3 ms·
> It's a mystery to me why in a case of clear and substantial wrongdoing such as this, no individual prosecutions occur It's not at all clear to me that any wr
by tjic 17y ago
> It's a mystery to me why in a case of clear and substantial wrongdoing such as this, no individual prosecutions occur
It's not at all clear to me that any wrongdoing took place.
Pfizer communicated true information that the government wanted censored.
OK, let me correct my statement: I think that there was wrongdoing, but it was on the government side.
- anigbrowl 17y ago(from DOJ press release): Pfizer promoted the sale of Bextra for several uses and dosages that the FDA specifically declined to approve due to safety concerns. From http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10004061/pfizers-west-side-story-how-the-sharks-sold-bextra-off-label/ http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10004061/pfizers-west-side-s... (hysterical title, but good linkage): In Kopchinksi’s district, doctors were given article reprints by sales reps addressing off-label uses. The articles’ first page indicated what Bextra was, and was not, approved for. But Pfizer had a way around that, according to the complaint: Pfizer sales representatives were instructed, when leaving these reprints with doctors, to fold this first page over, so that it became the last page, not the first page, of the reprint as it was presented to the physicians. Hrmm.