cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles, psychiatry

From Citalopram to Ebixa in 10 years; shopaholics beware!

An article today in the ‘Mail Online’ states “Now a pill that could help cure all you shopaholics

Psychiatrists have tested Ebixa for compulsive shoppers and say it could help curb their devastating spending habit. The drug is Memantine, also known as Ebixa and is made by Lundbeck. Considering it’s a Lundbeck drug, it will come as no surprise that among the listed side-effects here are psychotic-like behaviour, suicide and thoughts of committing suicide. (frequency unknown?) That will surely cure your overspending! The pill is an Alzheimer’s drug but hey, it might just cure you permanently!

“Hours spent shopping per week and money spent shopping both decreased significantly, with no side effects,’ said a team of psychiatrists from the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Mail Article.

I thought there was a touch of deja vous here as another ‘Mail Online’ article from 2002 proclaimed “Anti-shopping drug discovered” here. At that time the miracle anti-shopping drug was Lundbeck’s Citalopram. So did Citalopram not take off then? Maybe it was the reports of suicide that came with the drug which turned people off?

A follow up to the Citalopram ‘shopping cure’ in the Mail here, listed 3 compulsive shoppers experiences of Cipramil.

Luke: “To start with, I had mild, bearable stomach cramps. When I finally felt the emotional effects, my spending did stop a bit. I felt I didn’t need that high when I handed over the credit card.”

Christelle: ““But it had a very strange effect on me. I don’t know if this was due to all the other drugs I was on, but it knocked me out, and I could hardly move. So I suppose it did cure me of shopping – I couldn’t get out of the house.”

Anya: “However, I made a mistake when I didn’t cut down on my alcohol. One evening I was enjoying my favourite drink – an alcopop – when suddenly I felt very sick, and very drunk. Worse than this, my libido vanished.”

None of these peoples experiences are very convincing, Anya in particular seemed to be suffering from a side-effect which is only coming to light lately; see Prof. Healy’s “Every Drink Spiked“.

Anyway, does anyone really believe that a pill can sure your shopping addiction?

In 2008 Stanford University did a study on Escitalopram/Lexapro Here to test whether it was effective for “Internet Usage Disorder”…Seriously? In 2007 Stanford Uni also did a study on Lexapro to see if it was effective for Kleptomania here.

A shopping addiction, Internet usage or Kleptomania wont kill you but consuming Citalopram and Escitalopram just might. As one of my new-found friends, who also lost her child to a Citalopram induced suicide said “You’ve got to hand it to them for their brass neck alone.”

Update 31 May 2012.

I had forgotten about this article here where Lexapro/Cipralex was being tested for ‘shyness’. Is there anything Lundbeck don’t test their drugs for? It’s bound to work for something, right? Your shyness may be permanently cured by the suicide ideation though.

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Our story., psychiatry, Shanes story.

Doctors differ and patients die; Dr McManus, O’Brien and Coetzee differed, Shane died.

As we in Ireland know, secrecy is rarely a good thing. When we made a complaint about the treatment Shane received from the 3 doctors in the last 17 days of his life, we were surrounded by secrecy and confidentiality. This got seriously ridiculous when we were denied access to Professor P.J. Cowen’s report that he did on my son’s death for the Medical Council Complaint. The IMC came to their decision based on the “INDEPENDENT” report furnished by P.J. Cowen of Oxford University and yet denied us access to this report because Professor Cowen had written “In Confidence” on it. A report done on the death of my son that I can’t see, how extremely arrogant and fundamentally flawed. Then again, it seems that Professor Cowen has “previous” with Professor Healy and may be holding a bit of an academic grudge:

http://www.healyprozac.com/AcademicStalking/Post%2017.htm

It is worth a mention that Professor Cowen admitted to the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in 2002 that his grip on reality was never particularly strong.

So, Professor Cowen has “previous” with Prof. Healy trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to discredit him and has a long and I’m sure profitable association with Lundbeck and he is deemed to be independent?

Then, despite Professor Healy being a world renowned expert on SSRI’s and my insistance on forwarding the IMC a copy of his report which stated that, in his opinion, the drug caused Shane to behave as he did, they decided there was “not sufficient cause” to go further with our complaint. The deaths of Shane and another were considered “not sufficient cause”? Considering the close relationship that the IMC have with Irish Psychiatry, the fact that Professor Casey felt the need to come along to Shane’s Inquest (barrister in tow) and Irish Psychiatry’s involvement before, during and after the Inquest. it would make you wonder what they are trying to cover up?? The fact that these drugs cause suicide/homicide maybe?

I am mindful of the fact that other families are involved in our tragedy but as for the treatment Shane received in the last 17 days of his life, there should be no secrecy afforded.

Shane talked to 3 doctors in his last 17 days and strangely enough, they all said they did the right thing in treating Shane. Their recollection of my lovely son include a copious amount of lies, innuendo and misinformation from all 3 doctors.

I would think that the treatment Shane received from all 3 doctors is self-explanatory, considering after 17 days of this treatment, he was DEAD!!!

These 3 Doctors, in my humble opinion, deserve a special place in Professor Healy’s “Model Doctors“. One surprising fact (or not) is that Irish doctors do not take the Hippocratic oath.

Here is my letter to the Medical Council following the 3 doctor’s explanations/excuses:

……………………………………………

Medical Council

Kingram House

Kingram Place

Dublin 2

09/Jan/2011

Dear Ms McGuiness

Formal Complaint Regarding the Treatment of Shane Clancy

I refer to your letter dated 17 November 2010. I also refer to the formal responses you have kindly provided from Dr Eimear O’Hanlon dated 15 October 2010, Dr Johanna Coetzee dated 5 November 2010 and Dr John McManus and Dr Tony O’Brien, both of which are dated 16 November 2010. While I have set out below my further comments on the above responses, I have not commented on the report from Dr Eimear O’Hanlon as her treatment of Shane did not form part of my original complaint.

Dr John McManus – date of consultation: 27 July 2009

I take serious issue with Dr. McManus and what is considered to be normal practice for a patient who has previously expressed suicidal thoughts.

Why and indeed if it is considered to be normal practice to give a depressed patient a months supply of what has proven to be a lethal dose of any drug, did nobody put a stop to this madness?

It is clear from review of the leaflet contained in each packet of Cipramil and from various information leaflets sourced from the internet that suicidal thoughts and/or depression may be increased when first starting a course of anti-depressants. The information leaflets also state that suicidal thoughts are more likely to occur if a patient has previously had such thoughts as well as with adults aged less than 25 years. Dr McManus recorded in his consultation notes that Shane had previously had thoughts of self harm/suicide. In the circumstances the appropriate treatment plan should have been for Shane to return to Dr McManus for review on a weekly basis for the first 2 weeks at least rather than for review after three weeks only as requested by him.

In my original letter of complaint I commented that Dr McManus should have considered alternative treatments and/or psychiatric review prior to prescribing antidepressants. Despite his consultation notes not referring to having suggested to Shane that he consider psychiatric review, Dr McManus now claims in his letter in response that he advised Shane that he should consider a referral to a psychiatrist. Dr McManus’s consultation notes do not refer to this advice having been given and so I believe that his response on this issue should be considered in light of this.

Given the serious risks associated with Cipramil I stated in my letter of complaint that Shane should have had a much fuller examination prior to being prescribed the medication and should have been advised of any of the potential side effects of the drug. Significantly the consultation notes of Dr McManus do not reflect that he discussed the side effects of Cipramil with Shane and in his response Dr McManus does not claim that he did so. Instead, he relies on Dr O’Hanlon having done so during her consultation with Shane on July 18. With respect to Dr McManus, it was his decision ultimately to prescribe the medication to Shane and should therefore have been his duty to describe in detail to Shane the side effects of the medication. Dr O’Hanlon may have explained some of the side effects to Shane (as her consultation notes reflect) but it is accepted by Dr McManus that Shane had declined the treatment when raised by Dr O’Hanlon and so a much more comprehensive discussion should have been initiated by McManus during his consultation with Shane.

Dr Tony O’Brien – date of consultation: 31 July 2009

Dr O’Brien spoke with Shane on the evening of 31 July 2009 following a telephone call which Shane had made to the Carlton Clinic earlier that evening. At the time Shane had been taking Cipramil for 4/5 days and was extremely agitated, could not stay in the same place for too long and had a swollen tongue. While Shane had called to speak with Dr McManus, he was unavailable. Shane was contacted that evening by Dr O’Brien with a consultation conducted over the telephone. Dr O’Brien confirms that he reviewed the notes from previous consultations conducted by Dr O’Hanlen and Dr McManus. Dr O’Brien explains that after speaking with Shane he considered his swollen tongue to more likely be as a result of Calvepen which Shane had previously also been prescribed for a sore throat.

As I have previously stated, I am surprised and disappointed that Dr O’Brien considered it acceptable that a judgment as to how a patient was coping with medication was not only left to the patient themselves but that it was acceptable for such a consultation to be conducted by way of phone in the face of the patient’s known history and the known side effects of the medication in question. The fact that one of the significant side effects of Cipramil highlighted in the leaflet contained in each pack of the drug is a swollen tongue, an urgent physical examination of Shane would have been appropriate.

Dr Johanna Coetzee (Buys) – date of consultation: 7 August 2009

While there are a number of factual matters contained in the report from Dr Coetzee that I do not agree with, my substantive comments below focus on those issues directly concerning her actual assessment and treatment of Shane.

A key issue relied on by Dr Coetzee to explain her treatment of Shane is the suggestion that Shane had advised her that he had been taking Cipramil for ‘’a few months’’. It is clear from Dr Coetzee’s response that she (perhaps, more so now) understands the very real risks associated with Cipramil, and particularly in the first 2 weeks of treatment. With the greatest of respect to Dr Coetzee I cannot accept her statement that Shane had advised he had been taking Cipramil for the length of time Dr Coetzee now claims. Shane had only been taking the medication for a total of 11 days when he was examined by her. If Shane had been asked directly how long he had been taking the medication he would have, I am sure, have confirmed exactly when he first started the course of anti-depressant medication. Unfortunately with Shane’s death we now have no means of challenging the statement of Dr Coetzee and the importance of the dosage change can not be excused by saying Shane wanted to discontinue the medication. As Shane was only on the medication for 11 days at that stage and had no idea of discontinuation syndrome, he would simply not have gone back to the doctor if he had shown a desire to stop the medication of which I can assure you , he didn’t! Significantly, the actual record of Dr Coetzee’s consultation with Shane (attached to my original letter dated 13/08/2010 ) do not record him having been asked the length of time he had been taking Cipramil or that Shane advised her that he had been taking the medication for the period of time now claimed.

Shane was an intelligent and (as Dr Coetzee notes) well spoken young man. I cannot accept Dr Coetzee’s suggestion that he was unable to advise her of the name of the doctor who had originally prescribed the Cipramil. At the very least, Shane knew the name of the clinic which he had originally attended and if requested to do so, would have given this information. Dr Coetzee would then have been able to urgently consult with the clinic to verify Shane’s previous medical history and/or to confirm the various assumptions (including the incorrect assumption that Shane was being monitored by a psychiatrist) which she appears to have made in her assessment of him. Given that Shane had presented to her 48 hours after having tried to commit suicide by taking 21 Cipramil tablets (in addition to other medication), immediate verification of his medical history would have been the very minimum course of conduct required. In the circumstances I am particularly dismayed not only with Dr Coetzee’s ready acceptance of Shane’s assertion that he had no intention of self harm but also of her conclusion that Shane showed no signs of distress. Shane was unable to focus or concentrate on anything, was extremely agitated and was shaking so much I commented to my husband prior to driving him to see Dr Coetzee that he looked as though he was suffering from Parkinson’s disease.

In the circumstances I believe that the reasonable course of action for Dr Coetzee to have adopted would have been to urgently contact Shane’s doctor or at the very least to have identified the clinic at which he had been originally treated and to have contacted the clinic accordingly. As I noted in my original letter of complaint, given Shane’s attempted suicide and the condition in which he presented to Dr Coetzee, clinical tests and an onward referral for immediate specialist treatment would have been the very minimum of care that Shane was entitled.

I firmly believe that there should have been greater responsibility taken for management of Shane’s treatment during the initial 2/3 week period. Why did no doctor take responsibility for monitoring my son when he first commenced treatment? Despite the countless ‘’red flags’’ that could/should have been identified by all the doctors, no consideration was given at any stage to either alternative treatment or, more importantly, the close monitoring of his condition. My family (as well as other families directly affected by the tragic events of 16 August 2009) will never fully come to terms with our loss. What happened to Shane and the inadequate treatment which I believe he received should never be repeated.

Yours sincerely,

Leonie Fennell

https://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/03/26/my-sons-experience-with-3-doctors-in-17-days-there-was-no-18th-day/

hhttps://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/fao-doctors-ssri-antidepressants-can-be-fatal-in-overdose/

https://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/update-on-our-complaint-to-the-irish-medical-council/

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles

Another homicide to add to Lundbeck’s Pharmaco(non-existent)vigilance.

Just another story to add to Lundbeck’s pharmacovigilance department.

This is the story of Odysseus, as told by Professor Healy on his blog yesterday. He stated that “This was one of the most clear cut cases of SSRI induced violence that I’ve seen.”

Odysseus was a man in his 70’s, a pillar of the community and very happily married to Penelope; he was put on Citalopram(Celexa/cipramil) for anxiety.

He kept a diary while he was on Cipramil, which recorded that he was feeling worse and worse, and  becoming concerned that he might be going mad. He returned to the doctor and complained about his antidepressant but was persuaded to continue the pills – “these drugs take several weeks to work”. Stupid bloody doctors almost always say the same thing and rarely recognise a drug induced problem.

On the 10th day since he started on Citalopram, Odysseus got a blunt instrument, went into the bedroom where his wife was sleeping and battered her to death.

BUT HEY, I’M SURE PENELOPE’S DEATH IS LOGGED, ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHERS, IN LUNDBECK’S PHARMACOVIGILANCE DEPARTMENT. Link to full Article.

There is a mental health forum coming up, taking place on 23 May 2012 in London. The objective, “achieving the best possible outcomes for patients with mental health conditions.” Sounds great, right? The Conference, which is aimed at GPs, hospital specialists and mental-health specialists, is supported by none other than the highly dubious Lundbeck. I do hope these medical professionals will be made aware of the suicidal/homicidal side effects of Lundbeck’s drugs! Link to Conference.

Newspaper and internet articles, psychiatry

Why everyone on medication needs Rxisk.org

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Are you on medication? Would you like to see the side-effects that can accompany this medication? Click on the picture and enter the drug name.

Adverse side effects from prescription drugs are now a leading cause of death. This website offers a complete list of all medications and the side-effects that doctors will deny or worse, are completely unaware of.

 RxISK.org, the first free website (not sponsored by big pharma or advertising) for patients and their doctors and pharmacists to research, and more importantly, easily report drug side effects.

This is information which the Irish Medicine’s Board should have freely available on their website; they don’t! Have you ever tried to look up the side-effects of a particular drug on the IMB website? I have; a whole lot of effort and a complete waste of time.

This is the brainchild of, among others, Professor David Healy, who states “You may have been told there is no evidence linking the treatment you are on to the problems you are experiencing. One reason there may be no evidence is because you and your doctor have been silenced.”

The European brand names will be coming soon, but for now you will have to enter the Generic name of the drug; citalopram for Cipramil, Escitalopram for Lexapro, etc.

The Irish College of Psychiatry will find it a useful source of information as they seem to be unaware that Antidepressants can cause a person to commit suicide. Go on I dare you, click on the link and put Citalopram in there.

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles, Random

The Teratogenic effect of SSRI’s including Citalopram.

Back to the problem of depressants/antidepressants in pregnancy…

This morning I came across a Freedom Of Information e-mail that I had received from the IMB. It was a copy of the Adverse Reactions Reports (ADR’s) relating to Cipramil. I noticed that there was a intrauterine (inside the womb) baby death reported. The death of this baby was  attributed to “exposure to Cipramil during pregnancy.”

Teratogen; An agent, such as a virus, a drug, or radiation, that can cause malformations or functional damage to an embryo or a fetus.

In Ireland women get very little warning about the teratogenic effect of these drugs. Psychiatrists and GP’s seem reluctant to voice their opinion one way or the other. Whether this is because they don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them or because they believe the drug company spiel is anyone’s guess. Either way, spouting about the benefit/risk conundrum is clearly a get-out clause while in the meantime babies are dying.

In 2010 there was a Case in the High Court, where a little girl’s parents alleged that the disabilities she was born with, were caused by prescription drugs taken by her mother during pregnancy. The Case was settled without admission of liability for €500,000. Article.

I’m not an expert so can only give my opinion but Professor Healy is, so here is what he says: “In the case of the SSRIs as the evidence mounts that these drugs cause birth defects, doubling the rate of major malformations, doubling the rate of miscarriage, increasing rates of voluntary terminations and more than likely leading to learning disabilities/autism in a significant number of children born to mothers on these treatments, we have nevertheless a mounting use of these drugs.”

 

 

 

Here is an excerpt from Professor Healy’s talk “The Cardinals Of Psychiatry” Full Paper here.

Final Acts of the Tragedy

We are facing a true tragedy – a system put in place with the best of intentions to prevent injuries from drugs in general but symbolized in particular by injuries to babies in utero is now leading to just the outcomes it sought to avoid.

In the case of the SSRIs as the evidence mounts that these drugs cause birth defects, doubling the rate of major malformations, doubling the rate of miscarriage, increasing rates of voluntary terminations and more than likely leading to learning disabilities/autism in a significant number of children born to mothers on these treatments, we have nevertheless a mounting use of these drugs.  Where antidepressants were once used rarely in pregnancy they are now among the most commonly used drugs – up to 15% of pregnant women. 

This use is actively promoted by our Cardinals, who collectively make it almost impossible for articles to get published drawing attention to the issues. It is a world where articles can only get published in Vogue or other such outlets – outlining the case of Gina Fromm who for instance when she became pregnant in 2004, did a range of things that few women would have done in 1962 – she took cold rather than hot showers in case she might harm her baby, stopped eating yoghurts and incinerated any chicken because of the risk of bacteria from listeria to salmonella. She balked at taking prenatal vitamins, though she had been taking Paxil following a fleeting episode of anxiety.  She continued to take it through her pregnancy; she had found stopping difficult and her doctor reassured her it posed no risk to her baby.  On February 2nd 2005 her son Mark was born with congenital heart defects.

……………………………………………

The Death of the baby in the IMB e-mail was associated with Cipramil. We asked Lundbeck if their drug was a Teratogen. Although they seem to admit it, here is a prime example of drug company spiel….

Leonie  Do you think that it’s advisable to virtually bathe foetuses in Serotonin given it is now accepted this family of drugs are firmly associated with birth defects?

 Dr. Madsen  Virtually bathe?

 Leonie   Foetuses in Serotonin – pregnancy.

 Tony   Pregnant women.

 Dr. Madsen  I don’t know what you mean by virtually bathe

 Leonie    I’m talking about anti-depressants are known to cause birth defects.  If you think so, would it not be better if women of child-bearing age were cautioned against, perhaps even contra-indicated from using this drug?  Citalopram or Escitalopram?

 Dr. Madsen   Em, I think in…..

 Leonie   Your views?

 Dr. Madsen  In pregnancy?

 Mr. Schroll   the medicines agency authorities you can see what is in the checks that the Doctors and that is up to them to decide…..

 Leonie   So you are passing the buck back to the Doctor again.

 Mr. Schroll  I think when it’s prescription medication, yes.  If it was eh, eh,

 Leonie   And will they be told that it can harm their unborn baby?

 Mr. Schroll   Sorry?

 Leonie   Will the pregnant woman be told that the drug can, can harm her unborn baby?

 Dr. Madsen  Em, I think em, physicians need to double their efforts to make sure that there is a correct risk versus eh, benefit eh, assessment of the em, of any action.

 Leonie   Is Citalopram and Escitalopram a teratogen?

Dr. Madsen   Em, meaning, what, what, what do you mean?

 Leonie  Can it cause harm to foetuses? Unborn babies.

 Dr. Madsen   Em, obviously, in order to have our compounds approved we have done em, a large number of pre-clinical trials em, and we are constantly monitoring and the eh, while the recommendation I believe throughout, is to be, be extra cautious when administering any eh, medications to pregnant women…

 Leonie  Can it cause harm…..to unborn babies?

 Dr. Madsen   Anything can cause harm, can cause harm in any dose…

 Leonie     So yes it can.

 Dr. Madsen  depending on dose

 Leonie      Yep…………Em, why if it can cause harm, is this not clearly, clearly stated on the packaging and information leaflet?

 Mr. Schroll   Do you talk about the patient leaflet or do you talk about the SPC, the label that the Doctors use in order to prescribe the medication?

 Leonie    I’m talking about a pregnant woman that goes down and gets it in the chemist.  Is it on the patient information leaflet?

 Mr. Schroll   In the patient leaflet it says you have to talk to your Doctor….

 Leonie   And what does it say in the Doctor’s leaflet?

 Mr. Schroll  That he has to be extra cautious.  I think that if you go to the… to, to the Irish home page, I believe it is like that, it’s like that in Denmark and elsewhere.  If you go to the medicines agency authorities

 Leonie   So,

Mr. Schroll    It would be part of the discussion to talk about the risks and the benefits and that would be up to the Doctor.

 Leonie    It would be up to the Doctor to tell them that the drug can harm their unborn baby?

 Mr. Schroll   Eh, now, you’re talking…..

 Leonie   It’s not up to Lundbeck, no?  It’s up to the Doctor to tell the woman that the drug can harm their unborn baby?

 Mr. Schroll   To be cautious, yes, yes.

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles

Risk of Sudden Death with Citalopram and Escitalopram.

Risk of Sudden Death with Citalopram and Escitalopram.

The warnings with this drug just keep coming, but how late for how many? Citalopram already comes with side-effects listed as: aggravated depression, suicide attempt, confusion, aggressive reaction, depersonalization, hallucination, psychotic depression, delusion, paranoid reaction, psychosis, and not forgetting, self-harm and harm to others.

This week the IMB (Irish Medicines Board and protector of Irish consumers), issued yet another warning for the depressant/antidepressant Citalopram, aka Cipramil/Celexa. Link.

For ordinary consumers like us, and what it doesn’t clarify on this warning is this, a prolonged QT interval is a biomarker for ventricular tachyarrhythmias like torsades de pointes, and a risk factor for sudden death. Yep…sudden death!

Surprising or not, is the fact that the latest Cipramil warning for Irish consumers, comes almost 3 months after the FDA in the U.S. issued the same warning. Link. Has anyone died from a sudden death linked to Cipramil in the last 3 months or would that be classed as collateral damage, or the risks outweighing the benefits maybe?

The warning also states that this problem has also been reported with some other SSRI’s including the S-enantiomer of Citalopram (Escitalopram).

Well, considering the Irish Medicines Board do not have an SSRI expert, it may have escaped their attention that last month in a Brussels Court, Citalopram was held to be the same product as Escitalopram, meaning that the same warnings should be attached to both, albeit identical, medications. Link.

https://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/10/15/brussels-court-holds-escitalopram-to-be-the-same-product-as-citalopram/

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles

Are antidepressants the cause of the recent spate of murder/suicides in China? 抗抑鬱藥,最近接連發生在中國的謀殺 /自殺的原因?

抗抑鬱藥,最近接連發生在中國的謀殺 /自殺的原因?

Are antidepressants the cause of the latest spate of murder/suicides in China?

In the last year there has been a series of newspaper articles concerning recent murder/suicides in China. It seems that this kind of tragedy was virtually unheard of in China until recently. China is relatively new to the antidepressant market, I wouldn’t be too sure that the Chinese are aware of the dangers; I’m sure the various drug companies are not volunteering the information that these drugs can actually cause both suicide and homicide.

As you my be aware, my son killed himself and another young man in Aug 2009. I have the expert report which Professor Healy did for Shane’s Inquest, stating that, in his opinion, this was caused by Cipramil. For anyone that wants to read his report, I have blanked out the names of the other people involved but will attach it here…Professor Healy’s Report March 2010.

Back to China…

School attacks in the People’s Republic of ChinaWikipedia

A series of uncoordinated mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks in the People’s Republic of China began in March 2010. The spate of attacks left at least 21 dead and some 90 injured.

Kindergarten killings are a turning point for ChinaThe Telegraph

The series of kindergarten murders that has swept across China marks a turning point for Chinese society.

In a country which reveres children – especially since the one-child policy was introduced in the late 1970s – it is difficult to imagine how any atrocity could be worse than the premeditated murder of innocent toddlers. Since March 23, when a mentally-unstable doctor stabbed eight primary school children to death, each copycat attack has added to parents’ fears.

Life on the margins of Chinese society has always been unfair and difficult, but it is near impossible to imagine the rage that must have driven these men to slit the throats of young children. Clearly, something is very rotten in China.

Exactly what is going on in China?? The Moderator

Exactly what is going on in China?

A rash of bloody, knife and meat cleaver murders of small school kids by adults have stunned China, a country where children are treasured. It seemingly matches the inexpicable killing sprees that peppered American history over the past few decades. The question is “why.” And the answer so far is: “no one knows” — but a lot of parents now fear.

……………………..

The most widely-used antidepressants in China by the end of last year were GlaxoSmithKline’s Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine) with a value market share of 18%, followed by Pfizer’s Zoloft (sertraline; 10%) and Eli Lilly’s Prozac (fluoxetine; also 10%). Lundbeck’s older drug Cipramil (citalopram), also sold by Xian-Janssen, and Lexapro had market shares of 6.5% and 3.0% respectively.

Soo,  the Chinese people have been introduced to Seroxat, Prozac, Zoloft, Cipramil and Lexapro which can cause suicide and homicide ideation and there has been a spate of murder/suicides. Now isn’t that a co-incidence.

Has it anything to do with Lundbeck’s recent marketing push on Lexapro in China?

Lundbeck to establish a strong, dedicated sales… FE Investegate

Lundbeck will substantially increase sales and marketing efforts behind Lexapro in China. Lundbeck already has a foothold in China and stands to benefit from the rapidly evolving Chinese CNS market.

Lundbeck sees China as land of opportunity for Lexapro…PharmaTimesOnline

Lundbeck has unveiled plans to double its sales force in China with a specific emphasis on promoting the blockbuster Lexapro in the growing antidepressant market there.

So it begs the question, considering all of the above drugs can cause suicide and homicide, how many of the perpetrators were on an antidepressant?

One worrying aspect is that Lundbeck have just launched Lexapro in Japan. So it remains to be seen if the next headlines will be “School attacks in Japan” and “Exactly what is going on in Japan”?

GSK have already trialed the notorious Seroxat on Japanese  7-17 year olds, despite the fact that ssri’s have been proven to be detrimental to children, even causing deaths. But then, what do you expect from a company with such dubious ethics (on an equal par with Lundbeck) who see no moral issue with doing drug trials on children as young as 7?  Link. 

cipramil (celexa) stories,, lundbeck

Brussels court finds Escitalopram/Citalopram to be the same product.

BE – Ratiopharm (Teva) and Tiefenbacher v. Lundbeck (escitalopram)

Brussels court holds escitalopram to be the same product as citalopram under Articles 3(c)-(d) of the SPC-Regulation, Brussels Commercial Court, 3 October 2011 Link.

When the licence for Citalopram (Cipramil, Celexa) was coming to an end, Lundbeck launched their new wonder drug Escitalopram (Lexapro, Cipralex) and marketed this supposed new drug as a better and superior version of Citalopram. This has been proved once again to be fraudulent. So having been proved guilty of lying again and making billions from a product that was fraudulently licenced (without getting into how many people have died from its suicide ideation side effect) will the EU be taking a case against Lundbeck? What about the FBI? Will they be investigating Forest Labs who market Citalopram and Escitalopram in the US and incidentally have numerous ongoing cases for people who have suicided on this drug?

As far back as 2003, this had been reported in The British Medical Journal…

“The Danish drug company Lundbeck breached the UK industry code of practice in the way it advertised the successor to its top selling product, the antidepressant citalopram (Cipramil), the drug industry’s watchdog has ruled. The company claimed that its new offering, escitalopram (Cipralex), was more effective than citalopram, even though the two drugs have exactly the same active ingredient”. Link.

It didn’t take a genius to work it out either…

https://leoniefennell.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/citalopram-cipramilcelexa-escitalopram-lexaprocipralex-same-product/

Lundbeck have a habit of lying and it was no surprise that they had lied to us at our meeting in Copenhagen. I have said already that we were shocked when we questioned Dr. Madsen and Mr. Schroll about the drug trials that they are doing on children as young as 7, their answer being that Lundbeck were mandated to do drug trials on children, even for adult medication. Well, I e-mailed the Danish Medicines Board about my concerns and surprise, surprise, Lundbeck were lying!

Lundbeck…

Leonie                    Why are you testing this drug which is well-known to be detrimental to children on children as young as 7 years of age in a drug trial? Citalopram and Escitalopram?

Dr. Madsen               Em, we have done a number of trials and will do a number of trials. Eh, by one I can speak to the situation now, em, we’re mandated to investigate em, pharmaceutical effects in children also in order to advance the understanding of em, this treatment mortality, also on children.

Leonie                       So you actually intend to keep doing trials on 7 year olds, yeah?

Mr. Schroll                We are not able to get approval of new drugs if we don’t test it in…

Leonie                       So you have to test them on children? Oh, of course you are looking for U.18’s as well, aren’t you, to make more money Yeah?

Dr. Madsen               I think that is …..a certain out of this but per, per, eh, the Medicines Board, we would be mandated to do eh, trials, clinical studies in children.

Leonie                       So you’re still going to do them then, yeah?

Dr. Madsen               If we want to have eh, drugs approved in Europe, then we will probably have to, yes.

Leonie                       You have to? That’s if you want them, want them approved for U.18’s you mean?

Dr. Madsen             No.  Also if you want adult drugs approved.

Leonie                       If you want to have a tablet or medication approved in an adult population, you have to, eh you have to trial them on 7 year olds?

Dr. Madsen               Correct

Oct 11, 2011

Danish Medicines Agency – “Pharmaceutical companies are only required to conduct clinical trials in children for marketing approval of a drug if it is intended for use in children”.

.

lundbeck, Newspaper and internet articles, psychiatry

Lean on me? That’s unless you DIE from an adverse reaction of course!!!

Posted by Claire O’Keeffe,

Sunday, October 17, 2010 Excerpt:

Anti-depressants manufacturer funds depression-awareness campaign

Lundbeck, a pharmaceuticals giant and a major manufacturer of antidepressants, has fully funded an Irish depression awareness campaign called Lean on Me.

The Lundbeck-sponsored campaign, which was launched by singers, Johnny Logan and Niamh Kavanagh on 1st October, encourages people to support loved ones who are experiencing depression, as well as encouraging a better understanding of the condition.

Lundbeck’s primary product is Cipramil, the world’s most-prescribed new-generation antidepressant. Cipramil alone accounts for some 82 per cent of the company’s sales.

This pharmaceuticals company has given an unrestricted educational grant to the Lean on Me campaign and it claims mental health organisation, Aware and The European Depression Association (EDA) as its supporters.

“Paul David Klemperer is an economist and professor of Economics at Oxford University. He said: “When groups accept financial support from the pharmaceutical industry and medical device manufacturers this constitutes an increasingly important marketing component for the [pharmaceuticals company].”

A member of the pharmaceuticals industry who wishes to remain unnamed says,
“Once you scratch the surface you would be amazed how many organisations without the necessary resources avail of external resources like pharmaceutical companies. You then feel like you must align yourself with what those companies want. Questions should be asked about this.”

Lundbeck Ireland declined to comment on their funding of the Lean on Me campaign.

Posted by Claire O’Keeffe

 

Conflict of interest??

Is Ireland being bought by pharmaceutical companies?

1. Drug trials done on children in Irish childrens homes.

2. Lundbeck and Irish psychiatry denying links to suicide/homicide with ssri’s.

3. Off label prescribing of ssri’s for Irish children  (under 16’s  and including the notorious seroxat) 

4. Elan the €3bn-valued Athlone-headquartered company  agreed to pay the biggest fine in Irish corporate history, when it coughed up almost €147m as part of an agreement to resolve US criminal and civil investigations into the illegal marketing of an epilepsy drug.

5. Psychiatry Ireland ignores Irish ssri expert Professor David Healy because he dared to speak out about the  possible adverse side effects of these drugs.

6. The persecution of the late Dr. Michael Corry for daring to speak out about the side effects of ssri’s inc suicide/homicide.

Lundbeck – campaign sponsor

Lundbeck – campaign sponsor

Lundbeck is an international pharmaceutical company that is deeply committed to improving quality of life (unless you die from their drug of course)  for persons who have a disease of the central nervous system (CNS), like depression. Lundbeck sponsors the ‘Lean on Me’ campaign with an unrestricted educational grant.

LET’S NOT FORGET THE E.U. RECOMMENDATIONS..(Which psychiatry Ireland will deny)

August 19, 2005
European Union
Drug Class: Newer Antidepressants
Drug Name: Fluoxetine, Fluvoxamine, Sertraline, Paroxetine, Citalopram, Escitalopram, Atomoxetine, Duloxetine, Venlafaxine, Mianserin, Milnacipram, Reboxetine, Mirtazapine
Age: Children (under 18)

Side Effects: Suicide Risk/Suicide Attempts/Suicide, Aggression, Violence, Hostility

Summary: The Commission of the European Communities, representing 25 European countries, endorsed and issued the strongest warning yet against child antidepressant use as recommended by Europe’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Clinical trials had shown that the drugs caused suicidal behavior including suicide attempts and suicidal ideation, aggression, hostility (predominantly aggression, oppositional behavior and anger) and/or related behavior.
 
Source: Commission of the European Communities Commission Decision concerning the placement on the market, under Article 21 of the Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Brussels 19-VIII-2005, C (2205) 3256.
 
 
Germany Drug Warning, March 10, 2009
Drug Class: Older Antidepressants, Newer Antidepressants including CITALOPRAM.
Age: Adults (18 and over)

Side Effects: Suicide Risk/Suicide Attempts/Suicide

Summary: The German Drug Regulatory Agency (BfArM) issued an official notice to the pharmaceutical companies that the approval for all newer antidepressants on the market has been changed. BfArM now requires the package information leaflets for newer antidepressants to include information on the increased risk of suicidal behavior in adults under 25 years.
 
 

Pharmacovigilance Working Party  

A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials of antidepressant drugs in adult patients with psychiatric disorders showed an increased risk of suicidal behaviour with antidepressants compared to placebo in patients less than 25 years old.
If you are a young adult. Information from clinical trials has shown an increased risk of suicidal behaviour in adults aged less than 25 years with psychiatric conditions who were treated with an antidepressant.
 
 
Based on this review the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee agreed that labelling changes were required to inform health care professionals about the potential for an increased risk of suicidality in younger adults (aged 18 to 24) using antidepressants during the initial phases of treatment (generally the first one to two months).  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Based on this review the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee agreed that labelling changes were required to inform health care professionals about the potential for an increased risk of suicidality in younger adults (aged 18 to 24) using antidepressants during the initial phases of treatment (generally the first one to two months).  

January 2008

For bupropion, citalopram, escitalopram and fluvoxamine there is a trend towards an increased risk of suicidal behaviour with that for citalopram being most marked but does not reach statistical significance for any of these drugs. ( Only DOUBLE that of  placebo?)