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
Publications

Pharmaceutical fraud – Wikipedia

$3 billion GSK settlement. On 2 July 2012, GlaxoSmithKline pleaded guilty to criminal charges and agreed to a $3 billion settlement of the largest health-care fraud case in the U.S. and the largest payment by a drug company. The settlement is related to the company’s illegal promotion of prescription drugs, its failure to report safety data, bribing doctors, and promoting medicines for uses for which they were not licensed. The drugs involved were Paxil, Wellbutrin, Advair, Lamictal, and Zofran for off-label, non-covered uses. Those and the drugs Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent, and Valtrex were involved in the kickback scheme. The government investigation of GSK was launched largely on the basis of information provided by four whistleblowers who filed two qui tam (whistleblower) lawsuits against the company under the False Claims Act. GSK settled the whistleblowers’ lawsuits for a total of $1.017 billion out of the $3 billion settlement, the largest civil False Claims Act settlement to date.

Pfizer $2.3 billion settlement: Pfizer settled multiple civil and criminal allegations for $2.3 billion in the largest case of pharmaceutical and health care fraud in US history. The drugs involved were Bextra (an anti-inflammatory drug), Geodon (an anti-psychotic drug), Lipitor (a cholesterol drug), Norvasc (anti-hypertensive drug), Viagra (erectile dysfunction), Zithromax (antibiotic), Zyrtec (antihistamine), Zyvox (an antibiotic), Lyrica (an anti-epileptic drug), Relpax (anti-migraine drug), Celebrex (anti-inflammatory drug), and Depo-provera (birth control).

Merck $650 million settlement: Merck settled a nominal pricing fraud case in which the company was accused of taking kickbacks and violating Medicaid best price regulations for various drugs.

United States et al., ex rel. Jim Conrad and Constance Conrad v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al. involved a drug manufacturer selling a drug, Levothroid, that had never been approved by the FDA. These allegations settled for $42.5 million due to multiple whistleblowers stepping forward to provide detailed information on the alleged fraud. The collective reward to the relators in this case was over $14.6 million.

Wikipedia snapshot from 28 January 2021:

http://archive.today/WZkcB

Categories
Publications

Merck Discontinues Development of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates; Continues Development of Two Investigational Therapeutic Candidates – Merck

In these studies, both V590 and V591 were generally well tolerated, but the immune responses were inferior to those seen following natural infection and those reported for other SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 vaccines. 

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-discontinues-development-of-sars-cov-2-covid-19-vaccine-candidates-continues-development-of-two-investigational-therapeutic-candidates/

Categories
Publications

The Treatment of Viral Diseases: Has the Truth Been Suppressed for Decades? – Dr. Lee Merritt, The Journal of the American Physicians and Surgeons

None of this, however, explains the 40 years of medical
misinformation and suppression of the pharmaceutical truth.
To have covered up the knowledge for four decades that
viruses could potentially be treated by antimicrobials required
extensive effort:

• Censorship. It is likely that some scientists were never
published again after authoring one paper on the antiviral benefits of CQ.
• Buying silence of news media. This is evident from the
blackout across the political news spectrum concerning
vaccine adverse effects. Pharmaceutical manufacturers
provide the most lucrative advertising for both written
and broadcast news programs.
• Misdirection. For years, pharmacology professors in
medical schools have perpetuated lies of omission.
• Lies by drug companies. Merck was caught publishing its
own “peer reviewed” journal to promote its drugs.54
• Regulatory capture. “Big Pharma” essentially owns the
FDA by being its biggest funder and employing more
than 58 percent of the FDA’s upper-level regulators and
administrators either before or after their tenure.55,56
• Research funding. Big Pharma is the major funder of
nearly all “independent” drug research, and there is no
incentive to research cheap/ less profitable solutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic is calling attention to the
potential for treating viral diseases with currently available
drugs, and exposing long-available but ignored research.
The implications of all this are very disturbing. Where have
the virologists been, and the CDC “experts” who claim to care
about influenza deaths? Has the burgeoning nearly trilliondollar vaccine industry been built at the expense of patients’
lives?

https://jpands.org/vol25no3/merritt.pdf

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