Glaxo Makes Patient-Level Data Available From Drug Trials
has generated comment and analysis.
At Pharmalot you have:
Glaxo Peels Back Curtain On Clinical Trial Data
Where you'll find a preponderance of negative comments directed at U. Minn. Professor Carl Elliot who offered his own negative assessment of GSK motives.
To which, in rebuttal it must be asked, with Prof Elliot's motives or even Competency to critique said motives being called into question:
"Use the following search tool to view a summary of adverse reactions experienced by patients taking psychiatric drugs, culled from Individual Safety Reports (ISRs) submitted to the FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System (MedWatch) between January of 2004 and September of 2009."That's in Less than 6 years, US FDA Medwatch reports alone.
|Deaths Not From Suicide||238||141||131||21||19||4||33|
As there are investigative authors online who know Far, Far more about GSK than we do, we refer you to:
SEROXAT SUFFERERS STAND UP AND BE COUNTED for:
And GSK: Liscence To (K)ill;
And in the GSK Wiggum file from August 2012:
GlaxoSmithKline announced expansion after U.K. passed corporate tax relief
After a national effort by Prime Minister David Cameron's government to induce GlaxoSmithKline ($GSK) to expand its operations at home, a plant in Montrose, Scotland was included in the drugmaker's grand scheme to invest £500 million ($790 million) in the U.K. But in an illustration of the idea that all politics are local, a county council has stuck its finger in GSK's eye by turning down the drugmaker's plan to power it, in part with wind turbines.
Even after a reminder by GSK site manager Andy Ross of how important the API plant is economically to the area, the Angus Council yesterday voted 9-2 against the 85-meter-high turbines, The Courier reports. Local residents don't like the looks and worry about the effect on the town.
In an email response to FiercePharma, GSK spokesman Philip Brown says, "In essence, the refusal of the turbines won't impact the company's plans to invest in a vaccine adjuvants plant which will cost in the region of £25 million. This was announced in March 2012 as part of a £50 million package which included further investment in current products at Montrose, with around £10 million earmarked for the turbines and other energy efficiency technologies."
In March, after the U.K. Parliament approved a lower corporate tax rate on profits from U.K.-owned intellectual property, GSK said it would build its first new plant in the U.K. in 40 years in Ulverston, Cumbria. It also would invest £100 million ($158.3 million) in upgrades at existing plants in Irvine and Montrose in Scotland.
Ross reminded council members that in 2006 the Montrose plant was slated for closure. The expansion means work for local contractors and £25 million ($39.6 million) in annual salaries for locals. He said £50 million ($79.1 million) has been budgeted for a new product at the plant that helps ensure its longevity.
''The turbines will help make the site more attractive environmentally and commercially and underpin the 270 members of staff," The Courier quotes Ross telling the council members. ''It will help us double the size of the business over the next 5 to 6 years and I ask you to approve the application, given the economic significance of the factory to the town.''
But Montrose was never on board with the turbines; locals last year filed more than 360 objections to the 426-feet-high generators. So the council's response Tuesday? We appreciate what you have done, but don't put your turbines in our backyard. The council said GSK will just need to find another way to reduce its carbon footprint and power its plant.
- read The Courier story
- more from the Montrose Review
Scottish town blows off GSK's wind turbine plan
GSK to build new U.K. site, create up to 1,000 jobs
GSK site pulls out all stops in plant-investment competition
U.K. competition heats up for new GSK plant
Thank You Fierce Pharma and Mr Palmer.
So, it's not enough that GSK's Paxil/Seroxat has consumers unexplainably suddenly DEAD by their own devices left and right, but GSK wanted to rub even More salt into the wound by erecting these grotesque 426 foot tall wind power turbines to boot.
How would You feel, living in Montrose Scotland, if your son or daughter had taken their own life to swell GSK's coffers, and then you had to be slapped in the face with it every day by the sight of 2, 426 foot tall Green Whoredom Billboards to the fallacious nonsense of Saving the Planet by entities who are selling off the people On it?
Here's an artist's conception of the proposed eyesores from the Courier story.
Here's a view of some more in California's Altamont Pass. These CGI examples are working. Most of the Real ones are just sitting around rusting. Encouraging this type of Blight can only lead to peppering the planet with row after row of it.
And according to the pic's accompanying article they're tough on bats too.
But bats, birds and blighting the environs aside, removing products from the market which cause suicide and murder Ought to take precedence over carbon footprints.