Eli Lilley and Co paid out billions in court cases and has convictions for illegal drug marketing
Keir Starmer and Health Secretary Wes Streeting have gone to war on unemployed people they consider to be overweight – with a clear indication they intend widening it to the general population, with an implicit threat that they will be refused NHS treatment if they don’t take it – by forcing them to take a weight-loss drug that is known to have fatal side-effects and psychiatric impacts.
The new scheme will massively enrich drug manufacturer Eli Lilly & Co, which produces Tirzepatide, also marketed as ‘Mounjaro’, which will reportedly charge around £30 a dose initially given to 3,000 people weekly but eventually to millions. But US firm Lilly has a string of controversies, sharp practice and lawsuits in its wake that raise serious questions about Streeting’s decision to form a strategic partnership with the firm:
Zyprexa
Lilly faced thousands of lawsuits from people who claimed the anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa gave them diabetes and massive weight gain: 16% of people taking it gained almost five stones in their first year of taking it – but Lilly had given doctors a far lower number. Lilly paid out $1.2 billion to claimants.
The firm was then sued by 32 US states for illegally marketing the drug for ‘off-label’ use, especially as a dementia treatment – and pleaded guilty to a criminal charge of illegal marketing. It received a total penalty of $1.415 billion, including an $800 million civil settlement, a fine of $515 million and asset forfeiture of $100 million. The firm’s chief executive had emailed colleagues saying:
we must seize the opportunity to expand our work with Zyprexa in this same child-adolescent population [for off-label use].
Evista
Evista is a drug used to treat or prevent osteoporosis, the weaking of bones in the elderly and in post-menopausal women. The company, which had trained sales representatives to sell the drug as a preventative for cancer and heart disease – and told them to withhold information that its effectiveness against breast cancer was unproven – agreed to plead guilty to illegally marketing the drug and paid a fine of $36m. The company had also published a video promoting Evista as:
truly…the best drug for the prevention of all these diseases.
Trulicity
Lilly’s drug for the treatment of diabetes (and used off-brand as a weight-loss drug) is the subject of a major lawsuit in the US alleging that the drug causes cancers, blindness, neurodegenerative disease ALS, deep vein thromboses, pulmonary embolisms, serious gastrointestinal problems:
the drug, which mimics the GLP-1 hormone in the body that aids in insulin secretion, causes severe side effects, including gastroparesis and pancreatic cancer. Legal documents also suggest that the manufacturer of Trulicity, Eli Lilly, knew of these risks and failed to adequately warn healthcare providers or patients of the dangers.
Insulin pricing
Between 2012 and 2016, Lilly almost doubled the price of its insulin, prompting letters from members of Congress about the sudden and huge price increases.
Canada lawsuit
Lilly sued the Canadian government for US$500m in 2013, claiming it had violated the North American Free Trade Agreement by letting Canadian courts to invalidate patents for two of its drugs. The courts had found one patent invalid because the company’s drug study had lasted only seven weeks and involved only twenty-two patients. The other – for Zyprexa – was invalidated because the drug did not meet its promised usefulness. The company lost the case in 2017.
This is the firm that Streeting and his boss Keir Starmer trumpeted getting into bed with and whose drug – with its fatal side-effects – they plan to force on thousands and ultimately millions. Continuing its targeting of the vulnerable, the government has also announced that it will make people in hospital with mental health issues meet ‘work coaches’ – who have the power to impose punitive benefit sanctions on them – to ‘help’ them into work.
Labour has already announced policies that it knows will cost thousands of lives and has been exposed failing even to do assessments of the impacts of other policies. Both Starmer and Streeting have accepted large donations from private health companies and investors.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount as it has to be entered by us). Alternatively, if you prefer to make a one-off or recurring donation by simple card payment, please use the form below:
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your support is hugely appreciated.
Your support is hugely appreciated.
Your support is hugely appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearlyThanks for your solidarity so Skwawkbox can keep doing its job of inconveniencing the right and helping to build the left!
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
We all have to be very wary of side-effects from drugs. I have spent my life avoiding drugs and medications as far as is possible, but as I grow older, then I do need some, and many have had side effects,. However, as it is my own body/life I can choose whether or not I take them. This new regime of “You WILL take our drugs” is highly dangerous, and presumably you just have to accept the side effects or be sanctioned. This is highly dangerous.
📕📕📕👁️📕📕📕👁️📕📕📕
Sir Keith Starmer & Chums predictable.
Predicted YEARS ago.
Dim ‘the many’ blinded + deafened by their hopes + CHRONIC label-itis.
Prescription: READ + STUDY
Little Red Riding Hood.
Children grasp it.
If even little children get it, then
why don’t we ? ? ❔
BASICS
📕👧✅📕👧✅📕👧✅
winteringham – “This new regime of “You WILL take our drugs” is highly dangerous.”
….and your evidence for this is
👧👁️📕👧👁️📕👧👁️📕
windchime – Well done, that looks nice. Can you tell us all about your pretty illustrations. 🌞
“….and your evidence for this is?”
https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/benefit-sanctions
As can be seen from the evidence provided for you in the above link to the UK Government site, Billy, sanctions for non-compliance form an integral part of the Social Security Benefit System.
Having provided you with the evidence requested, it’s now quid pro quo time, Billy……
Dave – Can you provide an example of the DWP ever applying sanctions in similar circumstances.
…….. Your turn to supply the evidence requested here:
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/10/15/starmer-streeting-to-force-weight-loss-drug-with-known-fatal-side-effects-on-unemployed/#comment-260204
Off you go, Billy. Get on with it.
Dave – As previously stated I’m quite happy for others to make up their own minds about your weird propensity for supporting a corrupt fascist like Putin and his murderous regime. Why aren’t you happy to do the same?
Billy, when you have defined your nebulous term “similar circumstances” I will consider your request.
Billy, until you can substantiate this allegation with evidence, everyone can see you have not got a leg to stand on.
Do tell, where is your evidence that I have done what you claim?
Not a coincidence that Lilley were at Starmer’s ‘Big Business’ soiree only days ago, and have promised so many £billion investment in the UK?
As to Streeting’s ‘bulging waistbands’ comment, I see quite a few of your colleagues have ‘bulged’ over the past few years…. Perhaps trial it on them first.
I couldn’t help but smile at your second paragraph.
Their message is very Fabian. Justify yourself. Never mind who is asking, justify your reason for being here. Are you a useless eater?
Yes Julia attendees included Goldman Sachs chief executive David Solomon, David Ricks of drugs giant Eli Lilly, former Google chair Eric Schmidt and GSK chief Emma Walmsley. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and Brookfield CEO Bruce Flatt.
That (former?) Trilateral Commission membership of his seems to be getting Starmer more than free clothing, spectacles and accommodation.
Nothing about Rayner cuddling up to Larry Fink?
Have you not heard, Skwawkbox?…..
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/10/15/starmer-streeting-to-force-weight-loss-drug-with-known-fatal-side-effects-on-unemployed/#comment-260160
All these trials are going to magically lead to better patient outcomes and save the NHS a ton of money.
Dave – Thank you for highlighting my comments about the trials and giving me the opportunity to repeat this.
https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/new-study-to-deepen-understanding-of-a-weight-loss-medication/
“Martin Rutter, Professor of Cardiometabolic Medicine, University of Manchester, and principal investigator for the Greater Manchester study, said: “This five-year real-world study aims to demonstrate the long-term efficacy and safety profile of tirzepatide in a primary care setting compared to usual care. It will specifically quantify the medicine’s long-term effects on obesity, diabetes incidence, and obesity-related complications, as well as its impacts on employment and health economic outcomes.”
Prof. Martin Rutter is playing a very dangerous game by becoming the biochemical “expert” promoting Eli Lilly’s product here. He’s risking his -and the University of Manchester’s – reputations by promoting tirzepatide, (the active ingredient inLilly’s diabetes medicine ) for weight-loss. Tirzepetide was only approved (by FDA) for weight loss earlier this year. There has been no clinical testing of it as a weight-loss agent.
Worryingly, this Streeting-Lilley ‘arrangement’ will be structured as the drug’s clinical testing for weight-loss.
Rutter should not promote benefits that are, as yet, unproven. His reputation as a scientist is worth more.
qwertboi – Perhaps you should write to Prof. Martin Rutter and the MHRA and make them aware of your concerns.
I suspect a few biochemists will have already, SteveH. Good advice tho’, thanks.
If not, it’ll surely become apparent if adverse reactions exceed expectations (c<1%).
My worry would be a 'patient' population of benefit recipients can easily be encouraged NOT to report adverse reactions to their prescriber-GPs, and for a clinical trial this would be v wrong.
And your argument to refute the documented side effects of this drug and the record of Eli Lilly in its misleading claims is exactly what, Billy?
Or are you talso aking bribes and money from these Corporations and their obbyists to push this poison down peoples throats?
Dave – “And your argument to refute the documented side effects of this drug and the record of Eli Lilly in its misleading claims is exactly what”
I wasn’t aware that I’d made any such argument. 🤔
That’s the point, Billy. You are ignoring any evidence which does not suit your narrative.
The trial you are waxing lyrical about – “This five-year real-world study aims to demonstrate the long-term efficacy and safety profile of tirzepatide in a primary care setting compared to usual care.” – is superfluous in terms of the already available evidence of the lack of efficacy in terms of safety of the drug in question.
So why do you keep pushing this selective nonsense down peoples throats and bellyache like a mardy arsed five-year-old when informed of basic cause and effect?
Dave – The MHRA obviously disagree with you, were you also a antiVaccine Covid denier.
That proves nothing, Billy. Corporately captured Regulatory Agencies are now the norm across the Collective West. From HMRC to the Utilities; Banking to Medicine.
It’s not as though the Regulatory agencies have never approved a dangerous drug:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide_scandal
Not to mention the matter previously highlighted on Skwawkbox of the unqualified assistants being fobbed off to us as qualified doctors and anaesthetists – which is receiving a great deal of pushback from lower down the profession.
You really are well behind the curve, Billy. No one with an operational brain cell in the UK trusts The Official Narrative. We have been lied to too many times.
Dave – Oh for goodness sake, get a grip of yourself. All they are doing is trialling an existing drug for a new but related purpose. Why would you seek to deny those suffering from being grossly obese the opportunity to dramatically improve their life expectancy and wellbeing?
Surprise, surprise I trust the MHRA a great deal more than I do your histrionics.
ps: Are you also an antiVaccine Covid denier.
So your argument, Billy, is that the proven harmful effects of this drug – which has led to other regulatory agencies fining Eli Lilly substantial sums of money as detailed in the articles featured on this site – magically disappear when the drug is utilised for a “for a new but related purpose”.
What is hilarious about your logic free rantings is not simply that you take yourself so seriously but that you expect everyone else to take your ignorant evidence free arguments seriously as well.
Kudos for imagination, though. You’ll be telling us next that consumption of dog shit is beneficial and not harmful if taken intravenously – that method being “a new but related purpose.”
Dave – https://skwawkbox.org/2024/10/17/the-trail-of-streetings-jabs4jobs-slimming-drug-company-is-littered-with-massive-lawsuits/#comment-260316
Forced medication is sinister and probably highly illegal plus dangerous as Right Wing Labour bullies vulnerable citizens who may not be in a position to fight back, so WE have to fight for them!
And sending people, work coaches who know nothing about mental health, into mental health wards is not only extremely dangerous but it is likely to set back the patient care by NHS doctors & all staff.
The hospitals should refuse to let them in and all NHS staff should also refuse them entry to the point of striking; they have a duty of care for these often very vulnerable patients & are about supporting their best interests, so along with the community should fight for them.
Govts should be about enabling the health & happiness of citizens and work being the be all and end all of life is only for very narrowest of thinkers who put profits first.
Some argue K & S should be prosecuted for this.
Well said Bazza. Forced medication is more than sinister, it is illegal. During the alleged fake PHEIC (Public Health Emergency of International Concern) around the non-novel “novel’ SARS-CoV-2, Keir Starmer was on D4CE ‘s watchlists for seemingly arguing that NHS Staff should be ‘mandated’ to take the MRNA chemicals branded as ‘vaccines’ for Covid.
Happily, when the doctors’ trade union, BMA, reported that upwards of 32% of its membership would not take the Covid ‘vaccine’, the tory health minister backed down. Starmer didn’t. He accused the tories of being ‘reckless’
Forced medication will surely be revisited by Starmer. This Eli Lilly Tirzepatide ‘pilot’ is being watched very closely by international bodies who, since the global Covid deception, are hyper-alert about the likelihood of forced medication becoming a key aspect of a new world order. They are watching closely for any – even small scale – ‘enforcement’. Our Nuremberg Code human rights (embodied by the UN) are at stake.
AFAIK patients/people/Individuals must give “informed consent” to any medical procedure or drugs Often they need to sign a consent form. .Otherwise administering the drug/carrying out the procedure is illegal. PS Informed consent means they need to be told about all possible side-effects and risks
yeah benmadigan, the regulators assume that receiving a prescription, then cashing it and reading the PIL (Patient Information Leaflet) that every prescription medication has to have constitutes giving ‘informed consent’. It has worked like that since the start of the NHS. Most GPs and patient groups seem happy with it.
____
Separate (related) point – Problems start when governments give drug suppliers blanket legal indemnity for specific drugs. Whereas informed consent provides a patient with certain rights and responsibilities, legal indemnity for pharmaceutical suppliers mucks up the whole system, making them beyond legal rebuke/censure/£accountability.
during their appointment with their GP patients need to ask “What are the risks? What are the side effects?What’s the evidence it’s good for me?”And try and balance the answers up against the benefits the GP is probably “bigging “up as the latest miracle drug of the day! before deciding to take it or not. The decision can be made even after they have got the prescription and read the PIL
benmadigan 3.51: “the benefits the GP is probably “bigging “up as the latest miracle drug of the day…”
You’re touching-on a major issue there. Like most professionals nowadays, doctors undertake on-job-ongoing professional development training throughout their career. Doctors call it “CPD”. Sadly, many GPs’ CPD amounts to attending pharmaceutical roadshows where marketing staff present the ‘benefits of drug X’ (nothing else), i.e. sales-pitches, and record it as their CPD.
This is worrying to clinicians and patients that believe GPs should aspire to evidence based medicine.
So, yes, you’re spot on, maybe too many GP prescription-choices are based on the current campaign(s) of drug adverts available to GPs.
I’m sure that Mr Streeting will personally validate the safe use of the drug by being injected with it on live TV.
Nasty, I Know,but I’d watch Streeting being tirzepatide-jabbed on TV – then remind him of the psychotic and physical adverse reactions that have cost Eli Lilly $millions
Apparently, qwertboi, the MHRA responsible for approving drugs in the UK disagree that the drug in question poses any danger.
Despite the evidence to the contrary.
Who would’ve thought, eh? Another example of regulatory capture by Big Pharma and the we make up our own reality to suit our convenience crowd.
Dave – Oh dear, are you relying on qwertboi’s self proclaimed ‘expertise’?
😞
qwerboi
You are talking about Wes Streeting, how would you tell the difference
SteveH@ 6.47pm. I’ve no particular knowledge of, or expertise in tirzepatide. None at all in fact (but I can read yellow card and adverse reaction reports). However, back in 2002 I did provide colloid chemistry expertise to a research project on SARS-CoV-1, the first identified strain of the SARS-related coronavirus. That’s how I so quickly realised that much of the “Official Narrative” about SARS-Cov-2/Covid and the claimed-PHEIC was total bunkum.
No, Billy, I’m relying on the evidence available of the toxicity of the drug in question as detailed in the previous article…..
https://skwawkbox.org/2024/10/15/starmer-streeting-to-force-weight-loss-drug-with-known-fatal-side-effects-on-unemployed/
……which cites actual clinical data from the US National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI); along with the record of the drug company involved (Eli Lilly) as detailed in this thread’s above the line article.
What are you relying on, Billy?
Blind faith?
A PR release?
The entrails of a chicken?
You really are making yourself look a complete and utter tool.
Dave – I thought that I’d already made that clear. I’m relying on the judgement of the experts in the MHRA and the skill of GPs. Plus it has been commonly prescribed for overweight type2 diabetics for a number of years and that it continues to be commonly proscribed.
And your arrogant claim on everyone else’s behalf is Billy, that this trumps the data on the drug, the record of Eli Lilly, and the context in which it is to be used.
Those of us who actually live here require a lot more convincing than your personal recommendation.
And you wonder why Toffee and others forcefully point out how inappropriate it is for you to continually insist that we should all suck up to and welcome policies which affect those living here but not yourself.
How very narcissistic you are, Billy.
@qwertboi
Are you aware of Eliezer Masliah? Thanks to this chap, everything we know on Alzheimer’s is fraudulent. Has set medicine back years, just for a few pieces of silver…
Trust the science!
Yes nvla, Masliah’s works have been v important in several areas – not just Alzheimers. He’s demonised by Big Pharm for risking several of their income streams. “Trust the Science”? You bet! Nothing else is ever as illuminating>
He is facing misconduct
misconduct? I know his works and positions on a few things, bur am intrigued about alleged ‘misconduct’. Gonna see what I can find out about the charge(s). Thanks nvla. What’s your take on it?
nvla – Masliah’s possible research misconduct is very serious, but it does not ‘make everything we know on Alzheimer’s fraudulent’ as you say above. Before Masliah, Cerebrolysin was the main treatment of many neurodegenerative conditions – and it has remained so for over 50 years and produced much quantifiable benefit for sufferers.
Of course research misconduct is very wrong and should even – I’d say – be subject to criminal prosecution, but the charges against Masliah are dubious to say the least. Ask any biochemist, neuroscientist or virologist what constitutes “image manipulation” and we’d get no meaningful answer. Claiming proteins are present when they are not and manipulating images to infer them is wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. But is that what he did? Dunno. (He isn’t saying).
Itwill take decades for the significance of these “charges” to be clear. In the meantime cerebrolysin will continue to be studied and researched and used to good effect.