corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13140

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Berkrot B.
Connecticut sues Eli Lilly over Zyprexa marketing
Reuters 2008 Mar 11
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssHealthcareNews/idUSN1160916520080311?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0


Full text:

NEW YORK, March 11 (Reuters) – The state of Connecticut sued Eli Lilly and Co on Tuesday, accusing the drugmaker of illegally marketing and concealing serious side effects of its top-selling schizophrenia medicine, Zyprexa.

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who announced the suit, is seeking to recover “millions of taxpayer and consumer dollars improperly spent on Zyprexa as a result of its illegal marketing, and millions more spent for treatment of serious side effects from Zyprexa,” according to a press statement from his office.

Lilly is already in court against the state of Alaska in a trial that began earlier this month in which it is facing similar accusations involving marketing and side effects associated with the antipsychotic drug.

Zyprexa, by far Lilly’s biggest product, had sales of $4.76 billion in 2007, including U.S. sales of $2.24 billion.

In the lawsuit filed Tuesday, Lilly is accused of promoting Zyprexa for unapproved uses, including the treatment of children, and of hiding dangerous side effects, such as increased risk of diabetes, weight gain and heart problems.

“Through a complex series of illegal rackets and lies, Eli Lilly built a multibillion-dollar drug enterprise at the expense of taxpayers, consumers and patient lives,” Blumenthal said in a scathing statement.

He accused Lilly of promoting the drug for anxiety, depression and attention deficit disorder in children despite its not receiving FDA approval for those uses.

While doctors may prescribe medicines in any way they see fit, companies are allowed to promote them only for uses approved by U.S. health regulators.

“Eli Lilly adopted a sick marketing mindset: profits over patients, sales over safety,” Blumenthal said.

He accused the drugmaker of corrupting doctors, pharmacies and public officials nationwide, “who easily abandoned integrity and decency for self-enrichment.”

Lilly said the allegations were without merit.

“Lilly is committed to the highest ethical standards and to promoting our medications only for approved uses,” company spokeswoman Carole Copeland said.

She said Lilly has clear guidelines and extensive training for its sales representatives to help assure that they provide appropriate promotional information within the scope of prescribing information approved by the FDA.

Between 1996 and 2006, the Connecticut Medical Assistance Programs spent more than $190 million on Zyprexa, according to the news release announcing the lawsuit. Millions more were spent to treat injuries caused by Zyprexa use, it said.

In January, Blumenthal said he was involved in negotiations with Lilly over Zyprexa amid published reports that a settlement with federal prosecutors was in the works. He would not confirm at the time that the talks involved settlement discussions.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








As an advertising man, I can assure you that advertising which does not work does not continue to run. If experience did not show beyond doubt that the great majority of doctors are splendidly responsive to current [prescription drug] advertising, new techniques would be devised in short order. And if, indeed, candor, accuracy, scientific completeness, and a permanent ban on cartoons came to be essential for the successful promotion of [prescription] drugs, advertising would have no choice but to comply.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963