RE: Not so Ethical Lilly...

[Guest guest]

You are in true fighting form, my friend! Let us hope our ethical friends

will learn from the mistakes of others. I am removing your name as the

source of this information, unless you let me know that I can forward with

your information attached.

Thank you so very much for these important articles.

Warmest Regards,

Dawn

From:

Reply-To:

" Dawn Rider " <israelswarrior@...>

Subject: Not-So-Public Relations -- Spin of the Day, PRWatch 15 Dec 2003

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:56:36 -0000

Monday, December 15, 2003

Not-So-Public Relations

extract:

The standard treatment for sepsis, an infection of the blood, costs $50 per

day, but Eli Lilly has a new drug out called Xigris, which may not be any

better than older treatments but costs $6,800 per treatment. That's not

exactly an easy sell, but Lilly has hired a PR firm to launch a campaign

called " The Ethics, the Urgency and the Potential, " whose premise is that it

is " unethical not to use the drug. " " To reinforce the point, " writes Carl

Elliott, " Lilly has funded a $1.8 million project called the 'Values, Ethics

& Rationing in Critical Care Task Force,' in which bioethicists and

physicians from various American medical schools will examine the ethics of

rationing certain drugs and services. It is a brilliant strategy. There is

no better way to enlist bioethicists in the cause of consumer capitalism

than to convince them they are working for social justice. ... It's no

mystery, then, why pharmaceutical companies want to brand themselves with

bioethics. But do bioethicists really want to brand themselves with Pharma?

To take only one example: The pharmaceutical sponsors of the University of

Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics and its faculty's projects are now facing

multimillion dollar fraud sanctions (AstraZeneca), a Nigerian lawsuit for

research abuse (Pfizer), massive class-action payouts (Wyeth-Ayerst), a

criminal probe into obstruction of justice (Schering Plough), an ongoing

fraud lawsuit (Merck and Medco), and allegations of suppressing research

data on suicide in children (GlaxoKline). " Source: Slate, December 15,

2003

http://www.prwatch.org/spin/December_2003.html#1071550800

_________________________________________________________________

Worried about inbox overload? Get MSN Extra Storage now!

http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es

[Guest guest]

You are in true fighting form, my friend! Let us hope our ethical friends

will learn from the mistakes of others. I am removing your name as the

source of this information, unless you let me know that I can forward with

your information attached.

Thank you so very much for these important articles.

Warmest Regards,

Dawn

From:

Reply-To:

" Dawn Rider " <israelswarrior@...>

Subject: Not-So-Public Relations -- Spin of the Day, PRWatch 15 Dec 2003

Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:56:36 -0000

Monday, December 15, 2003

Not-So-Public Relations

extract:

The standard treatment for sepsis, an infection of the blood, costs $50 per

day, but Eli Lilly has a new drug out called Xigris, which may not be any

better than older treatments but costs $6,800 per treatment. That's not

exactly an easy sell, but Lilly has hired a PR firm to launch a campaign

called " The Ethics, the Urgency and the Potential, " whose premise is that it

is " unethical not to use the drug. " " To reinforce the point, " writes Carl

Elliott, " Lilly has funded a $1.8 million project called the 'Values, Ethics

& Rationing in Critical Care Task Force,' in which bioethicists and

physicians from various American medical schools will examine the ethics of

rationing certain drugs and services. It is a brilliant strategy. There is

no better way to enlist bioethicists in the cause of consumer capitalism

than to convince them they are working for social justice. ... It's no

mystery, then, why pharmaceutical companies want to brand themselves with

bioethics. But do bioethicists really want to brand themselves with Pharma?

To take only one example: The pharmaceutical sponsors of the University of

Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics and its faculty's projects are now facing

multimillion dollar fraud sanctions (AstraZeneca), a Nigerian lawsuit for

research abuse (Pfizer), massive class-action payouts (Wyeth-Ayerst), a

criminal probe into obstruction of justice (Schering Plough), an ongoing

fraud lawsuit (Merck and Medco), and allegations of suppressing research

data on suicide in children (GlaxoKline). " Source: Slate, December 15,

2003

http://www.prwatch.org/spin/December_2003.html#1071550800

_________________________________________________________________

Worried about inbox overload? Get MSN Extra Storage now!

http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es