Drug company “Might not be completely altruistic after all”

by philapilus
Pill box

Made from love. And potentially harmful chemicals.

The news that GlaxoSmithKline has been accused of ‘market abuse’ by the Office of Fair Trading, has sent ripples of shock through the commercial scientific sector this morning.

Allegations made against the pharmaceutical titan claim that GSK paid rivals to delay releases of copycat drugs, to maintain the market position of its anti-depressant Seroxat.

But in a strongly worded rebuttal, the company insists that it has never tried to make money at all out of any of its medicines, and certainly welcomes the appearance of generic drugs on the market which undercut GSK’s own prices.

Spokesperson Percy Spokes said “We have absolutely no interest in money whatsoever. We try really hard to help our competitors bring out cheaper, safer, drugs than ours.

“Also, given that Seroxat has severe withdrawal effects, and amongst the highest rate of discontinuation syndrome sufferers, clearly we have no interest in trying to maintain its market dominance.

“I must reiterate that we feel great responsibility to users of our medicines, and would certainly never make false claims about any of our products, or pay greater attention to our profit margins than people’s addictions and physical suffering.”

Unemployed pharmaceutical commentator Tim Twanks commented “This is just an absolutely shocking allegation. To think that a drugs company, and especially GSK, might not be full of lovely people working tirelessly for the benefit of mankind with never a thought of personal gain… it’s unbelievable I tell you!”

The company has in the past been accused of cynical profiteering: bribing doctors, misreporting or withholding safety data, charging overinflated prices, dodging on its taxes, firing quality experts who flagged up issues with its production, making misleading adverts about its drugs, suppressing scientific articles which found fault with GSK products, and making false claims about the health benefits of children’s drinks. Or ‘lying to children’, as it is also sometimes known.

GSK points out however that they have always responded, when found against in court, by paying out very large sums amounting to billions and billions of dollars, which the company insists just goes to show how uninterested in money they are, and therefore what a bunch of altruistic, lovely people they must be.

Twanks said “If the OFT decides competition laws have been infringed, GSK will once again likely face a huge payout, which would obviously be a terrible, terrible thing. I’ll probably cry.”

%d bloggers like this: