email 24 June 2009
Colin,
The almost obscured elephant in the room of the iatrogenic induced benzodiazapine plague, and the ineffective system of medicines regulation and pharmacovigilance in the UK, which predicated it would happen,...is that had the legal action against Hoffman La Roche and Wyeth, been allowed to proceed, the whole scandal of PHARMA's corporate dominance of health politics would have been exposed for what it mostly is: A money making scam.
But then you know that better than me. ie. An alleged quote from a Roche executive illustrates the why of the matter: "We are not in the business of curing people, we are in the business of making money" I have no reason to doubt that was said, and what difference? After all it is the truth. So are the illicit drug cartels, but of course they don't have their bought medical journals, medical articles, key opinion leaders and political lobbyists, nor do they fund govt. regulators, and I imagine no MP, or minister would make a declaration of interest to parliament that they were also a non-executive member of such an illegal enterprise, which, they do of course where employment by pharmaceutical companies and other corporate entities is involved.
If anyone other than your good-self gets to read this missive, I can imagine the shouts of "foul", "madness", "must be a scientologist", etc., and in truth the pharmaceutical industry manufacture many good and effective treatments, but in the matter of the so-called psychotropic drugs and the way they have been marketed by the industry, there is often little difference twixt the illegal (recreational) psychoactive drug(s) and the licensed drug(s) or their adverse effects, certainly with regard to their addictive properties, although with the licensed version we have come to be dependant on the drug, not addicted to the drug. What difference?
A small matter: It is called informed consent. Had I chosen too take crack cocaine, cannabis, or any other illicit psychoactive drug, then it could be argued I had used informed consent, and I could be prosecuted under the law, but would contrarily also probably be able to access drug counselling, and even a placement in a drug detox programme at a cost of around seven thousand pounds plus per treatment.
The unwilling iatrogenic addict is a different can of worms:
a) There was, and often still is, no informed consent, unless you count the prescribing doctor's.
b) The addiction is not illegal, after all, the state provides the drugs.
c) There are no publicly funded withdrawal programmes, the state will not admit to the problem, but rather prefers to blame the patient for their lack of informed consent.
d) No public body will ever prosecute the suppliers. They are the pillars of society itself.
And although in the USA., state attorneys' general are busily engaged in the process of recovering monies from pharmaceutical companies for fraudulent market practises, I don't have much faith that will happen in the UK. A lack of faith reinforced by the debacle of the MHRA's four year investigation into GSK's marketing of the SSRI Seroxat, with the result that although the MHRA did find there was malfeasance, when it came time to prosecute, someone had discovered some arcane legal excuse not to do so. Odd that!.... After a four year investigation.... More odd, was the fact that the investigating officers didn't even question the suspected persons involved in the scam, but then of course GSK had already informed the MHRA that none of their operatives would answer any questions put to them. However, the fact is: When a person is questioned under caution in this country they are given the option of not answering any question asked, but also informed that failure to answer may be used against them in a court of law. As I mentioned, odd that, but little wonder then, that benzo iatrogenically afflicted patients have not been able to get redress through the UK system of law. It may also account for why the so-called yellow card system of adverse event reporting does not work.
Stuart Jones, Drug Safety Advocate