Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Pfizer to pay record $2.3B penalty for drug promos

Wed Sep 2, 2009 9:10 AM EDT
business, politics, us, justice-department, settlement, pfizer
Devlin Barrett, Associated Press Writer
Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli says the world's largest drugmaker will pay the largest penalty ever to settle a case involving illegal prescription drug promotions.
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 6 photos
<p>FILE - In this April 8, 2005 file photo, a bottle of Bextra is photographed at a drugstore in New York. People familiar with a record legal settlement to be announced Wednesday, Sept. 2, 2009, say that Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drugmaker, will pay $2.3 billion in connection with illegal drug promotions.(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, file)</p>

FILE - In this April 8, 2005 file photo, a bottle of Bextra is photographed at a drugstore in New York. People familiar with a record legal settlement to be announced Wednesday, Sept. 2, 2009, say that Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drugmaker, will pay $2.3 billion in connection with illegal drug promotions.(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, file)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors hit Pfizer Inc. with a record-breaking $2.3 billion in fines Wednesday and called the world's largest drugmaker a repeating corporate cheat for illegal drug promotions that plied doctors with free golf, massages, and resort junkets.

Announcing the penalty as a warning to all drug manufacturers, Justice Department officials said the overall settlement is the largest ever paid by a drug company for alleged violations of federal drug rules, and the $1.2 billion criminal fine is the largest ever in any U.S. criminal case. The total includes $1 billion in civil penalties and a $100 million criminal forfeiture.

Authorities called Pfizer a repeat offender, noting it is the company's fourth such settlement of government charges in the last decade. The allegations surround the marketing of 13 different drugs, including big sellers such as Viagra, Zoloft, and Lipitor.

As part of its illegal marketing, Pfizer invited doctors to consultant meetings at resort locations, paying their expenses and providing perks, prosecutors said.

"They were entertained with golf, massages, and other activities," said Mike Loucks, the U.S. attorney in Massachusetts.

Loucks said that even as Pfizer was negotiating deals on past misconduct, they were continuing to violate the very same laws with other drugs.

To prevent backsliding this time, Pfizer's conduct will be specially monitored by the Health and Human Service Department inspector general for five years.

In an unusual twist, the head of the Justice Department, Attorney General Eric Holder, did not participate in the record settlement, because he had represented Pfizer on these issues while in private practice.

Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli said the settlement illustrates ways the Justice Department "can help the American public at a time when budgets are tight and health care costs are rising."

Perrelli announced the settlement terms at a news conference with federal prosecutors and FBI, and Health and Human Services Department officials.

The settlement ends an investigation that also resulted in guilty pleas from two former Pfizer sales managers.

Officials said the U.S. industry has paid out more than $11 billion in such settlements over the past decade, but one consumer advocate voiced hope that Wednesday's penalty was so big it would curb the abuses.

"There's so much money in selling pills, that there's a tremendous temptation to cheat," said Bill Vaughan, an analyst at Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports.

"There's a kind of mentality in this sector that (settlements) are the cost of doing business and we can cheat. This penalty is so huge I think consumers can have some hope that maybe these guys will tighten up and run a better ship."

The government said the company promoted four prescription drugs, including the pain killer Bextra, as treatments for medical conditions different from those the drugs had been approved for by federal regulators. Authorities said Pfizer's salesmen and women created phony doctor requests for medical information in order to send unsolicited information to doctors about unapproved uses and dosages.

Use of drugs for so-called "off-label" medical conditions is not uncommon, but drug manufacturers are prohibited from marketing drugs for uses that have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. They said the junkets and other company-paid perks were designed to promote Bextra and other drugs, to doctors for unapproved uses and dosages, backed by false and misleading claims about safety and effectiveness.

Bextra, for instance, was approved for arthritis, but Pfizer promoted it for acute pain and surgical pain, and in dosages above the approved maximum. In 2005, Bextra, one of a class of painkillers known as Cox-2 inhibitors, was pulled from the U.S. market amid mounting evidence it raised the risk of heart attack, stroke and death.

A Pfizer subsidiary, Pharmacia and Upjohn Inc., which was acquired in 2003, has entered an agreement to plead guilty to one count of felony misbranding. The criminal case applied only to Bextra.

The $1 billion in civil penalties was related to Bextra and a number of other medicines.

A portion of the civil penalty will be distributed to 49 states and the District of Columbia, according to agreements with each state's Medicaid program.

Pfizer's top lawyer, Amy Schulman, said the settlements "bring final closure to significant legal matters and help to enhance our focus on what we do best — discovering, developing and delivering innovative medicines."

In her statement, Schulman said: "We regret certain actions taken in the past, but are proud of the action we've taken to strengthen our internal controls and pioneer new procedures."

In financial filings in January, the company had indicated that it would pay $2.3 billion over the allegations.

The civil settlement announced Wednesday covered Pfizer's promotions of Bextra, blockbuster nerve pain and epilepsy treatment Lyrica, schizophrenia medicine Geodon, antibiotic Zyvox and nine other medicines. The agreement with the Justice Department resolves the investigation into promotion of all those drugs, Pfizer said.

The government said Pfizer also paid kickbacks to market a host of big-name drugs: Aricept, Celebrex, Lipitor, Norvasc, Relpax, Viagra, Zithromax, Zoloft, and Zyrtec.

The allegations came to light thanks largely to five Pfizer employees and one Pennsylvania doctor, who will now share $102 million of the settlement money.

FBI Assistant Director Kevin Perkins praised the whistleblowers who decided to "speak out against a corporate giant that was blatantly violating the law and misleading the public through false marketing claims."

To rein in the abuses, the government's five-year monitoring will force Pfizer to notify doctors about Wednesday's agreement, encourage them to report any similar behavior, and publicly post any payments or perks it gives to doctors.

Under terms of the settlement, Pfizer must pay $1 billion to compensate Medicaid, Medicare, and other federal health care programs. Some of that money will be shared among the states: New York, for example, will receive $66 million, according to the state's attorney general, Andrew Cuomo.

When Pfizer originally disclosed the settlement figure, it also announced plans to acquire rival Wyeth for $68 billion. That deal, which would bolster Pfizer's position as the world's top drugmaker by revenue, is expected to close before year's end.

Shares of Pfizer dropped 14 cents to $16.24 in midday trading.

___

AP Business Writer Linda A. Johnson in Trenton, N.J., contributed to this report.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Devlin Barrett's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: ConsumerVine, Corporatism, Crime and Punishment, EconVine, FROM THE INSIGHT OUT, Happy with Corporate America?, Our Orwellian World
  • Regions: Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (151)
Jump to discussion page: 1 2
J. W. Welch

How do we know they will pay the amount indicated?

  • 8 votes
#1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:08 AM EDT
MyOpIA

They probably will - it's not much to them. They have a self perpetuating product. Take a pill - get side effects - take some more pills for that - get more side effects... The mafia never had it so good.

  • 26 votes
#1.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:16 AM EDT
nyghtshayde

Big Pharm cheating??It can't be.They should not be allowed to advertise to begin with.These companies will sacrifice anything,including people to make a profit.It should bother all that the goverment is making deals with them to further their agenda.No deals with big corporate interest,they are a large part of the problem.

  • 17 votes
#1.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:34 AM EDT
JoulesBeef

This is much like the penal system we have for government offenders and really shows there are three americas.. one for the poor.. one for rich and one for corps and government.

Who gets punished with this fine?
Not the guy who made the decision to break the law.
the shareholders pay
just like when the us gov breaks the law and violates peoples rights.. the guy who ordered it doesn't get punished.. it is the tax payers that pay.

Stuff liek this will never stop until we actually punish the people involved.

  • 17 votes
#1.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:50 AM EDT
jamithy1

in the end it will be the user who pays.... just like big tobacco, they will raise their prices to cover their losses thereby passing the fine off to the people using the drug. Thankyou Government for watching out for me by raising the price of the drug. Settlements should include clauses requiring no price increases in order to actually punish the offender and not have the cost passed on.

  • 11 votes
#1.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:02 AM EDT
checkerbattery

Actually Pfizer's customers will pay but you're right. Corporate execs break the law and sick people pay the penalty. What a racket. If there was a tiny bit of personal responsibility for these execs you'd see a lot less law breaking that's for sure.

  • 11 votes
#1.5 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:02 AM EDT
netprophet

2.3 Billion??? Looks like Pfizer will have to look between their couch cushions for some spare change...I'd like an article that examines the profits that Pfizer made through marketing the off label use of this drug. Tisk, tisk, Pfizer, now don't do that again you bad bad boys...

I read an article yesterday where drug companies are making dangerous generics overseas with limited government oversight. We need some more of that socialist government regulation stuff or more will get sicker and die.

  • 10 votes
#1.6 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:12 AM EDT
Pamela Drew

Corporate execs break the law and sick people pay the penalty.

And when people die from corporate crimes the executives skate too. What would happen if dying for profits was considered a threat to Americans and corporate killers were seen as murderss?

  • 18 votes
#1.7 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:13 AM EDT
BadBoy-1285852

JW

How do we know they will pay the amount indicated?

I think the larger question(s) should be what is the larger picture, what is the totality of scope in this particular instance/case.

If the fine is 2.3 B what is the total net income to the company for this drug's segment?10B...20B... It is all about the numbers to these people.

The generalized attitude of 'oh well...so what if we get fined 20% even 30% of the net income...look at the total amount pocketed by these "humanitarians" . That is the real story. They could care less about the physical harm & death they cause....and the 'fine' is just a slap on the wrist in comparison to the complete picture.

And,,, this is just one case, from one manufacturer... do some extended simple math, with the amount of drug companies producing new "drugs" ever day this business's adds up to the hundreds of Billions annually, very quickly......

no wonder "regulation" is a four letter word and "heath care reform" has been turned on its head by the very rank & file that it will help by the very profits that are killing us all...........yep, only in America

  • 9 votes
#1.8 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:14 AM EDT
netprophet

When I saw this headline, I thought I was going to read that Pfizer was sued for their 'Viva Viagra' commercials. Am I the only one who recognizes that a medical intervention is being marketed as a feelgood street drug? Every time they air that commercial every self-respecting medical professional should be ashamed...problem is that it's really good for their business...money has a way of easing shame...remember back when doctors were respected???

  • 14 votes
#1.9 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:17 AM EDT
jumpshotjarrod

netprophet

great points

  • 3 votes
#1.10 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:42 AM EDT
Pamela Drew

Am I the only one who recognizes that a medical intervention is being marketed as a feelgood street drug?

No you're not the only one. It also makes me wonder where are all the Dobson moralist groups who take aim at things like Sponge Bob's square pants. Where is their outrage when we have prime time television filled with talk of erections lasting for hours or other drugs with side effects that include suicide? Why isn't it a problem for our children to hear about all the sexual activity when a potentially gay TeleTubby or square pants will launch them into a frenzy of protests?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/politics/20sponge.html

  • 13 votes
#1.11 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:45 AM EDT
3rdtime

Pamela, the FDA has the right to inspect any manufacturing plant that imports drugs to the US, regardless of the location or owner. With 34 inspectors that shouldn't be a problem, right??? Now, that 34 figure was from 2005, there may not be that many any more. By the way, only drug manufacturers are allowed to import drugs. That includes the ones they already EXPORTED. You might not know if something is contaminated or even counterfeit.

Don't buy that old "we need the money for research", either. 17% Of big pharma's budgets go to research. About 70% of innovative drugs come from research done the National Institutes of Health and university labs. These are then licensed by big pharma to develop and market. When they claim they brought these to you, they are right, but they DIDN'T do the grunt work. your tax money did that!

  • 14 votes
#1.12 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:46 AM EDT
millerb-1023348

Well as a person whose wife took Vioxx, Bextra, and who took HRT, for 6 years, had the wrong ovary removed, and had a Dalkon Shield perforate her uterus and had to have 24 surgeries to get it out (not without MAJOR damage), I have no faith at all in the medical industrial complexx .

She later sued AH Robbins (makers of Robitussin) for the Dalkon Shield only to get a pittance and then they sold that same product in the 3rd world despite losing the suits and admitting the danger . So much for "trust me".

  • 9 votes
#1.13 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:22 PM EDT
* The Dead Head *

If they do pay the amount indicated..........the cost of your pills just quadrupled......

  • 5 votes
#1.14 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:28 PM EDT
Ozark Mountain Sage

3rdtime............17% Of big pharma's budgets go to research.

50% of big pharma's budgets go to advertisement. (I read this somewhere)

  • 7 votes
#1.15 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:36 PM EDT
jmonarchy

So we stand at a crossroads; do we regulate big pharma, including reformation of how they do business in the US and the healthcare system, or, do we let them run amock and have free reign as they have for a decade?

  • 7 votes
#1.16 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:36 PM EDT
3rdtime

Ozark, I just finished reading "The Truth About the Drug Companies" by Dr. ????Angell. 64% is listed under the general heading "Administration and Promotion" by most of the top 10 companies. If the average even 15% administrative costs (including those executive salaries) you're right on target about the advertising budget!!!

Millerb, I sincerely hope your wife is doing better. What a nightmare!

  • 6 votes
#1.17 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:24 PM EDT
Pamela Drew

Another great read is the FDA's Confidential Internal Report (pdf) from November 2007, leaked not long after its release. FDA Science and Mission At Risk tells is all. The saddest part is the 90% of Federal employees on the bottom who try to serve are hindered and halted by the industry insiders serving revolving door appointments at the tippy top.

  • 9 votes
#1.18 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:38 PM EDT
Greg-281912

True, Viagra and it's counterparts are pretty much known as party/weekend drugs.

And, true, pretty much any doctor will write you a prescription if you say you have ED, for example, according to what I have heard from guys at work. What doctor is going to test you for ED anyway?

Yep, Viagra is easy to get, but God forbid you have an absessed tooth and you ask for one pain killer to get through the afternoon.

  • 6 votes
#1.19 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:37 PM EDT
magsby47

All this means is that they will raise the prices of their drugs - we'll all end up paying for this. Pfizer isn't going to take a loss, that's for sure. In the end, the only ones who win in these kinds of cases are the lawyers. I undertand the hottest place in hell is reserved for them. They're usually more loathsome than the people they sue.

  • 4 votes
#1.20 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 3:21 PM EDT
Teodoro Leon 3

Doctors were entertained with golf, massages, and other activities(enticed,baited and made complicit with Mammon)...will they also be held responsible and accountable for their malfeasance and avarice?

Is it funny how a Corporation is now a criminal?A person.An entity with civil rights.

Having acquired the legal rights and protections of a “person”, the question

arises: “What kind of person is the corporation?”

even as Pfizer was negotiating deals on past misconduct, they were continuing to violate the very same laws with other drugs.

How do we stop this?By understanding the truth...

The Corporation:

This film, presented below, is a great introduction to what a corporation really is:The Corporation includes interviews with 40 corporate insiders and critics - including Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, Milton Friedman, Howard Zinn, Vandana Shiva and Michael Moore - plus true confessions, case studies and strategies for change.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3203253804055041031&hl=en

You'd think that things like disasters, or the purity of childhood, or even milk, let alone water or air, would be sacred. But no. Corporations have no built-in limits on what, who, or how much they can exploit for profit. In the fifteenth century, the enclosure movement began to put fences around public grazing lands so that they might be privately owned and exploited. Today, every molecule on the planet is up for grabs. In a bid to own it all, corporations are patenting animals, plants, even your DNA. Around things too precious, vulnerable, sacred or important to the public interest, governments have, in the past, drawn protective boundaries against corporate exploitation. Today, governments are inviting corporations into domains from which they were previously barred.

http://www.thecorporation.com/media/Transcript_finalpt1%20copy.pdf

http://www.thecorporation.com/

And about Governments inviting and enticing complicity through corruption,aiding and abetting...how is this possible? This will tell you...

The Corporation, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and the War Racket http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1866496783791986992

It was around the same period, through the teaching of Jordan Maxwell, that I found out that our governments, from the smallest towns and municipalities to the largest countries, are actually registered corporations. Once I fully understood the implications of what was being revealed, I also realized that there was no such thing as an evil empire. There was only the reality of what many corporations has become.

United States of America is a Corporation

The United States Isn't a Country — It's a Corporation!

http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

US CODE: Title 28,3002. Definitions

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html

US CODE: Title 28:3002. Definitions - cornell.edu

(15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States.

www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.­html

(10) “Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe.

http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to you? This is why we can't get them to do anything on our behalf or to answer to us — as in the case with the illegal income tax — among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.

Act of 1871

http://byronwine.com/files/1871.pdf

1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.

With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see,Acts of the Forty-first Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).

The act -- passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War -- was a strategic move by foreign interests(international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America. Congress cut a deal with the international bankers(specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the United States.

The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced -- in effect vandalized and sabotage -- when the title was capitalized and the word "for" was changed to "of" in the title.

These institutions are illegal and Unconstitutional...we have the right to recourse.The Republic and the Constituion will be restored...and as result...the people will be free.

  • 4 votes
#1.21 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 4:49 PM EDT
jmonarchy

So, according to what I am reading, your logic is simply to allow big pharma the run of the house because even if they get fined or lose a law suit they will simply get it back through raising prices and screwing the public. Doesn't that statement support some sort of reform in how big pharma works and operates?

  • 5 votes
#1.22 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 4:49 PM EDT
bob-596800

I think big pharma should be DE-regulated.  Let's bring in some competition from Canada and Europe and watch those drug prices plummet. 

  • 3 votes
#1.23 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 8:13 PM EDT
Texasrodeoqueen

of course they will appeal and drag it out forever

I think what is so sickening is that Drs. are in bed with big Pharma to the detriment of their patients.

US Drs. are eaten alive by greed. We had to go to managed care and DRGs because they were ripping insurance companies and Medicare off so badly. This is why they despise the concept of universal care- they will be more carefully regulated.

I recall an anesthesiologist saying in a surgery break room:

"a woman is good for 5 surgeries- episiotomy, Csection, cholecystectomy, mastectomy, hysterectomy"

Also, my husband went to a Dr. that I mistakenly sent him to for a routine work physical. He came back practically hysterical and said the Dr. told him he had 2 inguinal hernias and needed surgery right away. I told him to get a second opinion and he did. Guess what? NO HERNIAS. Guess the guy needed to pay his country club dues.

  • 6 votes
#1.24 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:45 AM EDT
1standlastword

The Attorney General had to be recused! Amazing...maybe not.

I'd like to see the $2.3b allocated to healthcare reform.

  • 3 votes
#1.25 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:38 AM EDT
J Bolton

It doesn't matter if they pay or not because they will get the money be raising drug prices. Someone needs to join Bernie Madoff then maybe they'll get the message.
I urge everyone to check public records to see if your congressperson or senator is getting money from big pharma and big health insurance companies.

    #1.26 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 11:34 AM EDT
    jmonarchy

    Bob, Canada buys the majority of it's drugs from US companies at at fraction of the price our American Pharmacies pay.

    • 2 votes
    #1.27 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 5:02 PM EDT
    Pamela Drew

    Canada buys the majority of it's drugs from US companies at at fraction of the price our American Pharmacies pay.

    In Congressional doublespeak that's called a Free Market!

    • 4 votes
    #1.28 - Fri Sep 4, 2009 12:45 PM EDT
    get-to-the-program

    Big pharma representatives bribe doctors to promote those misbranded drugs that are detrimental to health. the same doctors are the ones that prescribe those misbranded drugs like candy and review our medical records before we have to bring a lawsuit. I believe they are on big pharma side, rather than patients. I believe they make lots of cases frivolous.

    Doctors who performed these acts need to go straight to hell.

    Pfizer need to compensate affected consumers, "the true victims" of this mess.

    This is beyond murder to put a drug in the market that has no valid indication for the disease and overcharged consumers.

    • 4 votes
    #1.29 - Sun Sep 6, 2009 6:43 PM EDT
    Brandon-801865

    Welcome to the Reaganomics-inspired, United Corporations of America.

    • 6 votes
    #1.30 - Sun Sep 6, 2009 7:16 PM EDT
    bgates43

    Doesn't that statement support some sort of reform in how big pharma works and operates?

    jmonarchy (#1.22) Of course it does. The case involved criminal action against a repeat offender. I'm disgusted with Pfizer, and with this nation's real drug cartel.

    Another reason for health care reform. Now!

    • 5 votes
    #1.31 - Sun Sep 6, 2009 11:11 PM EDT
    MyOpIA

    the same doctors are the ones that prescribe those misbranded drugs like candy and review our medical records before we have to bring a lawsuit

    Actually, if the attorney involved is doing their job, the record review should be done by an adult nurse practitioner. A lawsuit is (or should be) based on the treatment of the patient compared to what is reasonably expected - and doctors are not trained to treat patients, they are trained to treat symptoms. While expert testimony must come from witnesses considered to be "equal", a case review for merit needs to be performed by someone who can determine appropriate action based on a patient's individual condition, and isn't limited to evaluating only test results. A good example is respiratory distress, which can take place even though the test values are within text book acceptable ranges. Patient treatment can not be performed based on the average person, but must be patient specific. Another reason why O-Lacka-Care won't work.

    • 1 vote
    #1.32 - Mon Sep 7, 2009 8:02 AM EDT
    Reply
    deccles02

    So, where's all the people who don't want health care reform?

    Don't they have anything to say about this?

    • 17 votes
    Reply#2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:25 AM EDT
    nyghtshayde

    Alot of them would be saying,"Oh yes,capitalism at it's best"

    • 16 votes
    #2.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:29 AM EDT
    MyOpIA

    You'll have to be more specific. While there are aspects of the health care system that could certainly use some work, the mess being pushed currently is not something I would ever support.

    The pharmaceuticals make a show of being out for the good of all, but you really have to look at the fact that they are a for-profit company. There's nothing wrong with that, but any real "cure" for any of the many conditions they make products for would only cut into their revenue. There is no shortage of examples of drugs being pushed by these companies that are later found to have extremely detrimental side effects.

    Remember that they are treating the symptoms, not the condition. No cure or permanent improvement can ever result from that approach, but it is very very profitable.

    • 9 votes
    #2.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:31 AM EDT
    Joe Esposito

    One of the side effects of capitalism. It's all about the profit.

    True, the current plan isn't great by any stretch, but that doesn't mean that we don't need serious reform.

    • 6 votes
    #2.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:59 AM EDT
    MyOpIA

    It's fine that it's about profit, the problem comes from pretending that it's about something else.

      #2.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:01 AM EDT
      jumpshotjarrod

      You'll have to be more specific. While there are aspects of the health care system that could certainly use some work, the mess being pushed currently is not something I would ever support.

      What do you support Myopia? Do you believe people should be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions? Do you believe healthcare costs should increase at a rate 4 times the average wage increase? If you feel these are problems, what are your solutions?

      • 6 votes
      #2.5 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:23 AM EDT
      deccles02

      You're right myopia, there's nothing wrong with making a profit.

      What I have a problem with is when the system and laws and public safety are sacrificed and manipulated for the sake of profit without proper oversight and without stiff penalties.

      They've been doing this for a long time, and congress has let them get away with it in exchange for political contributions and high paying jobs after leaving office.

      Both major parties are guilty of it, and these are also the very same people who don't want reform. They constantly manipulate their constituency into believing no reform is needed and convince people to continue to vote against their own best interests.

      They are sheep being led to the slaughter; clapping, cheering, and waving the flag all the way.

      $2.8b, while appropriate, doesn't even begin to make a dent in this companies bottom line. The best way to get the message to these people is to hit them in the pocket book, and hit them hard.

      • 10 votes
      #2.6 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:29 AM EDT
      waffle

      Several years ago, we began an experiment in letting drug manufacturers market directly to customers. Before that, it had been illegal. The theory, such as it was, was that by advertising directly to the customers, the drug companies would educate the population such that they, with input from their doctor, might make a better informed choice in medication. What we got was commecials about everlasting erections, depressed circles and 'diseases' like shy bladder syndrome. The education factor has been low, but the miseducation factor high.

      Does anyone believe this experiment has been a success? Does anyone feel better informed? Or are we, the mass marketed, going to our doctors and pressuring them about medications we don't need? Are we being sold medications for conditions that were once considered nusiances or emotional quirks not requiring taking pills for the rest of our lives? Is anyone, other than the drug and advertising companies, impressed with our brave new world?

      For me, the entire thing has been a miserable failure, diverting money better spent on research into the hope of convincing people they need more pills. We are trying to create an expert consumer when the consumer already has an expert advocate, their doctor. The entire issue is only tangentally related to health care, but as a long term aspect of health care (i.e. not in the current bill), we need to end this experiment.

      • 7 votes
      #2.7 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:15 PM EDT
      Pamela Drew

      The best way to get the message to these people is to hit them in the pocket book, and hit them hard.

      Nah, holding executives responsible for corporate crimes and serving jail terms would do the trick. Congress could cut down the investigation time by approving water-boarding in gathering the executive testimony.

      Tough times call for drastic measures, time is money and we the people have nothing to waste. We'd have the whole truth in no time flat and isn't there Senate Gang who think it's fine to use? How 'bout it?

      • 10 votes
      #2.8 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:42 PM EDT
      Beverly-Mo.

      Thank God for whistle blowers. Drug Companies & Insurance Companies need strict rules, regulation and enough people to enforce the new regulations, the amount of advertising the drug companies spend anymore would cover every uninsured person in the United States, right now the profits made by the drug companies & insurance companies are so out of control, no wonder the costs of treatment is rising every day. I am so sick of the greed that is shamelessly controlling these industries and the politicians , regardless of party regulations, those that are against health care reform are in these corporations pockets, just watch how they vote if and when a health care reform bill finally is voted on. Worried about the deficit your fanny, that is a bald faced lie, if you cut out the fraud and the greed, reforming health care will save more than it costs.

      • 7 votes
      #2.9 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:47 PM EDT
      MyOpIA

      Lots of things need fixing.

      No, pre-existing conditions should not affect ability to obtain coverage, or the price of that coverage. BCBS has that already, though they still overcharge. The insurance companies need to be established as non-profit, governed by a volunteer civilian board, with a policy being good anywhere in the country. The board members should have both a lower and upper limit to their incomes ensuring that they represent middle America. There should be one policy, costing $X (determined by the board) per person, with the same terms applied to all policy holders - whether they are members of congress or the person working the grill at McD's.

      All policies should cover prescriptions and practitioner controlled supplements with a fixed copay of $15 per monthly dose. No more free or $2 prescriptions, and no more $200 prescriptions. The pharmaceuticals can cease charging Americans for all of their R&D, they can cease to spend money on advertising, and they can cease offering exotic vacations to physicians prescribing their products a certain number of times.

      Legal reform is needed also - any person can sue any medical practitioner, pharmaceutical company, or hospital for any type of actual malpractice or improper testing or production error. Anyone engaging in what is determined to be a nuisance suit will be billed for all costs, with payment being added to their insurance premium to ensure payment over a 10 year period.

      These obviously aren't answers, as I'm sure they are full of holes and possibly bad effects. They are also pulled from the air without research or justification. But they are ideas, and they address the things that need fixing while pretty much leaving alone the things that don't. Everyone won't be able to pay the rate, even though it should be able to be maintained much lower than current pricing, so there will still be a need for people to donate as they see fit to a fund to cover such people. Another alternative on that point would be to make the religious institutions taxable with the caveat that all resulting revenue be used to fund those policies.

      • 5 votes
      #2.10 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:55 PM EDT
      J Bolton

      Right on, Waffle, it is all about profits and getting hypochondriacs to beg the docs for more meds and most of the ads are full of lies. Also the companies do their own research so bad drugs get on the market and then the docs get sued for prescribing them. we lose; big pharma wins. THey need jail time to stop this repeat offending. Hell, if you smoke a little joint and are caught twice, you are SOL, but if you rip off billions of dollars while pushing legal drugs you get to pass your fine on to the people you wronged. Some Logic! Anyone know how much one TV ad costs or one of the 2-page ads in professional journals?

      • 1 vote
      #2.11 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 11:41 AM EDT
      Pamela Drew

      iJ Bolton #2.11...t is all about profits and getting hypochondriacs to beg the docs for more meds and most of the ads are full of lies.

      Don't forget their truthful warnings of possible side effects, added to reduce liability exposure!

      • 4 votes
      #2.12 - Fri Sep 4, 2009 12:48 PM EDT
      Reply
      Simplistic Reality

      Ouch. In Germany... this @!$%# wouldn't happen. Cheaper drug prices as well. This is what happens when health care becomes "for profit".

      • 11 votes
      Reply#3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:28 AM EDT
      jumpshotjarrod

      Bingo.

      Unfortunately, in a free market system, anything that can be twisted and gutted in the name of profit, will be.

      Perfect example: I'm watching TV last night and see a commerical featuring a man waking up next to a rather large, non-attractive woman. The commentator says, "Everyone can beat a one night stand......unless it's with the same woman every night". It then shows a wedding picture of the man and the woman he woke up with. It then gives a plug for a website. The website, as it turns out, is designed as a public hookup forum for unhappy married people who want to have an affair.

      The first thing that I thought was, "Thank you capitalism". As I said, any avenue that can be exploited for profit will, even if it means trying to help people cheat on their spouses.

      • 6 votes
      #3.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:36 AM EDT
      jamithy1

      this has nothing to do with healthcare reform. Drug manufacturers and the healthcare system are two entirely different entities. Healthcare reform is about who PAYS for healthcare not who delvelopes the drugs used by healthcare

      • 3 votes
      #3.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:04 AM EDT
      nyghtshayde

      this has nothing to do with healthcare reform.

      Medication is one of the biggest cost in healthcare.It has everything to do with healthcare.Why do you think Big Pharm secured a deal before they would support any kind of reform.They have played a large part in preventing reform through the years.

      • 9 votes
      #3.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:13 AM EDT
      jumpshotjarrod

      jamithy

      I respectfully whole heartedly disagree with you.

      To act as if pharmaceuticals are not part of the 'big three' of healthcare (insurance companies, medical providers, and pharmaceuticals) is to live in a dream world.

      • 6 votes
      #3.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:20 AM EDT
      jamithy1

      yes it is one of the biggest costs...... but healthcare reform is about having a public option as to who pays Big Pharm, insurance companies, the gov or the user. Big Pharm is getting paid no matter what, its just a matter of by whom. The public option just means that the government will open a federally owned insurance company (for lack of a better term), available to people who do not have private insurance.

      Big pharm will get paid regardless of who is doing the paying, so in that sense it is two different subjects.... the corps that stand to lose in healthcare reform are Insurance companies.... not drug makers

      • 1 vote
      #3.5 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:21 AM EDT
      jumpshotjarrod

      Big pharm will get paid regardless of who is doing the paying, so in that sense it is two different subjects.... the corps that stand to lose in healthcare reform are Insurance companies.... not drug makers

      Negative. A major part of healthcare reform discussion is drug cost control.

      http://formularyjournal.modernmedicine.com/formulary/Policy+News/Healthcag-reform-to-shape-drug-coverage-costs-and/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/619981?contextCategoryId=44230

      Ctrl+f the word 'drug' and notice that drug cost and control is one of the key elements of healthcare reform being discussed.

      • 7 votes
      #3.6 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:28 AM EDT
      jamithy1

      point taken, I stand corrected

      • 3 votes
      #3.7 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:05 PM EDT
      jumpshotjarrod

      your honesty is appreciated

      • 3 votes
      #3.8 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:48 PM EDT
      jamithy1

      there's no shame in being wrong, only in not being able to admit it.

      • 3 votes
      #3.9 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:23 PM EDT
      Simplistic Reality

      Big Pharm is getting paid no matter what, its just a matter of by whom.

      True but my point was Germany sets limits on Big Pharm on advertising and all the jazz and also collectively as a nation negotiates with Big Pharm on set prices that are non negotitable. Meaning.. the price is the same nationwide and the health care system speaks with one voice. Which equals cheaper drugs for all and its more fair. Instead of hospitals and pharmacies setting there own prices and raping us over the coals to make a killing. I mean come on.. hospitals charge like 8 bucks an Advil pill. WTF is that. Seriously.

      • 2 votes
      #3.10 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:40 PM EDT
      magsby47

      Except this isn't really a free market system, the pharmaceutical industry, that is. They get huge grants and tax breaks from the US government to develop drugs, then charge outrageous prices to Americans, but the same drug can be purchased at 1/3rd or so in European and Canadian markets because the governments in those countries have price controls on drugs - because they have universal health care.

      No one in any other country on this globe has to go bankrupt when they get sick or a family member gets sick - only in the good ol' USA. We are so far behind the rest of the developed world in delivering health care to all citizens, it's shameful. It's downright embarrassing that so many people are ignorant enough to think our system doesn't need reform.

      No wonder the rest of the world doesn't respect us - we don't even take care of our own people.

      • 7 votes
      #3.11 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 3:27 PM EDT
      magsby47

      Simplistic Reality, The hospitals charge $8 for an Advil because they have to make up for the money they lose on patients who can't pay. So, they raise rates for simple things on insured patients, then ins. companies raise their rates to us. We are all already paying for the millions of uninsured - it would make so much more sense to have UHC available. Those would want private ins. can still have it - dozens of countries already do this and their citizens are not dropping over dead from lack of attention.

      • 3 votes
      #3.12 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 3:37 PM EDT
      Pamela Drew

      Except this isn't really a free market system, the pharmaceutical industry, that is.

      That's true for every sector Wall Street's biggest companies control. There are 65 lobbyists for every Member of Congress and a revolving door for industry appointees.

      The revolving door spins like a top on both sides of the aisle and We the People take a big back seat to the personhood class of corporate citizen.

      Both sides point fingers and chatter about great divisions and unreconcilable differences, but when it come to putting money in their own pockets, they usually see their way clear to find consensus.

      • 4 votes
      #3.13 - Fri Sep 4, 2009 1:14 PM EDT
      Reply
      miasma

      Will this cause a cessation in the Pfizer spam ini my inbox? No? Crap.

      • 5 votes
      Reply#4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:34 AM EDT
      Scott F

      Drug companies don't want to cure anyone, they just want to continue giving stuff to make it go away for a little while. The cure of any disease is (sad to say) never going to happen because it's not being worked on as hard as it should be.

      • 7 votes
      Reply#5 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:37 AM EDT
      Nicey-1026620

      Why cure a disease when you can treat it for a lifetime.

      That's basically what has happened with aids. They've found a way for you to basically live a healthy life after contracting HIV you just have to pay for the rest of your life.

      • 7 votes
      #5.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:46 AM EDT
      goldie-1192825

      Pretty much every autoimmune disease is incurable. Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Polymyositis, Scleroderma, HIV, AIH..... you name it. But there sure is alot of meds to treat the symptons and maybe slow it down. A med for RA... Humira, Orencia, Remicade, Enbrel... run around $1300 to $1800 a month. Let's not forget all the other little pills you need to combat the side effects. If they can make a drug to slow something down I find it hard to believe they couldn't cure it if they wanted to. They're all crooks.

      • 3 votes
      #5.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:43 PM EDT
      Pamela Drew

      Pretty much every autoimmune disease is incurable. Lupus, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Polymyositis, Scleroderma, HIV, AIH..... you name it.

      Sadly, the American approach doesn't even eliminate known causes and discounts all the lives lost to preventable illness as part of the cost of doing business. Can big business do more to help us than Superfund cleanup back on the taxpayers tab and a way to cue a hard-on?

      • 4 votes
      #5.3 - Fri Sep 4, 2009 1:26 PM EDT
      Reply
      goldie-1192825

      Well, you know the prices of everything else they make will just go up to cover their loss and then some. No way are they just gonna pay it and take the hit.

      goldie-1192825

      • 2 votes
      Reply#6 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:42 AM EDT
      nyghtshayde

      Pfizer alone has net profits in the area of 10 billion dollars.2006 was over 8 billion.Their CEO last year made:

      8. Jeffrey Kindler – Pfizer - $14.8M

      • 5 votes
      #6.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:04 AM EDT
      3rdtime

      WOW! He's underpaid! The average in 2005 was 52.8M.

      • 4 votes
      #6.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:50 AM EDT
      Simplistic Reality

      Yeah and Billionaire Mayor of New York was just saying the Big Pharm CEO's don't make very much money. What a joke.

      • 5 votes
      #6.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:42 PM EDT
      xcomunic8ed

      Just another example of the death of the middle class in our country. All the wealth is being redistributed.....to the upper one percent. I wonder what will happen to them when everything crashes again like it did in the '20s? Will they be jumping from windows?

      • 3 votes
      #6.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 8:12 PM EDT
      Reply
      Aunk (The Cultural Health Guy)

      Hetep and Respect, this is just the tip of the ice burg, the Food and Death Administration (FDA) is in bed with MediPlex (Medical Industrial Complex). The anti-humanist Republicans and Corporate Dems don't want to touch this with a ten foot pole.

      Imagine activating Kennedy Health Care Reform and actually causing some accountability. The Party of no says no and we Dems need to run over them in Sept and pass Kennedy HCR, period.

      Now for a reality check, Kennedy HCR is just a start, fines are one thing, but where are the jail sentences for MediPlex murder and inventing drugs for diseases that do not exist.

      • 6 votes
      Reply#7 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:46 AM EDT
      JoulesBeef

      fines only punish share holders.. it doesnt even take anythign from the bonus of the guy that made the decision.

      • 8 votes
      #7.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 10:58 AM EDT
      Frustrated53

      The jail sentences are the same as with the Wall Street Mafia, not going to happen! These people donate to every politician's campaign. They make enormous profits, steal people's money or health and are not worried about prosecution from the Government. There is no such thing as a 2 party system, only who is in control of the dog and pony show. Until we have options to elect men and woman not affiliated with either sick party we now have, the policies in this country will only get worse.

      • 4 votes
      #7.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:21 AM EDT
      3rdtime

      Sorry, Joules, but the shareholders won't miss a penny. The drug prices will rise, some more. The sick will pay for the sin.

      • 4 votes
      #7.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:51 AM EDT
      Kim-298921

      I disagree Joules. Shareholders have a vote for who is on the board, and can hold that board accountable for the executives, policies and practices of the company that are irresponsible and diminish the value of the asset.

      Too many shareholders are ignorant or complacent, too many boards of directors are fatcats with no interest at all in the true mission or corporate citizenship of the entity.

      • 4 votes
      #7.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 3:31 PM EDT
      Reply
      CCArm

      So where does this money (fine) go? To the general fund? I love the comment about the hit being taken back in '08 and the blip at the end about the shares being up 9 cents.

      It is ALL about the money.

      As a person that hasn't taken anything stronger than an aspirin in 20 years, it is hard for me to understand the need for a pill for EVERYTHING.

      My mother is on Medicare and takes 10 pills or more a day...the MediPlex has her (and millions of others) number. Old = must need pills for everything from indigestion to aches and pains. I go with tums and an aspirin.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#8 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:13 AM EDT
      jamithy1

      i like my Tylenol #4 with codeine, no aspirin, massage therapy or chiropractic adjustment has been able to fix my back and make me able to work (keeping me off disability), It is those things in combination with appropriate medication that help. Not all drugs are unnecessary, some actually serve a purpose

      • 2 votes
      #8.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:28 AM EDT
      3rdtime

      Jamithy, I'm glad you've found something that really works for you. How would you like to pay 25% to 40% less for it?

      • 3 votes
      #8.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:52 AM EDT
      jamithy1

      I'm pro healthcare reform, even though I have private coverage for meds from my employer.

      • 4 votes
      #8.3 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:01 PM EDT
      3rdtime

      Me, too. Maybe, if they get relief from the high premiums they pay for us, we'll both get a raise!

      • 4 votes
      #8.4 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:27 PM EDT
      Simplistic Reality

      i like my Tylenol #4 with codeine

      That's good stuff :P Makes me feel like I want to melt into my bed.

        #8.5 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:43 PM EDT
        Reply
        GaryColumbus

        If this was a Texas based pharmaceutical, they'd probably get out of it. Just like Exxon Oil having the Texas Supreme Court bending over like they have in the resent lawsuit against Exxon. The Texas pharmaceuticals and industry conglomerates have been virtually untouchable in lawsuits.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#9 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:17 AM EDT
        Blearc

        How about we fix the main problem and ban TV commercials of pharmaceuticals? Personally I'm sick of hearing of all the things like leaking diarrhea, bleeding ulcers, even possibly death legal mumbo jumbo at the end of every commercial.

        But how much is added to our health care by the newest designer fad affliction that must be solved by this weeks block buster drug?

        • 4 votes
        Reply#10 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:30 AM EDT
        Simplistic Reality

        How about we fix the main problem and ban TV commercials of pharmaceuticals?

        I agree. Like I pointed out above... in Germany.. it is illegal to advertise drugs like that. Should be the same here. You left out those herpes pill commericials. Can't stand those.

        Guy's voice: "I have herpes"

        Guy's girlfriend: "And I don't"

        Guy's voice: "And were trying to keep it that way!"

        Guy and girl: < smiles and giggles >

        *As they both walk down the beach in the sunset*

        Ugh!

        • 2 votes
        #10.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:45 PM EDT
        Blearc

        Hey SR if you don't mind my asking are you in Germany?

        Personally I grew up in Memmigen and Kaiserslaughtern.

        • 1 vote
        #10.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 3:08 PM EDT
        Reply
        HorseTrainer

        They are all doing this. They just got caught.

        • 4 votes
        Reply#11 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 11:39 AM EDT
        Unrepentant Conservative

        The most significant bit of information here is in a single underplayed paragraph:

        "Use of drugs for so-called "off-label" medical conditions is not uncommon, but drug manufacturers are prohibited from marketing drugs for uses that have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration."

        The fact is that many drugs have other beneficial uses that were never part of the original FDA approval process for that particular drug. The ones in the best position to tout those uses of course is the original manufacturer. Unfortunately under our current FDA system of approvals, the FDA works against the best interest of the patient by making it a crime for them to tell you about them. This shame is exactly why having the Government in charge of any health care is a bad idea. Instead of trying to raise revenue by fining these companies they should be helping them get the word out about other uses which are just a safe as the original "approved" usage.

        Shame on the FDA.

        • 1 vote
        Reply#12 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:00 PM EDT
        jumpshotjarrod

        Wow. That might be the most ridiculous attempt to twist something that I have ever seen.

        Unrepentant Conservative, do you realize what you just said?

        Many allegy medications make you drowzy. Do you believe drug companies should be able to market their allergy medications as 'sleep agents'?

        Please tell me you see the inherent danger in that, or any of the other thousands of examples like it?

        Unrepentant conservatives may be the death of us all ;)

        • 7 votes
        #12.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:08 PM EDT
        3rdtime

        They can't tell you about them but they can tell doctors about "ongoing trials" for off-label uses. They spend part of their "promotional" money on seminars for doctors (which mostly qualify as continuing education credts) and are a major source of such "casual" discussions outside of the classroom.

        Jarrod, read the label of most OTC sleep aids. They are just antihistamines.

        We're talking about prescrition drugs MOST of which have NOT been tested and proven effective or even safe for many off-label uses. If the drug companies test them and get them approved for other uses, they can get a fresh patent for that use. It can extend their exclusivity for up to 20 years--at full monoploy price.

        • 2 votes
        #12.2 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:30 PM EDT
        Unrepentant Conservative

        What keeps these drugs from being approved for their "off label use" is not that they are un-safe as you falsely suggest, but the fact that such approvals require a complete set of new trails which would raise the cost needlessly. If the FDA was really looking after your interests they would create a short-track approval process for these off label uses instead of a complete process. But then they couldn't justify their bureaucratic jobs.

          #12.3 - Fri Sep 4, 2009 3:59 PM EDT
          Pamela Drew

          What keeps these drugs from being approved for their "off label use" is not that they are un-safe as you falsely suggest, but the fact that such approvals require a complete set of new trails which would raise the cost needlessly.

          Wrong. The method for determining drug safety and efficacy is trials and without those trials the drug can not be assumed to be either safe or effective. That was the primary function for establishing the FDA and outlawing the snake oil salesmen and their unprovn remedies.

          The delays and trials are "costly" to the drug makers but not as much as the lives that are lost to unsafe applications of drugs. If your only concern is the profitable pipeline than perhaps safety tests are unnecessary, but if protecting human health is the goal than all drugs need to be fully tested.

          • 2 votes
          #12.4 - Sat Sep 5, 2009 12:45 AM EDT
          Teodoro Leon 3

          Great job in the rebuttal dept., Pamela. Keep it up with the factually supported comments.

          is not that they are un-safe as you falsely suggest

          What spin embellished with lies , keep spouting this off and it is going to come back and bite you in the ass...you really should consider personal liability.You think you can continue with out consequences...watch. Immediate.

          • 3 votes
          #12.5 - Sat Sep 5, 2009 3:04 PM EDT
          Reply
          Paul I

          Where are the free-markets advocates who proclaim that a free-market is self-regulating and always acts in the best interests of the consumer?

          • 6 votes
          Reply#13 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:22 PM EDT
          jumpshotjarrod

          They were struck down by reality ;)

          • 4 votes
          #13.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:26 PM EDT
          Reply
          SD-BASS

          And some people wonder why drugs cost so much...

          The reform that is needed is in ridiculous litigation.

          Plus it would help if there wasn't so much fraud, waste and abuse with medicare and other government health programs, which are unconstitutional and perfect examples of why we need to prevent more government interference in health care.

            Reply#14 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:24 PM EDT
            Paul I

            Too bad we were not invited to stay at the resorts to play golf and get a massage. If the drug companies stop paying for doctors to have a good time so that the doctors will prescribe the drugs, does this qualify part of health care reform? Now if the drug companies stop paying for politicians to have a good time, that definitely would qualify!

            • 1 vote
            Reply#15 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:45 PM EDT
            Conservative Not NeoCon

            http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/byauthor/277553 Pfizer hopes $68B buyout of Wyeth is right medicine

            Excerpt:
            "By buying Wyeth, Pfizer will mutate from a maker of blockbuster pills to a one-stop shop for vaccines, biotech drugs, traditional pills and non-prescription products for both people and animals."

            You know what the golden rule is don't you? He who controls all the gold makes the rules. It's one thing to have fair competition or an advantage, it's another to run a monopoly. The practice buying out competition is fair game - to a point. When they buy out generic producers, it's consumers that have no choice but to pay through the nose for what they need.

              Reply#16 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 12:53 PM EDT
              jamithy1

              I'm against for profit Monopolies, but then im a democratic Socialist (note the small "d" meaning I believe in democratically electing Social minded governments NOT a Democrat).

              What I find funny is the number of people who are PRO capitalist yet complain about monopolies.... Monopolies are the epitomy of true Capitalism.

              • 1 vote
              #16.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:08 PM EDT
              Reply
              AFish

              This bit of news does not surprise me at all. I sold pharmaceuticals for 8 years (until 2006) and the "buying" of doctors was as routine as any marketing campaign. I was required to hold at least 5-6 "lectures", basically paying a doctor to come and speak at a fancy restaurant and getting as many doctors as I could to come to the event. They got a great meal, and until the last few years, could even bring their spouse. Pfizer was known for their reps having the biggest "expense" budgets for these events; competing against them came to be a battle of who could spend more on each key doctor.

              The amounts of money paid to "speakers" (basically doctors who had been trained by Pfizer to promote Pfizer products"), was more than just an honorarium for a specialist to educate other doctors. It basically became a way to "reward" doctors who promoted Pfizer products. (It was the same deal with most Pharma companies). It basically has made a mockery of the medical field as doctors knew that they were being bribed and most new drugs were over promoted and has been a real drain on the healthcare system of this country. I can't believe that the Healthcare industry is going to win by killing any type of healthcare reform. Basically, the drug companies, the hospitals, the medical device companies and the insurance companies will continue to make huge profits, and the very people who would have benefited by reform, will be the ones to help them kill it. Sad

              • 2 votes
              Reply#17 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:09 PM EDT
              millerb-1023348

              then there is the whole key leaders crap and the way that the companies track doctors through the print outs at the big pharma provided cash registers at your local pharmacy, and how many on and off patent meds they push, opps I mean prescribe and then they get to be Key leader. What hog wash--I try to avoid them as much as possible.

                #17.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:17 PM EDT
                Reply
                Missgpie

                Drugs should not be promoted. They should be only used based on the best benefits to the patient. No one should be getting schmoozed to push them. Shoot we may as well legalize that green leafy stuff.

                • 3 votes
                Reply#18 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:27 PM EDT
                HappyAnjali

                Excellent news. Doctors now a days advise drugs to patients based on promotion to them rather than the patient's requirement.

                Great Job US govt.

                • 3 votes
                Reply#19 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:33 PM EDT
                tweetheart44

                Money, money, money......that's what it's all about. To all of you who want to keep supporting big pharmaceutical companies that bribe customers and politicians, keep objecting to health care reform. Are you glad that Pfizer bribes doctors to get them to buy their products? Are you fine with these companies paying millions of dollares to politicians to object to health care reform? Guess who paid for those vacations? YOU DID! This is why we need health care reform. Companies like Pfiizer are no different than CROOKS! They are just like the companies that got bailed out by the government and need to be babysat! It all comes back to GREED! We can put a stop to the high prices. Support the president. Let's pass a bill that will help ALL citizens of the United States!

                • 5 votes
                #20 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:41 PM EDT
                Beverly-Mo.

                tweetheart #20,good message.

                Nail meets hammer, right on. GREED has taken over this country, the best advice I can give anyone is to have a good primary family Dr., that truly cares about you, that doesn't push drugs, prescribes only what you need and schedules appts where he takes the time to sit down and talk to you. I know this type of Dr., is getting harder to find, however if you are not comfortable with the care you are getting , switch doctors until you find one that cares. Choosing the right candidate to represent you in Congress is another decision that should be made after much study and thought, then follow their voting record. Don't let talk radio or the tv political commentators influence your decisions when you go to the polls, quit being so lazy, do some research and check out who is being truthful and who is spreading lies. Follow the profits, follow the money and follow the greed, then exercise your vote in every election that is held from your local city government, school & state right on up to the Presidential election.

                • 1 vote
                #20.1 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:20 PM EDT
                FmntGirl

                tweetheart --- great comment, you took the words right out of my mouth!

                • 1 vote
                #20.2 - Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:40 AM EDT
                tweetheart44

                Thanks Beverly and FmntGirl. As you can see, this topic gets me going. It is quite obvious that the Republicans/conservatives are going to go against EVERYTHING that President Obama does or says. How very immature of them. They remind me of a child that throws a tantrum when their parent doesn't let them have some candy! We need health care reform.

                • 1 vote
                #20.3 - Sat Sep 5, 2009 4:01 PM EDT
                Teodoro Leon 3

                You mean how you will become a criminal under Health Bill 3400? I would throw a temper tantrum too...

                http://secaa23.newsvine.com/_news/2009/09/03/3221586-irs-would-become-chief-enforcer-under-obamas-health-care-reform

                Do you know that under Health Bill HR3200 IRS Would Become "Chief Enforcer" Under Obama's Health-Care Reform and dictate to you if your insurance is inadequate or adequate?..and if it's not ,excise a tax on you, 2.5%.

                "A substantial portion of H.R. 3200, the House health care bill, is devoted to amending the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in order to give the IRS the authority to perform these new duties.

                This Act may be cited as the

                ‘‘America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009’’.

                The Democrats' plan would require all Americans to have "acceptable" insurance coverage (the legislation includes long and complex definitions of "acceptable") and would designate the IRS as the agency charged with enforcing that requirement. On your yearly 1040 tax return, you would be required to attest that you have "acceptable" coverage."

                For employers:

                http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

                ENFORCEMENT OF HEALTH COVERAGE PARTICIPATIONREQUIREMENTS.—

                17‘‘(1) CIVIL PENALTIES.—In the case of any employer who fails (during any period with respect towhich the election under subsection (a) is in effect)

                20to satisfy the health coverage participation requirements with respect to any employee, the Secretary may assess a civil penalty against the employer of $100 for each day in the period beginning on the date such failure first occurs and ending on the date such failure is corrected.

                As to the IRS issue...page 167

                TITLE IV—AMENDMENTS TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 8

                Subtitle A—Shared Responsibility 9PART 1—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
                SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

                (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the
                Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:

                ‘‘PART VIII—HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES ‘‘
                COVERAGE

                SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE.
                ‘‘Subpart A—Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage
                ‘‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

                ‘‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. ‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of— rDte Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILHR 3200 IH
                ‘‘(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over‘‘(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

                Is it funny how a Corporation is now a criminal?A person.An entity with civil rights.

                The IRS is a Corporation registered in Delaware.

                INTERNAL REVENUE TAX AND AUDIT SERVICE (IRS)
                For Profit General Delaware Corporation
                Incorporation Date 7/12/33
                File No. 0325720

                http://www.metatech.org/the_us_constitution.html

                Having acquired the legal rights and protections of a “person”, the question arises: “What kind of person is the corporation?”

                How do we stop this malfeasance and avarice? By understanding the truth...

                The Corporation:

                This film, presented below, is a great introduction to what a corporation really is:The Corporation includes interviews with 40 corporate insiders and critics - including Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, Milton Friedman, Howard Zinn, Vandana Shiva and Michael Moore - plus true confessions, case studies and strategies for change.

                http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3203253804055041031&hl=en video

                You'd think that things like disasters, or the purity of childhood, or even milk, let alone water or air, would be sacred. But no. Corporations have no built-in limits on what, who, or how much they can exploit for profit. In the fifteenth century, the enclosure movement began to put fences around public grazing lands so that they might be privately owned and exploited. Today, every molecule on the planet is up for grabs. In a bid to own it all, corporations are patenting animals, plants, even your DNA. Around things too precious, vulnerable, sacred or important to the public interest, governments have, in the past, drawn protective boundaries against corporate exploitation. Today, governments are inviting corporations into domains from which they were previously barred.

                http://www.thecorporation.com/media/Transcript_finalpt1%20copy.pdf

                http://www.thecorporation.com/

                And about Governmemts inviting and enticing corruption,aiding and abetting...how is this possible? This will tell you...

                The Corporation, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and the War Racket (video)http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1866496783791986992

                It was around the same period, through the teaching of Jordan Maxwell, that I found out that our governments, from the smallest towns and municipalities to the largest countries, are actually registered corporations. Once I fully understood the implications of what was being revealed, I also realized that there was no such thing as an evil empire. There was only the reality of what many corporations has become.

                United States of America is a Corporation

                http://www.jusbelli.com/usofa_is_corp.html

                The United States Isn't a Country — It's a Corporation!

                http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

                US CODE: Title 28,3002. Definitions

                http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html

                US CODE: Title 28,3002. Definitions - cornell.edu

                (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States.

                www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.­html

                (10) “Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe.

                http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm

                The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

                What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

                Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to you? This is why we can't get them to do anything on our behalf or to answer to us — as in the case with the illegal income tax — among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.

                Act of 1871

                http://byronwine.com/files/1871.pdf

                1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.

                With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see,Acts of the Forty-first Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).

                The act -- passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War -- was a strategic move by foreign interests(international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America. Congress cut a deal with the international bankers(specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the United States.

                The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced -- in effect vandalized and sabotage -- when the title was capitalized and the word "for" was changed to "of" in the title.

                These institutions are illegal and Unconstitutional...we have the right to recourse.The Republic and the Constituion will be restored...and as result...the people will be free.

                http://www.metatech.org/the_us_constitution.html

                • 1 vote
                #20.4 - Sat Sep 5, 2009 5:46 PM EDT
                tweetheart44

                Teodoro, First off, your post is too long. I barely got into it before I stopped reading it. You just ramble on. Did you think that health care reform would be free? Secondly, nothing has been written in stone, yet. They are trying to fine tune the bill. I am not going to pass judgement until the final draft is presented.

                  #20.5 - Sat Sep 5, 2009 7:17 PM EDT
                  Teodoro Leon 3

                  Too long? Maybe the bill(correction from above HR3200) that is in the a House is too long. Final draft my ass.

                  Keep trying to discredit through misinformation.

                  A health bill should not be imposed first of all. Second ,it shouldn't criminalize you and penalize you with a TAX. What part of the IRS dictating to you if you have ADEQUATE Health Coverage did you not get? They have no business in business first of all. Second of all they should not be in the insurance business. The 3 rd, evaluation of Health Care business or your health.

                  It hasn't been written in stone?

                  Latest Actions View All Actions [18]

                  Jul 30th
                  Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 31 - 28.

                  Jul 30th
                  Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

                  Jul 30th
                  Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

                  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/actions_votes

                  • 2 votes
                  #20.6 - Tue Sep 8, 2009 1:04 PM EDT
                  tweetheart44

                  First off, you're rude. Secondly, it is high time for a public health care system. There is no equality when it comes to health care. People who don't have insurance are billed at an extremely high rate compared to those that have insurance. I cannot figure out why the Republicans enjoy lining the pockets of insurance, pharmaceutical and health care corporations. I certainly don't. They don't have any competition. Competition will bring the cost of health care DOWN. If they are getting close to passing the bill, GOOD! We've heard enough lies by the conservatives.

                    #20.7 - Tue Sep 8, 2009 1:54 PM EDT
                    Teodoro Leon 3

                    Go with your sensitivity elsewhere then...boy, your touchy...I bet this is George Frame isn't it?lol

                    But thanks for giving more exposure to this...that was your intent? Inspite of yourself...you will do God's will! And you have. The truth will set us all free.Thanks again.

                    As to the IRS issue...page 167 HR3200

                    http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

                    TITLE IV—AMENDMENTS TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 8

                    Subtitle A—Shared Responsibility 9PART 1—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
                    SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

                    (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the
                    Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:

                    ‘‘PART VIII—HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES ‘‘
                    COVERAGE

                    SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE.
                    ‘‘Subpart A—Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage
                    ‘‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

                    ‘‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. ‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of— rDte Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILHR 3200 IH
                    ‘‘(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over‘‘(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

                    • 1 vote
                    #20.8 - Tue Sep 8, 2009 9:24 PM EDT
                    tweetheart44

                    boooooorrrrrrinnnnnng.

                      #20.9 - Wed Sep 9, 2009 1:38 AM EDT
                      Teodoro Leon 3

                      So you live in a suburb of Phoenix? And you...

                      love to blog and I think that this is the perfect place to voice my opinion.

                      And your child is now 5'7" ?

                      I will respect the views of anyone on newsvine and I hope that they will do the same.

                      Respect the facts that I posted above for they are the truth and not like your comment ,opinion.And you know what they say about opinions?Funny how there are only a couple of tweethearts44 on the web...and they all belong to Brandi Melton?But of course that isn't you,is it?

                      Though you fit the profile described...female.And your worthless comment "boooooorrrrrrinnnnnng" is in line with a disrespectful 23 yr.old.Gives you alot of credit in your love of blogging...and articles posted? 1(one).

                      And again thanks for the exposure...that is your intent?

                      • 2 votes
                      #20.10 - Wed Sep 9, 2009 4:19 PM EDT
                      tweetheart44

                      Sorry to burst your bubble, Teddy, but I have no idea who Brandi Melton is. You must really love me to look at my bio! Thanks for the compliment!

                      Oh, and your last few comments here are enough to make an insomniac fall asleep sitting up. You might want to try a different approach.

                        #20.11 - Wed Sep 9, 2009 4:41 PM EDT
                        Teodoro Leon 3

                        No I pity you and wonder what your trauma was...keep challenging me and you willbe found out...everyone will know you for what you are...your own words.

                        I know,we know that you claim to be in Phoenix.That your son's feet were deformed.That the docs said he would not grow taller than 5'.

                        Cause and effect.Your own vileness imposed on those you love.Karma.

                        So continue...for you make an excellent promoter of this article.And what compliment. Yes,your deluded.

                        Can't wait to see you comment on my articles. You just don't have anything better to do than bring trauma on those you"love"?You are what is labeled a troll.You are blind. But you will see. So go to sleep...I wonder what entices you to keep commenting...I'm getting a message out...about the farce of your beloved Master Obama and his ilk...can't reconcile the fact that you were duped again by voting for his CHANGE...get over it...many were fooled by his NWO farce...swallow your spit and save your own people.

                        But maybe you hate them just as much?

                        • 2 votes
                        #20.12 - Wed Sep 9, 2009 9:37 PM EDT
                        tweetheart44

                        Teddy, You are one sick...VERY sick puppy. Are you stalking me?

                          #20.13 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:32 AM EDT
                          Teodoro Leon 3

                          Are you stalking me?

                          No need troll you just keep popping up,your comments have been forwarded to newsvine(malicious user)...just making you responsible for your insolence.

                          And my name is Teodoro Leon III.Useless,off topic comments...indicates a troll.

                          You can't come up with viable responses..except conjecture and ridicule. You just keep drawing more people to the truth of this AGENDA of enslavement.By directing them to these comments.

                          And you reveal yourself more and more.

                          So do I need to stalk you(scary word...impotent word)? " You" opened yourself up to scrutiny...though I do have one suggestion...if this stalking paranoia bothers you,you'd be better more selective in your comments and words...for it's not me you have to worry about. I make you responsible and accountable with your own words.Others might not take to kindly to your attacks,ridicule and belittlement.

                          See how easy it was to find this info on you? How about someone else with better resources then I getting offended by your insolence and indignance?

                          So continue with your comments...for as I wrote, I have a purpose for responding to your impotent,elementary comments...to draw attention to this article and the very relevant info contained in it. Like HR 3200's Amendment to the IRS ACT of 1986 on page 167 of... or I wouldn't bother with you.But your attempt to discredit this information mandates that I reveal you.

                          http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

                          TITLE IV—AMENDMENTS TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 8

                          • 2 votes
                          #20.14 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 10:40 AM EDT
                          tweetheart44

                          Is that so, Teddy??? I haven't said anything that is against the newsvine rules. PASS THE BILL, PRESIDENT OBAMA AND PUT AN END TO THE LUNACY!!!

                          I don't know anyone that is going to take the time to read your entire posts say nothing of going to the dozens of links that you love to provide. Have a grand life!

                            #20.15 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:37 PM EDT
                            Teodoro Leon 3

                            Oohh ,they read it,thanks to you.They educate themselves to the truth of you and Obama's(mouthpiece for the NWO) agenda.xkater from Mesa.Inspite of your attempts...as I wrote, you draw them to the comments...your intent?

                            http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf pg 167

                            TITLE IV—AMENDMENTS TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986 8

                            Subtitle A—Shared Responsibility 9PART 1—INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
                            SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

                            (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the
                            Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:

                            ‘‘PART VIII—HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES ‘‘
                            COVERAGE

                            SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE.
                            ‘‘Subpart A—Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage
                            ‘‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

                            ‘‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. ‘‘(a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of— rDte Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILHR 3200 IH
                            ‘‘(1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over‘‘(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

                            Were going to fin that your not only a zealot,but a paid one at that...and what these tactics comprise of is Treason against the Republic of the US of A and it's sovereign citizens.

                            Your comments and ID are permanently in perpetual Cyberspace...for when the accounting comes you will be held legally and civilly responsible.

                            You don't realize that patriotic intelligence agencies and agents have tagged you? You think that you follow a majority of untouchables?

                            If, and that's a big IF,this country is thrown into turmoil by violence due to your promotion of theft by malfeasance and avarice displayed in these comments a warrant will be issued for your arrest. For treason,to start.

                            So,please continue your impotent attempts at comments...it gives this info so much more exposure.

                            • 1 vote
                            #20.16 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:19 PM EDT
                            Teodoro Leon 3

                            Organizing for America | Maria Kenez's Blog

                            http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/ThinkAboutThis/gGxMLf

                            http://xkater.libsyn.com/

                            http://www.ireport.com/people/xkater

                            http://www.pandora.com/people/xkater#

                            • 1 vote
                            #20.17 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:06 PM EDT
                            tweetheart44

                            Wow, if anyone has been flagged, it would be someone like you! I have NOTHING to hide. Toodles! By the way, anyone out there who wants to see what this guy is all about, check out his bio! Very scary!

                              #20.18 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:57 PM EDT
                              Teodoro Leon 3

                              Yes ,my little "toodle loo"...that's what it is there for ,to read. And you neither confirm or deny?

                              But your scared? Fear is always the work of your adversary...and it's not me. I just reveal things. And funny thing...most people do read my Bio and comments before sending a friend request. And they are not scared ...usually...just fascinated.

                              What part do you find scary.Black Pearl Dragon? Mysticism?Hymn of the Pearl? Reality?My Birthday? Place?Google Earth...etc...etc.

                              I hope "toodles" means your finished. I think I AM finshed with my work.Here.

                              And then just Google my name if you get Boooored! lol This one...Teodoro Leon III.

                              Tres bien? Bon nuit,bon chance,adieu Madame. And again,Merci.

                              • 1 vote
                              #20.19 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:16 PM EDT
                              tweetheart44

                              I guess it is the total wackjob package.

                                #20.20 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:09 PM EDT
                                Teodoro Leon 3

                                Very becoming of you..shows your maturity.Can't respond without resorting to "childish,obnoxious comments...that are personal attacks?

                                Must have struck a nerve.Don't worry, your suspense and torment will be over soon...you will fail.The Agenda will fail...for your Father defiles all and is the cause of Failure,Lies.

                                Here is your desperation...

                                PASS THE BILL, PRESIDENT OBAMA AND PUT AN END TO THE LUNACY!!!#20.15

                                see in the Republic of the USA..it's not just up to him. When sovereign persons exercise their right to self determination through informed ,knowledgeable actions that are not under duress,coercion,deceit and manipulation...Voila,healing begins.

                                Contracts entered into with the above negative criteria and stressors are illegal and null and void.Especially when they are entered into through ignorance.

                                Choose between the lesser of two evils? You NEVER ,EVER have to choose Evil and LIES.

                                Look what Charlie Sheen and so many others are doing...this is a great example of how the truth will set "you" free,"Toodle loo".

                                http://homelessokc.newsvine.com/_news/2009/09/08/3237775-charlie-sheen911-and-president-bobamatwenty-minutes-with-the-president-

                                Charlie Sheen's Follow up Video Message to President Obama

                                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyKR2-A0KPU

                                Que te vas con Dios antes que viene el diablo por usted y los de mas que quieres.

                                Adios.Muy pronto viene tu paz. Ya no despares ,chiquita.Teodoro Leon III

                                PS I bet you learned some Spanish since moving to Phoenix.Where did you come from? The Exodus from Florida?

                                • 1 vote
                                #20.21 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:38 PM EDT
                                tweetheart44

                                Like I said, a total wackjob. Oh, and one more thing.....POOF, you are gone! I just hit the ignore button.

                                  #20.22 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:06 PM EDT
                                  Teodoro Leon 3

                                  Wow...you are so smart! And delusional. It would have been easier if you had just stopped commenting...but continue to convince yourself that all of a sudden I am gone because you clicked a button on your screen.

                                  I can still see your and my comments.I'm still here.

                                  Oooh , I'm so glad that you are able to delude yourself into thinking you did something wonderful and magickal by hitting the ignore button(you didn't)..just like a supporter of the NWO Agenda and Obama.Deluded.

                                  When they come ask Granny in the future of the comments you made what will you respond?

                                  When they ask Granny if she was aware of the amendment to the IRS ACT of 1986 what will you respond? These will be all those around you who you have led astray wanting to know of your malfesance and avarice.Many have seen these comments.

                                  I will make sure they see these comments.

                                  Did you see that they deleted the my.barackobama.com EVENT...at the insistence of real DEMOCRATS tied to this campaign...they will find out about you to...here it is...

                                  Obama Website Calls Opponents "Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists" :Promotes "fight back against our own" on "Patriot Day"(9/11)

                                  This is a comment off the seed...

                                  brianandrew

                                  This was a very upsetting post http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/healthcareorganizingevent/gpk4cj and members of my.barackobama.com protested it themselves until it was taken down. None of the lefties I know would have approved of this either. I also don't think that I somehow mourn or remember those who died on 9/11 more than someone else just because I'm conservative. I just hope you don't think of this as a right/left issue. Very few people on the left would approve of such tactics. The same way I am embarrassed by certain groups or people that represent the right from time to time.

                                  Here you can view the saved page here...

                                  click on link below and use cursor(left click) to magnify

                                  http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/highlightedversion.jpg

                                  Those in your community...oooh when they find you out.And the shame you bring on your family.Old age doesn't always equate with wisdom or maturity. Though I know you don't do this innocently,inadvertantly.

                                  You willingly and feloniously are complicit. As proven by my research.

                                  Watch your Fate befall you human.Think it's me you contend with? God has heard the cries and anguish of his people. Now watch and tremble in your repentance.This is the 50th Jubilee Year... proclaiming glad tidings to the Poor and liberty to the Captives.

                                  Contend with God's Will. Any of you? Now watch.Watch the light of Truth.

                                  • 1 vote
                                  #20.23 - Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:21 PM EDT
                                  Reply
                                  Sacrilege

                                  This reminds me of the time I took Luvox. While I was taking it, it became an illegal drug because it didn't prevent what it was meant to prevent, it only made it worse. And, apparently, it was permanent for most people taking it. Now, I must deal with bad siezures and am taking other things to lessen the effects.

                                  Pills usually have negative effects now, more then they do helping people anymore. You must deal with the thirty-plus side-effects in order to get ride of one thing bothering you.

                                  • 1 vote
                                  Reply#21 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 1:57 PM EDT
                                  MinnieApolis

                                  Now, I must deal with bad seizures and am taking other things to lessen the effects.

                                  I am so sorry about your experience with big, bad Big Pharma. Are you party to any class-action lawsuit? It is probably very difficult to get anything in terms of recompense for your very real suffering -- but those companies have to be brought to heel.

                                  • 1 vote
                                  #21.1 - Tue Sep 8, 2009 3:09 PM EDT
                                  Sacrilege

                                  Thanks, Minnie. Unfortunately, I was too young to pursue it and my mother didn't pursue it at all, saying that I didn't need drugs period.

                                    #21.2 - Wed Sep 9, 2009 8:10 PM EDT
                                    Reply
                                    Rixar13

                                    Distressing to know the truth about Drug Companies, what happened to company ethics except for the whistle-blowers...?

                                    "Pfizer ripped off New Yorkers and taxpayers across the country to pad its bottom line," Cuomo said.

                                    At least the states will get some much needed money.

                                    • 2 votes
                                    Reply#22 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:08 PM EDT
                                    Andromeda-510639

                                    It's amazing, this was written off fourth quarter 2008; Considering that Pfizer is a four time offender and that the lid blew off of this because of whistleblowers (sharing $102 million of the settlement?), I find the remarks made by the spokesperson Schulman about corporate integrity quite amusing; actually it is a contradiction in terms when referenced with pharmaceuticals.

                                    "These agreements bring final closure to significant legal matters and help to enhance our focus on what we do best — discovering, developing and delivering innovative medicines to treat patients dealing with some of the world's most debilitating diseases," said Amy W. Schulman, senior vice president and general counsel of Pfizer.

                                    Note: Hey, Amy, you forgot to mention cheating and defrauding the public among the things they do best.

                                    Also, I hope that the fines are paid and that the money actually goes into the Medicare/ Medicaid accounts. I also hope that the money shared with the states is actually put back into both programs and not diverted to their respective General Funds to pay off debt unrelated to this fraud.

                                    Well, I guess we can all expect an increase in the cost of drugs and prescriptions; someone has to pay for these fines and it's always the consumer. Imagine if all of the money spent to perpetrate this fraud, spent on doctors, etc. as well as the money that will be paid in fines and penalties was actually applied to health care or used to reduce pharmeceutical costs?

                                    • 2 votes
                                    Reply#23 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:21 PM EDT
                                    redtejano

                                    test

                                      Reply#24 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:42 PM EDT
                                      Krankee

                                      This fine amounts to no more than a slap on the hand. According to Hoovers, Pfizer has had a combined net income between 06 and 08 of 35 Billion dollars. This company has assets of 115 Billion dollars year after year, 2.3 Billion is nothing.

                                      When the government starts fining these companies 10's of Billions, then they will cease running amok on the market and doing as they please. Next time lets hope the Justice Dept sinks their teeth into them.

                                      • 1 vote
                                      Reply#25 - Wed Sep 2, 2009 2:47 PM EDT
                                      Jump to discussion page: 1 2
                                      Leave a Comment:
                                      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                      You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                      (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                      Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                      FUN STUFF:
                                      • Leaderboard |
                                      • E-Mail Alerts |
                                      • Top of the Vine |
                                      • Newsvine Live |
                                      • Newsvine Archives |
                                      • The Greenhouse
                                      COMPANY STUFF:
                                      • Code of Honor |
                                      • Company Info |
                                      • Contact Us |
                                      • Jobs |
                                      • User Agreement |
                                      • Privacy Policy |
                                      • About our ads
                                      LEGAL STUFF:
                                      • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                      • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                      • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com