Connect with us

Health & Society

Corruption, a lucrative business for the pharmaceutical industries

Published

on

In August 2013, three months after Xi Jinping entered the Chinese government, a corruption scandal broke out in the national medical system, skilfully exercised by the multinational pharmaceutical companies based in that country. The campaign launched to settle responsibilities ended with the arrest of four senior officials of the British multinational GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and the barring of 18 other senior officials from leaving the Asian country. At the time, the official Xinhua news agency said that some of those under investigation were …suspected of offering bribes to doctors while asking them to prescribe more drugs in order to increase sales volume; and at the same time pushing up prices….

According to a study carried out at the time, just ten years ago, the pharmaceutical sector, due to the corruption they themselves promoted, had to increase the retail price of medicines by 20%. On that occasion, several companies in the sector, including Johnson & Johnson, were sanctioned. Thanks to the extensive coverage by the Chinese news agency, we now have valuable details of how the pharmaceutical companies acted in order to sell a drug for respiratory patients in 10 hospitals in the capital of Henan province, Zhengzhou: …they invited doctors to attend high-level academic conferences to help them gain influence in their fields. They also established good personal relationships with doctors by servicing their pleasures and offering them money to prescribe more drugs.

A sales representative of those groups (GSK) even claimed that she went into doctors’ offices and even catered to their sexual needs, stating that the company’s executives in China knew everything that was going on, and that some of them even set a target, however, to increase business in that area by 30%.

Shortly after the investigation, two months later in July, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) admitted that it had replaced its head of that subsidiary, Mark Reilly, with the Frenchman Hervé Gisserot. AstraZeneca, France’s Sanofi and US-based Eli Lilly were also investigated, albeit to a lesser extent. The latter also paid 22 million euros in the United States in December 2012 to close allegations that its employees gave money and gifts to officials in China, Brazil, Russia and Poland. Pfizer, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, based in the US, had accepted a year earlier a payment of 45.3 million euros due to the same circumstances.

On that occasion the Food and Drug Administration confirmed the need to take expeditious measures, crackdowns, again. It should not be forgotten that years earlier, in 2007, the head of the FDA, Zheng Xiaoyu, was sentenced to death and executed because he accepted money in exchange for allowing counterfeit products to be marketed.

The names in the article are certainly recognisable in health markets around the world.

The news over the past 10 years of multi-million dollar payoffs by pharmaceutical companies when they are caught in the act makes us think that we humans are just customers, guinea pigs in some cases, and mere numbers in annual profit and loss reports.

According to a ranking updated to 1 January 2023, the five largest companies in the world in terms of market capitalisation, or what they are worth, would be: Johnson & Johnson ($440.04 billion), Eli Lilly ($320.13 billion), Novo Nordisk ($314.65 billion), Merk ($275.14 billion) and Abbvie ($261.18 billion). The stock market update was done as of 2021. Today, other companies, such as Pfizer, have undoubtedly risen in the world ranking of stock market profits.

The professional portal es.statista.com, in its statistics section, gives us the revenue figures for pharmaceutical companies worldwide, including the figure for 2021, which was around 1.40 billion US dollars. With this figure, all is said and done. What they pay for the lawsuits or for the revelry of some people linked to the health sector, be they doctors, nurses, politicians, etc., is mere pocket money. We will not say, like the Chinese Government or the Queen of Hearts in the story of Alice in Wonderland, “Off with their heads!!!”, but perhaps we could comment that from time to time an example could be made of some of these companies or some of these so-called merchants, who abound in the public and private health system of any country in the world.

Sources:
EL PAIS newspaper, Monday 5 August 2013, author José Reinoso. https://es.statista.com/estadisticas/635153/ingresos-mundiales-del-sector-farmaceutico/

Author

Health & Society

EU treading Dangerous Waters: The Perils of Psychedelics in Therapeutic Use

Published

on

The European Commission is getting ready to review citizens’ proposals and one controversial idea on the table is the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative that supports the exploration and implementation of psychedelic treatments for mental wellbeing issues. Advocates of this initiative highlight the advantages of using psychedelics in addressing mental health concerns; however it’s crucial to carefully assess the consequences of making these substances mainstream for therapeutic use, it already happened with way too many “pharma products” and end up being dangerous street drugs, as this is what they actually were from the beginning.

The Illusory Promise of Psychedelics

Supporters of this “therapies” frequently promote these substances as amazing remedies for profound mental health challenges like depression and anxiety disorders such as PTSD are regularly highlighted by them in support of their claims. However, these early research findings are willfully misinterpreted and exaggerated. The “positive outcomes” observed in limited research studies do not automatically translate to safety and effectiveness across wider and more varied demographic groups, often the contrary. Throughout history the fascination with a quick fix for mental health issues has often resulted in disappointment and harm, if not death.

A Lack of Comprehensive Understanding

The insufficient scientific knowledge about psychedelics raises concerns within the community as the intricate workings of the human brain remain a mystery when influenced by these substances. There are risks such as psychological distress and worsening of preexisting mental health conditions that make it unthinkable to integrate psychedelics into mainstream therapy practices at all. It is crucial to acknowledge the variations in individual experiences and biological compositions to prevent unintended harm rather than aiding in treatment efforts.

Regulatory and Ethical Concerns

The push for government endorsement of psychedelic therapies raises numerous ethical questions. Should substances with known psychoactive properties be part of mainstream health care? The regulatory environment surrounding these compounds is fraught with challenges, including ensuring quality control, standardizing dosages, and preventing misuse. With the legalization movements in various regions, the potential for recreational abuse expands, risking public health and safety.

Historical Context and Social Implications

Looking back, the late 1960s and early 1970s were marked by a psychedelic counterculture that resulted in societal turmoil and increased drug abuse. The legacy of this era still looms large; many young individuals romanticize psychedelic use without regarding the severe consequences that accompanied its earlier popularity, including addiction, mental health crises, and a societal disregard for safety protocols.

A Dangerous Precedent

By calling for a more prominent role for psychedelics in treatment protocols, the advocates of the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative may unintentionally set a dangerous precedent. Replacing established, evidence-based treatments with unproven psychedelic therapies could detract from the very real progress made in mental health care. It could shift focus away from holistic approaches that consider lifestyle, therapeutic counseling, and medication tailored to individual needs.

Conclusion

The debate surrounding the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative should prompt a vigilant and cautious examination of the implications of endorsing psychedelics as treatment options. While there is a critical need for innovative approaches in mental health care, rushing to embrace unproven therapies poses significant risks. It is paramount that we prioritize rigorous scientific scrutiny, ethical considerations, and the well-being of individuals over the allure of quick solutions. The only clear path forward is one grounded in proven therapies, comprehensive research, and unwavering commitment to public health.

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Why chocolate should not be given to dogs

Published

on

Chocolate is a favorite delicacy for people, but for cats and dogs it is a real poison, writes the magazine ” Sciences et Avenir” and explains why pets should not be “pampered” with chocolate under any circumstances.

For them, chocolate is toxic, because it is not properly absorbed by their body. This is due to the alkaloid theobromine, which is contained in cocoa and therefore in chocolate.

The substance becomes dangerous to health when large amounts of it are stored in the liver. About 12 grams of theobromine are contained in dark chocolate, twice as much in milk chocolate, and very small amounts in white chocolate.

Theobromine does not harm humans, as the human body manages to break it down quickly.

However, it takes 20 hours for dogs to get rid of this molecule. It can build up in their liver and cause poisoning if large amounts of chocolate are ingested at once.

Among the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhea, rapid pulse, convulsions.

The same is true for cats. However, they are less attracted to chocolate than dogs because they cannot taste sweets with their tongues, although there are exceptions.

In addition, pet obesity is the subject of a number of educational campaigns aimed at owners.

A court in North West England has banned a British man from keeping pets for the next 10 years because his Dalmatian became too fat. wrote the English tabloid “Sun” in November 2009.

40-year-old man John Green, a resident of Macclesfield in Cheshire, showed extreme irresponsibility towards his dog Barney and fed him chips and chocolate.

Thus, in just three months, it became several times fatter than normal for its breed and reached 70 kg.

Green was tipped off by alarmed, vigilant fellow citizens.

Animal control officials warned Green that his dog’s health was in danger and recommended that he be put on a diet.

However, he did not follow the recommendations and the dog continued to gain weight.

The Dalmatian was eventually removed from his owner’s home in June and put on a diet in a private kennel, where staff made sure he got enough exercise.

As a result, Barney, who is eight years old, lost 40 kg.

Green pleaded guilty to causing his dog unnecessary suffering, but the court found some mitigating circumstances because the man treated Barney more like a friend than a dog and did not realize he was harming him.

That’s why Green was only sentenced to 200 hours of community service and to pay £780 in costs.

Illustrative Photo by Glenn: https://www.pexels.com/photo/high-angle-photo-of-a-corgi-looking-upwards-2664417/

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Russian Orthodox Church calls on mass culture to abandon ‘images promoting alcoholism’

Published

on

On the occasion of the Day of Sobriety celebrated in the country today, the Russian Orthodox Church called on mass culture not to promote alcoholism, TASS reported.

The agency recalls that the All-Russian Day of Sobriety is celebrated on the initiative of the Russian Orthodox Church on September 11 to remind people of the harm caused by alcohol. On this day, in some parts of Russia, the sale of alcohol is limited or completely prohibited.

“The culture of attitude towards this is very important. There are many “nice jokes” about alcoholism in our everyday culture. There is nothing good about that. We know what the state of intoxication leads to. Those who deal with mass culture should make an effort that the image of the “dear drunkard” should still leave our mass culture,” said the head of the synodal department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Church Interaction on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Forum of United Cultures with society and media Vladimir Legoida.

Asked whether it would be appropriate to ban or restrict the sale of alcohol across the country, he said “that would be wonderful”. “But it is important that people do this consciously, independently, not because someone is forcing them, and also that there is, as it is customary to say, a public consensus,” he stated.

Legoida noted that the category of “sobriety” is important for the church in general, which refers not only to abstinence from alcohol.

Meanwhile, during a press conference dedicated to the All-Russian Day of Sobriety, Russia’s Deputy Health Minister Oleg Salagai said that alcohol abuse can reduce a man’s life expectancy by six years and a woman by five years.

“The systemic measures that were adopted allowed us to really reduce alcohol consumption. Today, it can be confidently said that Russia is not one of the most drinking countries in the world,” said the deputy minister, who pointed out that in 2023 alcohol consumption in the country was about 8.4 liters per person, while at the beginning of the century the indicator was in double digits.

Illustrative Photo by EVG Kowalievska: https://www.pexels.com/photo/selective-focus-photography-of-assorted-brand-liquor-bottles-1128259/

Author

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2023 EuroTimes

Exit mobile version