Was Glaxo’s David Wheadon guilty of perjury?

Finding a copy of the Paxil Protest website once again has been great. It’s a veritable treasure trove of fantastic stories and link, such as this one:

The following exchange is from a transcript of a video deposition taken from Dr. David Wheadon, who was at the time, Vice President Regulatory Affairs and Product Professional Services, GlaxoSmithKline, in Philadelphia, PA on Thursday, October 19, 2000 prior to the Tobin/Schell civil suit.

Questioning Dr. Wheadon were California attorney Donald J. Farber and Texas attorney Andy Vickery.

Paxil Victim’s Attorney: I’m asking you to kind of elevate yourself above this particular paper and go to your general knowledge now on Paxil. You have been now with the company eight years, and you have studied and are aware, I presume, of Paxil’s traits in either causing or unrelated to addiction and withdrawal, and based on that general knowledge I think you probably have, do you consider as a labeling instruction today that this paragraph, physical and psychological dependence, is a good labeling instruction?

GlaxoSmithKline’s Dr. Wheadon: Well, quite frankly, it is an outdated labeling instruction, because there have been a number of systematic studies in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence. So actually, there is data to date to negate the statement that it has not been systematically studied, because, in fact, it has been.

That’s clear enough then – Paxil (Seroxat) has been studied a number of times in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence… and of course, Dr Wheadon was under oath – so he had to tell the truth – didn’t he?

The problem is that seven years later, the official Paxil prescribing information (produced by Glaxo) provides the world with a statement in stark contrast to Dr. Wheadon’s testimony.:

DRUG ABUSE AND DEPENDENCE
Controlled Substance Class: PAXIL is not a controlled substance.
Physical and Psychologic Dependence: PAXIL has not been systematically studied in animals or humans for its potential for abuse, tolerance or physical dependence. While the clinical trials did not reveal any tendency for any drug-seeking behavior, these observations were not systematic…

Just to recap:

…there have been a number of systematic studies in humans looking at the potential for Paxil for abuse, tolerance and physical dependence… (2000)

…PAXIL has not been systematically studied in animals or humans for its potential for abuse, tolerance or physical dependence… (2007)

So while Wheadon said one thing (under oath) in 2000, Glaxo says the EXACT opposite in its current official prescribing information.

One of these statements has to be a lie.

7 Responses to “Was Glaxo’s David Wheadon guilty of perjury?”

  1. truthman30 Says:

    As I’ve said before, If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck ,then it is a duck…
    And David Wheaton does seem to quack a lot…

    Both of those statements could be lies…
    Glaxo could have known all along that Seroxat could cause Dependency/Addiction( same thing)…
    So maybe these are the studies which Wheaton was alluding to.?…
    And maybe it was easier for them to say there had been no studies done , rather than reveal the studies which indicated dependence and addiction…

    I know that GSK were using Some individuals as long term Human Guinea pigs,( the individuals just didnt know it at the time) There were articles about this a few years ago, ( I will try and find a link) ,these could have been the “systematic dependence” Studies Wheaton was talking about..( maybe they just never made it public?)
    Conspiracy theory?.
    GSK…?
    Surely not?….

  2. truthman30 Says:

    http://www.network54.com/Forum/281849/thread/1144790576/%22%3BMEDICINE+not+MARKETING-++About+NO+FREE+LUNCH+-+UK%22%3B

    Nov 04: “GPs PAID UP TO £2,000 per patient testing a medicine”…
    April 11 2006, 10:59 PM

    Hundreds used as ‘drug guinea pigs’

    GPs are paid up to £2,000 for each patient testing a medicine

    The health of hundreds of UK patients is at risk because their GPs are secretly being paid to use them as guinea pigs in drug trials, an investigator has told the BBC.

    Peter Jay of Medico Legal Investigations, the only British company specialising in medical research fraud, has tracked down 26 cases involving GPs and hospital doctors in recent years.

    All but one of the doctors has been found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the General Medical Council.

    Mr Jay, a former Detective Chief Inspector, said a small number of trusted family doctors were forging patient consent forms and fabricating data to earn extra cash.

    “Several thousand patients are taking part in trials in the UK,” he told BBC One’s Real Story programme. “Those involved in fraudulent or dishonest ones will probably be in the hundreds.”

    (for the whole story, see link above)

    REAL STORY
    Trust me, I’m a Doctor
    BBC One, 1930GMT
    Tuesday, 9 November, 2004

    Real Story looked at the case of Dr Robert Adams of Letchworth, Kent who was last year found guilty by the General Medical Council of putting patients on clinical trials without informed consent, forging data and pocketing himself over £100,000 in the process.

    According to Mr Jay, doctors are still exploiting their position of trust in this way.

    http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,891938,00.html

    Patients used as drug ‘guinea pigs’
    Firms pay out millions to doctors to test medicines

    Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
    Sunday February 9, 2003
    The Observer

    When Italia Sudano went for a check-up with her GP, Dr Robert Adams, she was in good health. Her husband had died a few months earlier and her blood pressure was a little high.
    Yet nothing could have prepared Sudano, 72, for the nightmare that was to follow and the discovery of a trail of greed and fraud that went right to the heart of the medical profession.

    She was astonished to discover that her trusted GP had been using her as a guinea pig by giving her tablets which had not been medically approved. Worse still, he was being paid to do so by a pharmaceutical company.

    GlaxoSmithKline was using Adams to study its anti-depressant Paroxetine, but had to cancel the trial at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds.

    (for full article see link)

    How many more people were uses as paroxetine Guinea pigs without their consent?…
    That, we may never know…

  3. Glaxo & the MHRA; the MHRA & Glaxo… « seroxat secrets… Says:

    […] (he gave evidence for Glaxo alongside David Wheadon). And to this day we still don’t know if Wheadon was guilty of perjury in that […]

  4. A Scandal Emerging: Glaxo’s Irish Vaccine Trials « GSK : Licence To (K) ill Says:

    […] it is more bad news for GSK but because I believe that those who were prescribed Seroxat were guinea pigs too. Seroxat was inadequately tested before GSK obtained a license for it. Those who were […]

  5. The Irish Nuns, The Babies For Sale, And The GSK (Wellcome Foundation) Vaccine Trials In Ireland | GSK : Licence To (K) ill Says:

    […] it is more bad news for GSK but because I believe that those who were prescribed Seroxat were guinea pigstoo. Seroxat was inadequately tested before GSK obtained a license for it. Those who were […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: