Big Pharma Pays Big Bucks in Fines for ‘off-label marketing’
By The Liberty Beacon Staff
Big pharma companies have had their fair share of expensive fines, mainly for advertising the use of drugs for purposes not approved by government, called ‘off-label marketing’.
GlaxoKlineSmith
In 2012, GlaxoSmithKline paid £782million in criminal damages for failure to disclose safety data and off-label marketing and £1.45billion in civil charges.
The case covered a variety of miss-marketed drugs including antidiabetic, Avandia.
Pzifer
In 2009 the company paid a $2.3billion fine for false claims in one of the biggest fraud settlements in US history.
Pfizer Inc pleaded guilty to a US criminal charge relating to promotion of its now-withdrawn Bextra pain medicine.
The world’s biggest drugmaker was slapped with huge fines by the US government after being deemed a repeat offender in pitching drugs to patients and doctors for unapproved uses.
Pfizer’s marketing team promoted Bextra for acute pain, surgical pain and other unapproved uses, while its salesforce promoted the drug directly to doctors for those unapproved uses and dosages, according to the US Department of Justice.
Johnson & Johnson
In 2013 Johnson & Johnson paid 1.4bn for the same offence.
At the time, Associate Attorney General Tony West, said: “When companies put profit over patients’ health and misuse taxpayer dollars, we demand accountability.”
“In addition to significant monetary sanctions, we we help ensure the playing field is level for all market participants.”
Abbot Laboratories
In 2012, US company Abbot Laboratories were hit with with a $1.5billion fine for unlawful promotion of the prescription drug Depakote.
Abbott pleaded guilty to misbranding Depakote by promoting the drug to control agitation and aggression in elderly dementia patients and to treat schizophrenia when neither of these uses was approved by governing bodies.
They failed to demonstrate that adding Depakote was any more effective than an atypical antipsychotic alone for that use.
At the time of the trial, the FDA – the Food and Drug Administration only approved the drug for three uses: epileptic seizures, bipolar mania and the prevention of migraines.
Eli Lilly
Three years earlier, in 2009, Eli Lilly was issued with a $1.4billion fine on similar charges.
It came after they pleaded guilty to promoting Zyprexa for such off-label or unapproved uses as treatment for dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia, in elderly people.
_________
It is no accident that you do not see Legal Action taken against Big Pharma by the Biden Administration for the many times it has crossed over the line of the Laws written in the books of regulation.
One of the biggest enemies of your Health and Wellbeing is Big Pharma. Their goal is to help the Global Elites achieve Depopulation and Control of Humanity.
Header featured image (edited) credit: Pills over money/Getty Images
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply