Editing Pharma
From TobaccoControl Tactics
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
[[File:believe.gif|right]] | [[File:believe.gif|right]] | ||
− | It is worth noting that during the last two decades, the pharmaceutical industry has donated [http://cleanairquality.blogspot.gr/2007/12/rwjfs-446-million-contribution-to-boost.html hundreds of millions of dollars] to | + | It is worth noting that during the last two decades, the pharmaceutical industry has donated [http://cleanairquality.blogspot.gr/2007/12/rwjfs-446-million-contribution-to-boost.html hundreds of millions of dollars] to organisations that lobby for smoking bans. |
Was this an exercise in philanthropy on the part of the caring pharmaceutical industry? | Was this an exercise in philanthropy on the part of the caring pharmaceutical industry? | ||
− | Not exactly. Big Pharma is an industry every bit as profit-driven, cutthroat and devious as any other global industry. Smoking bans represent a lucrative market opportunity for Nicotine Replacement Therapy products (nicotine patches, nicotine gum etc.), to be ''' | + | Not exactly. Big Pharma is an industry every bit as profit-driven, cutthroat and devious as any other global industry. Smoking bans represent a lucrative market opportunity for Nicotine Replacement Therapy products (nicotine patches, nicotine gum etc.), to be '''maximised at all costs''', collateral damage notwithstanding. The more bans there are, and the more draconian the penalties for transgression, the better the market penetration. In this instance, the costs of their drive for greater market penetration are borne by smokers around the world in the form of marginalisation, restrictions as to where they are permitted to smoke, and demonisation/denormalisation. The theory behind this pogrom is that smokers will be driven to quit, and in doing so, will turn to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), which is, of course, manufactured by those same pharmaceutical companies who are funding the Tobacco Control Industry. The hundreds of millions Big Pharma spends in funding Anti-Smoking and general smoking-ban initiatives is small beer when set against the profits from sales of NRT and smoking cessation products. |
<blockquote>The prescription nicotine dependence market is set to grow strongly at a compound annual growth rate of 16% to reach $4.6 billion by 2016 ...<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20080926025357/http://www.pharmaceutical-business-review.com/article_feature.asp?guid=C6E81C1A-8DBE-40EE-85B1-A463A5544D89 Pharmaceutical Business (Archive)]</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>The prescription nicotine dependence market is set to grow strongly at a compound annual growth rate of 16% to reach $4.6 billion by 2016 ...<ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20080926025357/http://www.pharmaceutical-business-review.com/article_feature.asp?guid=C6E81C1A-8DBE-40EE-85B1-A463A5544D89 Pharmaceutical Business (Archive)]</ref></blockquote> | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
<blockquote>It took over three months to get the information<ref>[http://www.freedom2choose.info/press_viewer.php?id=56 NRT: Studies Destroy “Four Times More Likely To Quit With NHS” Claim]</ref></blockquote> | <blockquote>It took over three months to get the information<ref>[http://www.freedom2choose.info/press_viewer.php?id=56 NRT: Studies Destroy “Four Times More Likely To Quit With NHS” Claim]</ref></blockquote> | ||
− | When that information was finally forthcoming, the figures showed a 6.5% quit rate for those using NRT, and a 6% quit rate for those going "cold turkey, i.e. without using NRT. | + | When that information was finally forthcoming, the figures showed a 6.5% quit rate for those using NRT, and a 6% quit rate for those going "cold turkey, i.e. without using NRT". So much for the "15% success rate" and "four times more likely" claims. |
− | One study even found a quit rate using NRT as low as 0.8%!<ref>[http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/new-study-shows-that-even-extended.html New Study Shows That Even Extended Nicotine Replacement Therapy is Extremely Ineffective; Unaided Quitting Rates are Far Better]</ref> Hardly a ringing endorsement of NRT. | + | One study even found a quit rate using NRT as low as 0.8%!<ref>[http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/new-study-shows-that-even-extended.html New Study Shows That Even Extended Nicotine Replacement Therapy is Extremely Ineffective; Unaided Quitting Rates are Far Better]</ref>. Hardly a ringing endorsement of NRT. |
In fact in most cases, the success rate was higher if '''no''' NRT was used. | In fact in most cases, the success rate was higher if '''no''' NRT was used. | ||
− | + | ||
− | + | Gregory N. Connolly, professor of the Practice of Public Health, Director, Center for Global Tobacco Control recently published a study <ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation]</ref> that he co-authored that came to the following conclusion | |
− | Gregory N. Connolly, professor of the Practice of Public Health, Director, Center for Global Tobacco Control recently published a study <ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation]</ref> that he co-authored that came to the following conclusion | ||
<blockquote>This study finds that persons who have quit smoking relapsed at equivalent rates, whether or not they used NRT to help them in their quit attempts. Cessation medication policy should be made in the larger context of public health, and increasing individual treatment coverage should not be at the expense of population evidence-based programmes and policies.</blockquote> | <blockquote>This study finds that persons who have quit smoking relapsed at equivalent rates, whether or not they used NRT to help them in their quit attempts. Cessation medication policy should be made in the larger context of public health, and increasing individual treatment coverage should not be at the expense of population evidence-based programmes and policies.</blockquote> | ||
− | Please note that letters disagreeing with this study were all submitted by researchers who had ties to the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract/reply#tobaccocontrol_el_3882 Replies to A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation ]</ref> What is intriguing about this study is that it was completed in 2006 yet it was only published in January 2012. Could Professor Connolly's resignation <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704405704576064000800551720.html FDA Tobacco Adviser Resigns ]</ref> from the FDA tobacco-advisory committee have anything to do with it? Could his support <ref>[http://axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/21667 Harvard Prof's Interview Lends Impetus to 22nd Century Group's Very Low Nicotine Tobacco ]</ref> of a pharmaceutical smoked cigarette (that would most probably compete with nicotine replacement treatment) have anything to do with the delayed publication of this study? Whatever the reasons, it is quite strange that in the ''publish or perish'' world of epidemiology | + | Please note that letters disagreeing with this study were all submitted by researchers who had ties to the pharmaceutical industry.<ref>[http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/10/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.abstract/reply#tobaccocontrol_el_3882 Replies to A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation ]</ref> What is intriguing about this study is that it was completed in 2006 yet it was only published in January 2012. Could Professor Connolly's resignation <ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704405704576064000800551720.html FDA Tobacco Adviser Resigns ]</ref> from the FDA tobacco-advisory committee have anything to do with it? Could his support <ref>[http://axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/21667 Harvard Prof's Interview Lends Impetus to 22nd Century Group's Very Low Nicotine Tobacco ]</ref> of a pharmaceutical smoked cigarette (that would most probably compete with nicotine replacement treatment) have anything to do with the delayed publication of this study? Whatever the reasons, it is quite strange that in the ''publish or perish'' world of epidemiology <ref>[http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=411323 'Publish or perish' culture distorting research results]</ref>, research would be published after a 6-year delay |
But when even the father of the universally known and utilized ''nicotine dependence test'', Karl Fagerström, has a change of heart and now concedes that nicotine is not the only reason people smoke, is it any wonder nicotine replacement therapy is virtually useless? <ref>[http://www.formindep.org/Fagerstrom-Finds-His-Way-To.html Fagerström Finds His Way To Damascus]</ref> | But when even the father of the universally known and utilized ''nicotine dependence test'', Karl Fagerström, has a change of heart and now concedes that nicotine is not the only reason people smoke, is it any wonder nicotine replacement therapy is virtually useless? <ref>[http://www.formindep.org/Fagerstrom-Finds-His-Way-To.html Fagerström Finds His Way To Damascus]</ref> | ||
Line 36: | Line 35: | ||
The nicotine addiction fallacy, rather than helping science progress, creates barriers to further scientific research on tobacco. In Professor Robert Molimard's wise words: | The nicotine addiction fallacy, rather than helping science progress, creates barriers to further scientific research on tobacco. In Professor Robert Molimard's wise words: | ||
− | <blockquote> (...) having arbitrarily decided that nicotine alone explains tobacco dependence and having it engrained in the minds of doctors, the authorities and the public, any research on the other possible factors of this dependency is now excluded in advance and a vast new market is made available for commercial exploitation by the pharmaceutical industry | + | <blockquote> (...) having arbitrarily decided that nicotine alone explains tobacco dependence and having it engrained in the minds of doctors, the authorities and the public, any research on the other possible factors of this dependency is now excluded in advance and a vast new market is made available for commercial exploitation by the pharmaceutical industry<ref>[http://cagecanada.blogspot.ca/2010/12/beliefs-manipulation-and-lies-in.html Beliefs, Manipulation and Lies in the Tobacco Issue]</ref>.</blockquote> |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Line 55: | Line 41: | ||
==Company Listing== | ==Company Listing== | ||
===Johnson & Johnson=== | ===Johnson & Johnson=== | ||
− | :Under the banner of its subsidiary, McNeil Consumer Products, J&J markets the Nicotrol nicotine patch and nicotine inhaler. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is | + | :Under the banner of its subsidiary, McNeil Consumer Products, J&J markets the Nicotrol nicotine patch and nicotine inhaler. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is the biggest single shareholder in J&J and began its massive funding of tobacco control in the U.S. in 1991, the same year the FDA approved the nicotine patch as a prescription drug. Pharmacia reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from J&J's McNeil in July 2000. |
− | |||
===GlaxoSmithKline=== | ===GlaxoSmithKline=== | ||
:Pharmaceutical giants Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham merged on December 27, 2000, making the new company the world's biggest drugs group by sales. Glaxo Wellcome markets Zyban (buproprion) and SKB markets Nicoderm CQ nicotine patch and Nicorette gum. One of the major holdups in getting FTC approval for the merger was that both companies sold smoking cessation products, but even though these cessation products accounted for less than 4% of SK's sales, neither company was willing for them to be sold to another pharmaceutical company to facilitate the merger. SK was also investigated by a congressional committee for overpricing of cancer treatments. SK infuriated the committee by refusing to hand over information about Kytril, its anti-nausea drug for chemotheraphy patients. ("Federal smoke delays merger," Andrew Clark, ''The Guardian'', October 10, 2000). | :Pharmaceutical giants Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham merged on December 27, 2000, making the new company the world's biggest drugs group by sales. Glaxo Wellcome markets Zyban (buproprion) and SKB markets Nicoderm CQ nicotine patch and Nicorette gum. One of the major holdups in getting FTC approval for the merger was that both companies sold smoking cessation products, but even though these cessation products accounted for less than 4% of SK's sales, neither company was willing for them to be sold to another pharmaceutical company to facilitate the merger. SK was also investigated by a congressional committee for overpricing of cancer treatments. SK infuriated the committee by refusing to hand over information about Kytril, its anti-nausea drug for chemotheraphy patients. ("Federal smoke delays merger," Andrew Clark, ''The Guardian'', October 10, 2000). | ||
− | :In 1999, SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare's combined U.S. sales of Nicorette and NicoDerm CQ reached $570 million. The company also markets its nicotine patch under the trade name "NiQuitin CQ" in Belgium, France, Denmark, Mexico and Brazil and under "Nicabate" in Australia and New Zealand, where it was the number one smoking cessation product in 1999 ( | + | :In 1999, SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare's combined U.S. sales of Nicorette and NicoDerm CQ reached $570 million. The company also markets its nicotine patch under the trade name "NiQuitin CQ" in Belgium, France, Denmark, Mexico and Brazil and under "Nicabate" in Australia and New Zealand, where it was the number one smoking cessation product in 1999 (Philippe Boucher's Rendez-vous with ... Leslie A. Ashburn, Communications Supervisor for GlaxoSmithKline, January 29, 2001). |
− | |||
===Pharmacia=== | ===Pharmacia=== | ||
:(Also Pharmacia & Upjohn). | :(Also Pharmacia & Upjohn). | ||
Line 71: | Line 55: | ||
===ATP=== | ===ATP=== | ||
:[Advanced Tobacco Products, Inc./Advanced Therapeutic Products] | :[Advanced Tobacco Products, Inc./Advanced Therapeutic Products] | ||
− | :Sold their patented nicotine technology, which forms the basis of the Nicorette/Nicotrol Inhaler, to what once was Pharmacia Corporation, in exchange for product payments of 3% of Pharmacia's net sales. In July, Pharmacia announced it had reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from McNeil PPC, Inc., a unit of Johnson & Johnson. As a result of the Nicotrol takeback, Pharmacia said it has a renewed interest in consumer | + | :Sold their patented nicotine technology, which forms the basis of the Nicorette/Nicotrol Inhaler, to what once was Pharmacia Corporation, in exchange for product payments of 3% of Pharmacia's net sales. In July, Pharmacia announced it had reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from McNeil PPC, Inc., a unit of Johnson & Johnson. As a result of the Nicotrol takeback, Pharmacia said it has a renewed interest in consumer advertising as well as the professional detailing of doctors and healthcare providers" ("ATP Announces Fiscal Year Results, Dividend Payments & British Medical Study of the Nicotine Inhaler," Company Press Release, November 28, 2000). |
===Hoechst Marion Roussel=== | ===Hoechst Marion Roussel=== | ||
:(the pharmaceutical company of Hoechst) | :(the pharmaceutical company of Hoechst) | ||
Line 79: | Line 63: | ||
:"Novartis Pharma To Launch Nicotine Patches in Japan," ''NewsEdge'', May 11, 1999. "Although the patches are available over-the-counter in 29 countries, they will require a doctor's prescription in Japan and will not be covered by insurance." | :"Novartis Pharma To Launch Nicotine Patches in Japan," ''NewsEdge'', May 11, 1999. "Although the patches are available over-the-counter in 29 countries, they will require a doctor's prescription in Japan and will not be covered by insurance." | ||
===Pfizer=== | ===Pfizer=== | ||
− | :Discovers, develops, manufactures and markets leading prescription medicines for humans and animals, and many of the world's best known consumer products. Pfizer had global revenues of $29.6 billion in 2000. In 2000 Pfizer took over Warner-Lambert. Pfizer is developing a new agent for smoking cessation, currently known as CP-526,555, "that relieves both cravings and withdrawal symptoms and blocks the reinforcing effect of smoking" ("Pfizer to Advance Industry Leadership Through the Best People, Products And Pipeline, Steere Tells Shareholders," Company Press Release, April 26, 2001). | + | :Discovers, develops, manufactures and markets leading prescription medicines for humans and animals, and many of the world's best known consumer products. Pfizer had global revenues of $29.6 billion in 2000. In 2000 Pfizer took over Warner-Lambert. Pfizer is developing a new agent for smoking cessation, currently known as CP-526,555, "that relieves both cravings and withdrawal symptoms and blocks the reinforcing effect of smoking." ("Pfizer to Advance Industry Leadership Through the Best People, Products And Pipeline, Steere Tells Shareholders," Company Press Release, April 26, 2001). |
:Main sponsor for TC conferences and main supporter of the FCTC. | :Main sponsor for TC conferences and main supporter of the FCTC. |