines, and hepatitis B vaccines, produced in monkeys and chimps.

“There is no question that the FDA is much more vigilant today than it was 40 years ago,” Dr. Carbone wrote. “I guess they learned the lesson from the SV40 mess.

Although his opinion about the dangers of HIV conflicts with Dr. Montagnier’s findings, Professor Carone wrote that many people, “received hepatitis vaccines contaminated with HIV.”

If those who received the vaccine already suffered from an immune system that was compromised by environmental, behavioral or pathological co-factors, chances are that iatrogenically-introduced vaccines will further compromise the immune systems of those who receive them.

This could also produce a multi-billion dollar motive for pharmaceutical manufacturers (and universities like Harvard that rely on pharmaceutical funding to keep their doors open) to “discover” innocuous or non-existent viruses to blame for thousands of preventable deaths each year.

The fact that Harvard University just lost $1.8 billion in reckless investments only adds to that motive.

Dr. Carbone further stated:

“I do believe – and hope – that the present vaccines are safe and clean, and this is partly based on my experience in testing polio vaccines prepared in the Western world after 1963, neither I nor anybody in the world can assure you that with 100% confidence.”

Also engaged in the discussion was Rev. Roxanne Hampton, who sourced the legislative resolution urging passage of vaccination exemptions for religious persons in the State of Hawaii and elsewhere. Rev. Hampton raised the question of vaccine makers’ reliability, to which Dr. Carbone responded.

Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, a vaccine risk investigator and author of sixteen books including Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola–Nature, Accident or Intentional? was also invited to reply to the question of H1N1 safety testing.

“Dr. Carbone’s testimony is very important,” Dr. Horowitz said, addressing the little-known fact that “1) HIV was spread via the earliest hepatitis B vaccines, and 2) Despite the most advanced intelligence in vaccine science, there is no certainty that benefits outweigh risks, since the full extent of H1N1 vaccine risks are not known.

“Without certainty, and the past history, it is my humble opinion,” Dr. Horowitz added, “you would have to be a complete fool to trust the people that promote getting vaccinated this flu season (or any flu season for that matter).”

Dr. Horowitz went on to address the problem of lacking confidence in the H1N1 vaccines by considering those who manufactured the fright and these viral vaccines. ”

Regarding #1, it is gross criminal negligence that Dr Carbone’s factual statement has never been adequately investigated or acknowledged by anyone with authority in the four groups that produced that horrible HIV-contaminated hepatitis B vaccine, manufactured using chimpanzees (not VERO cell cultures contaminated with SV40, as Baxter Corp. is doing for some of its H1N1 flu vaccines).”

Dr. Horowitz cited the FDA, CDC, NIAID, and Merck & Co. as responsible for the production of the hepatitis B vaccines that massive evidence suggests triggered AIDS.

This evidences gross official criminal malfeasance at the highest levels of health science and the US Government,” Dr. Horowitz charged. He then went on to discuss the earlier pan-genocide as it relates to today’s H1N1 pandemic:

“At that time 1972-74, Dr. David Sencer was the CDC director who was very knowledgeable about this hep B vaccine investigation by NY University Medical Center researcher, Saul Krugman, et. al. His collaborators were at the New York City (NYC) Blood Bank, including Wolf Szmuness.

Dr. Sencer was also the CDC director who authorized the Public Health Service to conduct the Tuskeegee Syphilis study.

“As HIV-was out-breaking in NYC (and due to this same vaccine in Africa and Willowbrook State School for mentally retarded children on Staten Island, NY) Dr. Sencer was “demoted” to go from Atlanta, and transition from CDC director, to become the Health Department Director for the City of New York. This was done so that he could oversee the propaganda for damage control at the New York Blood Bank, created and controlled by the Rockefeller family (including Sen. Jay Rockefeller advancing the Senate Democratic Party’s health care reform plan).

Dr. Sencer was successful in preventing safety testing of the contaminated blood.

This intended delay, according to medical historians and lawsuits, spread HIV/AIDS internationally along with the herpes type viruses, including Epstein Barr causally-linked to several cancers and immune dysfunctions.

“Also at that time, as Willowbrook children were dying of the ‘abuse’ Geraldo Rivera was reporting, and Dr. Sencer was transitioning from CDC to the NYC Health Dept., in neighboring Fort Dix, New Jersey, a mysterious Swine flu outbreak occurred in military personnel, none of whom had any contact with pigs. That virus had been, according to experts, extinct for two decades.

“The 1976-1977 outbreak was most likely a military experiment, and precisely like the 2009 Mexican H1N1 outbreak in its media propaganda. The media promoted the 1976 Swine Flu campaign that was devastating in its side effects and adverse events including Guillain-Barre, that my mother died from, linked to this vaccination.

In 1977, the swine flu outbreak has been widely acknowledged by top officials, including Dr. Sencer himself, to have been “laboratory sourced.” Dr. Sencer wrote in a CDC publication, that this swine flu outbreak came from “a refrigerator.”

“In 1997, it was Dr. Sencer who led the team of virologists to Alaska, against international outrage and protests from leading scientists. He and his team, under top secret security, resurrected the 1918 Spanish flu virus and genetically reconstructed it. This was the virus said to have killed 50 million people worldwide. At that moment, it was a no-brainer for all these protesting scientists, that this virus would outbreak from containment in a high level security “refrigerator.”

H1N1 currently circulating, carries genes from this virus! Since this virus had gone extinct, and only existed in military labs, it is safe to say its genes were recombined with avian H1N1 and swine H1N1 to give you this never-before-seen “reassortant”– the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.

“Now it was Reuter’s News Service, Thomas Glocer, Editor-in-Chief that broke world news in April regarding the Mexican outbreak. Thomas Glocer’s propaganda alleged H5N1 was possibly in this mix–a virus that kills 60% of humans infected. Thomas Glocer is a Director, on the Board of Directors, of Merck & Co. owner of CSL, Inc. the H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine maker that provided the world’s safety testing and assurances of vaccine safety for pregnant women, babies, and children.

These safety tests were conducted in Australia at the Victoria Women’s Hospital directed by Elisabeth Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch’s mother. The children were tested at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute under the direction of Sarah Murdoch, Rupert’s daughter-in-law. FOX, Time Warner, and more are controlled by Murdoch. This GROSS CONFLICTING INTEREST would stun the world; yet it is not being reported at all in mainstream media despite my best efforts.

“The other day, Dr. Oz told America on ABC that everyone needs to get vaccinated. The financier behind ABC-Disney is Lloyd Blankfein. Thomas Glocer, Rupert Murdoch, and Lloyd Blankfein are David Rockefeller’s partners in Partnership for New York City, the world’s premier biotechnology trust, advancing “genetopharmaceuticals”–vaccines for everything. These are the people that dictate what people like Dr. David Sencer and Dr. Anthony Fauci (NIAID AIDS Czar, premier promoter of H1N1 Flu vaccines) say and do.

“By the way, Dr. Fauci joined Dr. Oz on ABC the other day as “the government’s leading flu vaccine expert.” Dr. Fauci, the co-patent holder, and royalty earner for IL-2, a vaccine adjuvant, did not disclose his conflicting interest, nor the amount of money he has been paid for IL-2’s use in vaccines. Nor did Dr. Oz who, in his book, urged readers to examine ingredients carefully prior to consuming products. The fact is, the ingredients of the H1N1 flu vaccines are not listed in the package inserts. One needs to go to their patents to find them.

“Suffice it to say, only mentally-manipulated fools think these vaccines are safe. Further only downright idiots would consent to getting vaccinated this flu season having the aforementioned intelligence.” (more info HERE)

Doctors Sell Out to Pharmaceuticals

In another case of doctors selling out to the pharmaceutical industry, the Guardian reports that Dr Richard Eastell is being tried in front of a medical council for allowing his name to be put on a study of the osteoporosis drug Actonel.

Doctors have been agreeing to be named as authors on studies written by employees of the pharmaceutical industry, giving greater credibility to medical research, according to new evidence.

The Guardian has learned that one of Britain’s leading bone specialists is facing disciplinary action over accusations that he was involved in “ghost writing”.

The wider phenomenon has come to light through documents disclosed in the US courts which have revealed a culture in which doctors agree to “author” studies written by employees of drug firms. The doctors may have some input but do not have access to all the evidence from the drug trial on which the paper’s conclusions are based, the documents showed.

The General Medical Council will call Professor Richard Eastell in front of a fitness to practice committee. Eastell, a bone expert at Sheffield University, has admitted he allowed his name to go forward as first author of a study on an osteoporosis drug even though he did not have access to all the data on which the study’s conclusions were based. An employee of Proctor and Gamble, the US company making Actonel, was the only author who had all the figures.

Experts believe the practice is widespread in Britain. In another alleged example, a consultant cardiologist claims an expert listed as an author on a medical paper died before the research began. Peter Wilmshurst, a heart specialist at the Royal Shrewsbury hospital, is involved in a dispute over a study which he helped design, which involved the insertion of a device to close a hole in the heart.

He claims the manufacturers refused him access to data and he had concerns about the accuracy of the paper, so he refused to sign it off and is not listed as an author. One of those who is named, Wilmshurst said, is a true ghost author. Anthony Rickards, a cardiologist, was involved in preliminary discussions but died before the research was conducted.

The company which sponsored the research, the US firm NMT Medical, is suing Wilmshurst for remarks in a lecture that he made about outcomes in the trial, which were published on a medical journal website. A UK charity, HealthWatch, has launched a fund to support Wilmshurst, who was in 2003 a recipient of its award for challenging misconduct in academic medical research.

The US documents show that Wyeth, one of the biggest companies involved, employed a medical writing agency with the purpose of getting favourable studies about its HRT drug Prempro into prestigious medical journals.

The agency dreamed up ideas for papers about the benefits of the drugs and then wrote an outline and even a first draft before offering it to a doctor who might agree to have his name attached as the author. Although the doctor would see drafts and revisions, critics say that control of the content and message were in the agency’s hands. The memos and emails show that many busy academics signed their approval to the finished paper.

Many of the documents are records of planning meetings, where agency staff list articles that will be written, suggesting possible authors and targeting journals. Concern about ghostwriting caused the UK-based open-access journal PloS Medicine, part of the Public Library of Science, to intervene in a court case brought by women who claim they were harmed by the HRT drug. PloS Medicine, with the New York Times, argued that the public should know what was going on. A US judge agreed to place the documents in the public domain.

Ginny Barbour, editor in chief of PloS Medicine, said she was taken aback by the systematic approach of the agency. “I found these documents quite shocking,” she said. “They lay out in a very methodical and detailed way how publication was planned. “Other documents released through US court action show that GlaxoSmithKline employed a ghostwriting programme named Caspper in which doctors could take credit for medical journal articles written by the company’s consultants.

The project was aimed at boosting the US sales of an antidepressant called paroxetine, which goes by the brand name Paxil in the US and Seroxat in the UK.

Caspper stood for Case Study Publication for Peer Review. It enabled doctors with positive experiences of Paxil to get into medical journals. A busy doctor could sit back and let a medical writing agency paid by GSK do all their work, from the first draft to getting it accepted for publication by a journal.

The medical writing agency would prepare drafts using whatever material the doctor sent them and create figures and tables. These would go to the doctor for approval. “The author ensures accuracy of material, updates references, supplies missing information, etc,” says the leaflet. Eventually the doctor would complete a sign-off form and the agency would send the paper for publication.

Caspper came to light when internal GlaxoSmithKline documents were released in court action in the US brought by the legal firm Baum Hedlund on behalf of patients who claim they were harmed by Paxil. GSK says the programme was discontinued some years ago and that the names of medical writers were included on any published papers.

But Caspper shows there was no dividing line at the time between science and marketing – the leaflet states its purpose is to “strengthen the product positioning and overcome competitive issues”. Doctors and medical journals became part of a promotional campaign, aimed at selling more drugs.

The disciplinary move in the Eastell case comes after he admitted that a statement he signed declaring that all six authors had access to all the statistical data was wrong.

In a letter published in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, which carried the original study, he stated: “In the original paper one of the authors, a statistician working for P & G, Ian Barton, had full access to all the data.” The authors had full access to all the analyses of the data that they requested, he said – but those analyses were carried out by the company.

The letter, published in 2007, also acknowledged flaws in the study. A later ndependent analysis of the data “identified some errors and poor practice”, he wrote. The study was designed to show the strengths of Actonel which was in fierce competition with a rival bone-strengthening drug called Fosamax, made by Merck.

Eastell’s paper concerned a study carried out on behalf of Proctor and Gamble, comparing the bone density of women prescribed Actonel with others who were not. Only the company knew which women were on the drug and which were taking something else.

Eastell’s colleague, Dr Aubrey Blumsohn, wanted the codes which would say which of the patients who suffered fractures had been on the drug. The company refused. Blumsohn took his concerns to Eastell, but in a conversation which Blumsohn says he taped, Eastell said he was concerned that persistent requests might damage the
relationship they had with the company. Eastell is said to have told him: “The only thing that we have to watch all the time is our relationship with P&G. Because … we have the big Sheffield Centre Grant [from P&G] which is a good source of income, we have got to really watch it.” .

Tim Kendall, joint director of the National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health, says the problem is the close relationship between doctors and the industry. “Some doctors don’t seem to see the relationship … as problematic.”

A study of 4,000 physicians found that 96% received money from drug companies, and yet “the majority did not see it as a conflict of interest”, he said.

“I do think there needs to be a national debate in this country about the interpenetration of medicine and the pharmaceutical industry.”

Ghost writing was one manifestation of a bigger problem which he believed was the institutional bias of doctors who work closely with and for drug companies. “In mental health 85% of all published trials are funded by the drug industry,” he said. Allowing for the unsuccessful trials the industry does not publish, the figure is probably nearer 95%, he said.

Studies have shown that drug company-funded trials are five times more likely to come out with a positive result for the drug than independent trials.

The GMC is criticised by doctors like Wilmshurst and Blumsohn for failing to take a tougher line against doctors involved in dubious research practices.

Jane O’Brien, head of standards and ethics, said that their research guidance specified the importance of honesty in the attribution of authorship. “We would see that as an important issue. If somebody’s name is on something it gives research a credibility that it wouldn’t otherwise have. If somebody had not been involved, we would see that as misleading people as to the credibility of the research.”

She added that the GMC felt it important to play a role in ensuring good conduct in research. About a year ago, she said, they took soundings of bodies that regulate and support research, such as the Medical Research Council, asking whether the GMC should be involved. “The response was yes, because we are the people who can strike doctors off in the end.”

Eastell declined to discuss the hearing. “I do not wish to comment on the case. The proceedings have yet to commence,” he told the Guardian in an email. A spokesperson from the University of Sheffield, where Eastell is professor of bone metabolism, said they were aware of the investigation. “We will be informed by the GMC of any outcome and cannot comment further until we receive this.”

If Bernard Madoff Were a Doctor

Dr. Kate Scannell compares disgraced financier Bernie Madoff to pharmaceutical shill, Scott S. Reuben, MD: 

In an analogous manner, the story of Dr. Scott S. Reuben tells the tale of one man who, in pursuit of personal gain, harmed huge segments of our nation’s health care system. That he could get away with falsifying pharmaceutical research and medical publications on such a massive scale over many years also tells a larger story about our nation’s medical research industrial complex. 

That complex — the enormous, poorly regulated, financially incestuous and opaque system that generates and disseminates the medical information we use to determine health care for patients — is similarly structured to allow individuals and privileged industries to profit through backroom deals. 

A few days ago, it was widely reported that Reuben, an anesthesiologist in Massachusetts and a faculty member of Tufts’ medical school, had falsified at least 21 of his 72 published research studies. He simply made them up. 

Many of those fictional studies promoted the use of painkillers — like Pfizer’s Celebrex or Merck’s Vioxx — during orthopedic surgeries, highlighting yet another layer of his disgrace. Those drugs, known collectively as “COX-2″ drugs, have been suspected of causing severe side effects like heart attacks and strokes, and Vioxx was finally withdrawn from the market in 2004. 

As was reported in Scientific American, Reuben’s work tried to encourage surgeons to abandon use of older and less expensive anti-inflammatory painkillers in favor of newer and more expensive ones called “COX-2″ drugs. 

In addition to faking research, downplaying COX-2 side effects, and jacking up the cost of medical care, Reuben also profited from financial arrangements with Merck and Pfizer. Those relationships are hard to confirm in his publications, but you find evidence of them in odd places. For example, in a conference brochure (Reuben lectured widely to disseminate his “research”) you discover that he not only received “grants” from Merck and Pfizer, but that he was also on their for-hire speaker’s bureau.  

The rest of Dr. Scannell’s commentary is found at Inside Bay Area.