Categories
News

Cells from human foetuses are important for developing vaccines – but they’re not an ingredient – The Conversation

Two embryonic cell lines have been used to develop COVID-19 vaccines: human embryonic kidney cells called HEK 293 and human embryonic retinal cells called PER.C6. The PER.C6 cell line is from an elective abortion in the Netherlands in 1985, and the HEK 293 cell line comes from an undisclosed source (either spontaneous miscarriage or elective abortion) in the Netherlands in about 1972.

Johnson & Johnson used PER.C6 cells in their COVID-19 vaccine development, and the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine used HEK 293 cells. CanSino Biologics and Gamaleya Research Institute’s Sputnik V vaccines have also used HEK 293 cells.

Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech used HEK 293 cells in their proof-of-concept tests to see effectively take up the genetic instructions contained in these vaccines and produce the required spike protein. But human embryonic cell lines were not used to make either company’s final vaccine.

HEK 293 and PER.C6 cell lines have been genetically altered to include the part of the adenovirus instructions that trigger replication of adenoviruses. This allows the production of a large amount of the final vaccination product and allows the removal of the adenoviral replication instructions in the vaccine.

http://archive.today/2022.10.02-145609/https://theconversation.com/cells-from-human-foetuses-are-important-for-developing-vaccines-but-theyre-not-an-ingredient-157484

Categories
Opinion

The ex-Pfizer scientist who became an anti-vax hero – Reuters

Michael Yeadon was a scientific researcher and vice president at drugs giant Pfizer Inc. He co-founded a successful biotech. Then his career took an unexpected turn.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-coronavirus-vaccines-s

Categories
Publications

List of largest pharmaceutical settlements – Wikipedia

Wikipedia snapshot from 9 March 2021:

YearCompanySettlementViolation(s)Product(s)Laws allegedly violated
(if applicable)
2012GlaxoSmithKline[1][6]$3 billion ($1B criminal, $2B civil)Criminal: Off-label promotion, failure to disclose safety data.
Civil: paying kickbacks to physicians, making false and misleading statements concerning the safety of Avandia, reporting false best prices and underpaying rebates owed under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program
Avandia (not providing safety data), Wellbutrin, Paxil (promotion of paediatric use), Advair, Lamictal, Zofran, Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent, ValtrexFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2009Pfizer[2]$2.3 billionOff-label promotion, kickbacksBextra, Geodon, Zyvox, LyricaFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2013Johnson & Johnson[7]$2.2 billionOff-label promotion, kickbacksRisperdal, Invega, NesiritideFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2012Abbott Laboratories[8]$1.5 billionOff-label promotionDepakoteFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2009Eli Lilly[9]$1.4 billionOff-label promotionZyprexaFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2001TAP Pharmaceutical Products[10]$875 millionMedicare fraud, kickbacksLupronFalse Claims Act, Prescription Drug Marketing Act
2012Amgen[11]$762 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacksAranespFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2010GlaxoSmithKline[12]$750 millionPoor manufacturing practicesKytril, Bactroban, Paxil CR, AvandametFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2005Serono[13]$704 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacks, monopolistic practicesSerostimFalse Claims Act
2008Merck[14]$650 millionMedicare fraud, kickbacksZocor, Vioxx, PepsidFalse Claims Act, Medicaid Rebate Statute
2007Purdue Pharma[15]$601 millionOff-label promotionOxycontinFalse Claims Act
2010Allergan[16]$600 millionOff-label promotionBotoxFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2010AstraZeneca[17]$520 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacksSeroquelFalse Claims Act
2007Bristol-Myers Squibb[18]$515 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacks, Medicare fraudAbilify, SerzoneFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2002Schering-Plough[19]$500 millionPoor manufacturing practicesClaritinFDA Current Good Manufacturing Practices
2006Mylan[20]$465 millionMisclassification under the Medicaid Drug Rebate ProgramEpiPen (epinephrine)False Claims Act
2006Schering-Plough[21]$435 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacks, Medicare fraudTemodar, Intron A, K-Dur, Claritin RediTabsFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2004[22]Pfizer$430 millionOff-label promotionNeurontinFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2008Cephalon[23]$425 millionOff-label promotion[23]Actiq, Gabitril, ProvigilFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2010Novartis[24]$423 millionOff-label promotion, kickbacksTrileptalFalse Claims Act, FDCA
2003AstraZeneca[25]$355 millionMedicare fraudZoladexPrescription Drug Marketing Act
2004Schering-Plough[26]$345 millionMedicare fraud, kickbacksClaritinFalse Claims Act, Anti-Kickback Statute

http://archive.today/2021.05.05-122141/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

Categories
News

A THIRD of all military personnel are refusing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine with alarmed commanders aiming to make the shot mandatory ‘as soon as possible’ – Dail Mail

  • A third of all military personnel are refusing the COVID-19 vaccine 
  • Some are citing the rushed rollout of the anthrax vaccine in the 1990s as the reason why they do not want to receive the new COVID jab
  • In 1997, the military made it mandatory for service personnel to receive the anthrax shot; thousands subsequently complained of debilitating side effects 
  • A lengthy legal battle ensued, before the courts determined that the FDA hadn’t ‘adequately studied’ how effective the shot was against the inhalation anthrax
  • Commanders concede they need to do a better job of messaging and allaying fears among military members that they are being used as ‘testers’ for the jab 
  • Other personnel are citing wild conspiracy theories about the vaccine, including one who refused the shot for fear it was implanting a tracking device  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9316827/A-military-personnel-refusing-receive-COVID-19-vaccine.html

Categories
News

The Case for a Coronavirus-Vaccine Bond – The New Yorker

Drugs are a risky business and, for equity investors hoping to eventually share in the profits, each stage of development presents an escalated risk. Lo reasoned that substantially lowering the risks, even if it meant correspondingly lowering the rewards, could attract investment instead from ordinary bond markets—that is, from managers of pension funds, university endowments, and sovereign-wealth funds, who control a great deal of money and generally invest in low-risk, low-return assets. 

Given how uncertain vaccine markets are, the paper notes, governments (“public-sector interventions,” and so forth), would need to guarantee a vaccine bond by committing in advance to purchase and stockpile vaccines. The paper’s most creative suggestion is for a subscription model, a kind of vaccine Netflix, where governments would pay an annual fee to a new international-development fund, one that could perhaps be managed by the G7. The fund could float a bond to both advance vaccine biotechs and to make market commitments to Big Pharma. The virus, the markets, and the science are global.

…it would be much better for the government to say that the money is not from taxpayers. “We’re borrowing it from the rest of the world. And if and when you succeed, or any of the other hundred and fifty projects—that could have been funded, but aren’t being funded right now—succeeds, all the bond holders will get paid. That would be great. Everybody earns a return.”

http://archive.today/2020.08.15-143205/https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-case-for-a-coronavirus-vaccine-bond

Categories
News

AstraZeneca to be exempt from coronavirus vaccine liability claims in most countries – Reuters

AstraZeneca has been granted protection from future product liability claims related to its COVID-19 vaccine hopeful by most of the countries with which it has struck supply agreements, a senior executive told Reuters.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-astrazeneca-results-vaccine-liability/astrazeneca-to-be-exempt-from-coronavirus-vaccine-liability-claims-in-most-countries-idUSKCN24V2EN