July 31, 2014

FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries

pin it button FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries

warning fda approved 300x222 FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries

by Alliance for Natural Health

Is FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries?

If enough people raise their voices in protest, we can prevent it. Action Alert!

Remember the controversial diabetes drug Avandia? In 2010 we told you about two FDA drug safety reviewers who warned the agency that Avandia posed serious risks of heart attack and heart failure when compared with other diabetes drugs. Since then, the drug has been removed from the market in most countries and has been under severe restrictions in the US.

Last Thursday, in a combined meeting of separate FDA advisory committees, 20 of 26 panelists voted to recommend removing or modifying Avandia’s highly restrictive label and distribution system. Five voted to keep the restrictions in place, while one panelist voted to remove the product from the market altogether.

There has been only one large, randomized trial for the safety of rosiglitazone, the drug that is marketed as Avandia. That trial—sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), the drug’s manufacturer—was called RECORD (Rosiglitazone Evaluated for Cardiac Outcomes and Regulation of Glycaemia in Diabetes). Serious flaws were found in RECORD’s methodology, its results were questioned, and the trial was widely discredited.

In 2010, FDA required GSK’s RECORD results to be reexamined and re-adjudicated. What was the FDA’s motivation for reviewing Avandia? GSK didn’t request that the drug be reviewed. Could it be, as Steve Nissen suggests in Forbes, because FDA “is seeking to avoid accountability for its role in the Avandia tragedy”? FDA’s official position is that they asked for the re-adjudication because of “the public interest in Avandia, the extensive history of the product, and the continued uncertainty of the risk surrounding this drug.”

Duke University’s Clinical Research Institute (DCRI) was selected for the re-adjudication, and they found that the risk for cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke to be virtually the same as the original study concluded. Because these new results reaffirmed GSK’s findings that the drug was no more unsafe than other diabetes products in its class, Thursday’s panelists were sufficiently reassured that the drug was safe enough to lift restrictions.

Unfortunately, other data paint a very different picture:

  • In 2005 and 2006 GSK secretly conducted an analysis of cardiovascular safety of Avandia, and concluded that the drug increased the risk of heart attacks and related events by 30%. Since two-thirds of diabetics eventually die of cardiovascular complications anyway, this 30% hike is terrifying.
  • In 2006 GSK informed the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) of the secret analysis, but FDA and CDER agreed to conceal this hazard from patients and practitioners.
  • During a public hearing, independent FDA statisticians reported an 80% increased risk of heart attack. Avandia is estimated to have caused 83,000 heart attacks in the United States alone.
  • Adverse effects caused by the drug are currently the subject of over 13,000 lawsuits against GSK. As of July 2010, GSK has agreed to settlements on more than 11,500 of these suits.
  • Last year, GSK pled guilty of criminal conduct, partially for concealing the hazards of Avandia. The company paid a $3 billion fine—the largest in US history.

In addition, the re-adjudication process itself was biased. GSK prepared the study materials before submitting them to Duke for analysis, rather than allowing the university to review the raw data. (On the widespread problem of publication bias, see our article in this issue.)

On top of that, key members of the 2010 advisory committee that decided to place restrictions on Avandia in the first place were not part of the 2013 meeting. Of the twenty-seven member panel, fourteen of the experts were on the panel last time, and they were the people with a more favorable attitude toward Avandia. This is in contrast to the other experts who did not serve on the panel a second time—like Steven Nissen, who was one of the most outspoken critics on the panel. FDA claims all panelists were invited, it does not appear they made a huge effort to ensure their participation; Nissen says he was not re-invited. With all of the big nay-sayers out of the picture, it’s no surprise the panel voted to lift the restrictions on this dangerous drug.

FDA should focus more on advisory panelists who have true conflicts of interest. A 2007 law placed caps on the number of waivers that could be granted allowing experts with conflicts of interest; a 2012 law removed those safeguards. When there are no restrictions on experts with conflicts of interest serving on FDA advisory panels, more drugs with dangerous side effects could certainly enter the market.

Action Alert! The FDA is not obligated to follow its advisory committee’s recommendation, though they usually do so. Moreover, there is no regulatory deadline by which they have to make a decision. If there is enough public pressure, perhaps this will force the FDA to reject the advisory committee’s decision on Avandia—or at least postpone any action indefinitely.Please send your message to the FDA about the dangers of Avandia!

Take Action11 FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries

Read the full article here: http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-greenlight-drug-banned

Confessions 20of 20an 20Rx 20Drug 20Pusher FDA About to Greenlight a Drug Banned in Other Countries

Free Shipping Available for this book!


0 commentsback to post

Other articlesgo to homepage

Doctors Against Mandated Flu Vaccines

Doctors Against Mandated Flu Vaccines

Mainstream news media sources (which are heavily funded by Big Pharma) would like everyone to believe that those in the medical field are united in their support of vaccines. However, there are many doctors and healthcare officials questioning the safety and efficacy of vaccines today.

This is especially true regarding the issue of mandatory flu vaccinations for healthcare workers. Doctors, nurses, and others are increasingly speaking out against mandatory flu vaccinations, especially in Canada.

A recent report in the Vancouver Sun quoted an emergency room doctor, Dr. Derrick Moore, as stating that he and 10 nurses refused to comply with mandatory flu vaccinations for healthcare workers at Nanaimo Regional General Hospital in Victoria B.C. According to the Vancouver Sun, Dr. Moore stated that the health authorities in Canada were unable to pick on him and the nurses because of “strength in numbers” and the impact it would have on emergency room staffing if they were fired. He stated he believed doctors and nurses across Canada were refusing the mandatory flu vaccine.

Earlier this week, three medical doctors wrote an editorial in the Toronto Star opposing mandatory flu vaccinations for healthcare workers. They stated that the evidence of the benefits of the flu vaccine is not nearly strong enough to justify taking away a doctor’s choice to make the decision on whether or not they vaccinate themselves.

Thousands Sue for Damages Against Cholesterol Drugs as Big Pharma Defends Billion Dollar Industry

Thousands Sue for Damages Against Cholesterol Drugs as Big Pharma Defends Billion Dollar Industry

The $100 billion dollar cholesterol-lowering statin drug industry is under attack, as thousands of Americans are filing lawsuits against the manufacturers cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Lipitor. Research continues to confirm just how dangerous these drugs are, with yet another study published recently linking increased statin drug use to type 2 diabetes. Since the study was published by the American Diabetes Association, these known risks to cholesterol-lowering drugs can no longer be denied or defended, and the lawsuits are pouring in at a rapid pace. Most of the lawsuits at this point are from women who have suffered with diabetes as a result of taking cholesterol-lowering drugs, but lawsuits over breast cancer, Alzheimer’s, liver damage and others may soon follow now that it is generally known how dangerous these drugs are.

According to statistics supplied by various law firms, there were 464 claims filed against Lipitor as of April 15, 2014, which increased to 703 by May 15, and then to 846 by June 16. As of mid-July 2014 over 959 claims have been filed for damages due to Lipitor alone. There are also many claims currently filed against Crestor, the next nearest competitor to Lipitor, and undoubtedly other similar drugs now sold under generic labels. These lawsuits now number well over 1,000, and are increasing at a rapid pace. Yet, this news is largely blacked out of the mainstream media.

700 Lipitor and Diabetes Lawsuit Claims Filed Against Pfizer

700 Lipitor and Diabetes Lawsuit Claims Filed Against Pfizer

Before its patent expired, Lipitor was the best-selling drug of all time. Lipitor, the drug that artificially lowers cholesterol, outsold almost all other drugs combined during the height of its run, before the patent ran out allowing generics to enter the market. The FDA did not issue warnings about the dangerous side effects of cholesterol-lowering drugs until after Lipitor’s patent expired.

The information here comes from an attorney, as attorneys across the nation see the economic opportunities now to sue Pfizer for damage done to millions of peoples’ health.

Veterans Kick The Prescription Pill Habit, Against Doctors’ Orders

Veterans Kick The Prescription Pill Habit, Against Doctors’ Orders

1 in 3 veterans polled say they are on 10 different medications.

While there is concern about overmedicating and self-medicating — using alcohol or drugs without a doctor’s approval — there are also some veterans who are trying to do the opposite: They’re kicking the drugs, against doctor’s orders.

Legal Child Kidnapping: Has the U.S. Become one of the Most Dangerous Places in the World for Children to Live?

Legal Child Kidnapping: Has the U.S. Become one of the Most Dangerous Places in the World for Children to Live?

The right to legal counsel, your Miranda rights, and the right to a speedy jury trial are American rights protected by our Constitution. But not in family court, where a single judge can decide whether or not you are a fit parent. Child Protection Services (CPS) has more power today than the police, sheriff, or FBI, as they can come into your home and remove your child without a search warrant or court order.

Someone who doesn’t like you, for any reason, can make a phone call and provide an anonymous “tip” with the result of you losing your children. Doctors you disagree with can call CPS and have your child removed from your home with no search warrant or court order, by simply reporting you to CPS. This is in fact happening all across America to thousands of families. It is time to put a stop to this.

read more


Get the news right in your inbox!