Tag Archives: Glaxosmithkline

MEDICAL RECORD THIEF MARK PEPYS CAUSES DR. BERNARD RIMLAND PAPER RETRACTION

Not even the dead are safe from sham retractions by Glaxo’s medical record thief Mark Pepys. Just before Autism Investigated reported on yet another retraction caused by Pepys, he caused the retraction of a paper by the late Dr. Bernard Rimland of all people. The paper was retracted explicitly because it linked vaccines to autism, cited the Wakefield paper that Pepys stole medical records of children in, came up at the top of Google and was cited by vaccine opponents including Autism Investigated’s editor.

The retraction was authored both by the editor of the journal Laboratory Medicine and by the senior author of Google opposition research for the vaccine industry. They wrote:

A single article that suggests a risk of autism associated with vaccination might not be expected to cause great harm; however, a recent study5 reported that the 2002 Rimland and McGinnis paper is frequently accessed and cited to support the position of those who oppose vaccination on the mistaken belief that it is a risk factor for autism. One of us (P.G. [Pietro Ghezzi]) was the senior author of that study.

Therefore, following the course taken by The Lancet, Lab Medicine has decided to withdraw the 2002 article by Rimland and McGinnis.

One of the reviewers of that “research” by Pietro Ghezzi was GSK Vaccines-backed epidemiologist Pier Lopalco. And who do you think is also a top cited researcher in Ghezzi’s work? You guessed it: Mark Pepys! The retraction was done weeks after Autism Investigated confirmed his role in the Wakefield coauthors’ retraction and confirmed from one of them that it was done just to distance themselves from the autism-vaccine link.

It was Dr. Rimland who was the reason parents are no longer blamed for their children’s autism and who was also one of the first scientists to pinpoint vaccines. Laboratory Medicine doesn’t deserve a paper by him. Instead, the journal will go into the ash heap of history with parent-blamer Bruno Bettelheim and Glaxo’s Sir Medical Record-Leaksalot Mark Pepys.

Yehuda Shoenfeld’s Vaccine-Autoimmunity Paper Retracted by GlaxoSmithKline’s Mark Pepys

Israeli autoimmunity expert Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, ISRAEL21c

*Photo and headline updated.

Sir Mark Pepys did not just cause the 1998 autism-vaccine Wakefield paper’s interpretation retraction, ultimately leading to its full retraction. Pepys also caused the 2017 retraction of an autoimmunity study used in vaccine court for personal injury compensation.

Corresponding study author Yehuda Shoenfeld said of the retraction at the time:

Indeed it is [very] strange;  after one year of being in the journal and after extensive peer reviews of the paper suddenly we received a letter from the editors that SOMEBODY criticized the paper extensively??, it looks very strange and unprecedented. yet indeed at this time we have used this paper in Court for vaccine compensation to show that autoantibodies penetrate cells. Is it coincidental ????????

The retraction statement admitted it was done in part by the British Society of Rheumatology. The society’s founding president George Nuki approved the dangerous MMR vaccine in the UK and his son Paul Nuki was editor of GlaxoSmithKline opposition researcher Brian Deer. Deer had obtained medical records of children in the Wakefield paper that were stolen by Royal Free Hospital’s then-Head of Medicine Mark Pepys. That happened two years after he forced Dr. Andrew Wakefield out of the Royal Free.

Pepys is fully aware of Shoenfeld’s research. The two gave back-to-back talks at a Rheumatology meeting in London the year before he submitted his now-retracted paper. Just last year, both were speakers at the 2017 American College of Rheumatology meeting. Clearly Pepys – and by-extension GlaxoSmithKline – aren’t stopping with Wakefield.

In May, research from Japan on HPV vaccination’s adverse effects was also retracted. The first citation in that study about those adverse effects was one of Shoenfeld’s autoimmunity papers.

GlaxoSmithKline Engineered Eli Lilly Thimerosal Protection Rider

In November 2002, an infamous rider was slipped into the Homeland Security Act which sought to shield former thimerosal maker Eli Lilly from litigation. But Lilly was not the pharmaceutical company behind the provision, European pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline was. The move enabled GSK to escape scrutiny over its toxic vaccinations. In GSK’s place was a company that had not made the mercury-based vaccine preservative for a decade and had not made childhood vaccines since the seventies.

Shielding Lilly from thimerosal litigation was done to protect vaccine manufacturers that use thimerosal, like GlaxoSmithKline. The rider was originally intended for a vaccine compensation bill pushed by then-Senator Bill Frist one year prior in response to rising lawsuits. His health policy adviser told Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2005:

“The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists.”

Although Frist received major contributions from Eli Lilly, he consistently enjoyed much greater financial support from GlaxoSmithKline. For the first five years that the thimerosal issue was raging, the company was Frist’s twelfth biggest campaign contributor. Merck was number 100. Lilly didn’t even make the top 100.

He was also far from GlaxoSmithKline’s only beneficiary. In mid-2002, GlaxoSmithKline was chief corporate sponsor of a GOP fundraiser in Washington headlined by President Bush.

Ultimately, Frist agreed to remove the rider from the law in January 2003. The repeal did not make Eli Lilly liable as all the thimerosal lawsuits would be forced into federal vaccine court anyway. However, the rider and subsequent fallout did help GlaxoSmithKline shirk public scrutiny.

The rider was slipped in two months before federal scientist-turned-GlaxoSmithKline employee Thomas Verstraeten submitted his thimerosal research for publication. The agreement to kill the rider happened just two weeks before Verstraeten’s submission. His earlier work for the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had shown associations between thimerosal and autism. He then heavily manipulated his research to make those associations go away. Much of his earlier manipulation was done in a draft he presented at a secret meeting between CDC and drug companies including his future employer.

After the publication of GlaxoSmithKline fraud, Verstraeten published a letter asserting an all-out denial of any cover-up. Another Glaxo-supported doctor had just engineered a fraudulent coauthor retraction of the interpretation from the seminal 1998 autism-vaccine paper the month prior. Unlike the retraction, the Verstraeten letter never made big news.

Attention was diverted from the pharmaceutical company covering up thimerosal’s dangers to another pharmaceutical company that hadn’t made it in a decade. All of that company’s employees who first brought thimerosal to market 70 years earlier were long dead.

GlaxoSmithKline Facebook Page Reveals Company Supports Internet Trolls

Editor’s commentary and troll response under GSK post feigning LGBTQ inclusion

Wondering who feeds anonymous online trolls that post pro-vaccine screeds? Wonder no more. GlaxoSmithKline’s Facebook page has given it away.

Autism Investigated’s editor posted links to several of this site’s posts on GSK’s Facebook page. One was Autism Investigated’s latest post about GlaxoSmithKline’s new She-E-O. The other was the post showing how Glaxo turned former journalist Brian Deer into its opposition researcher through threat of litigation. The former was placed under a GSK post about gender equality, the latter under equal opportunity for LGBTQ+ people.

Not a day went by before a Facebook account posting as “Marty James” responded to the Brian Deer post. “James” wrote, “Haha, what a joke of an article. Come back when you find any evidence of wrongdoing.”

Because a completely sparse Facebook account happened to be reading GSK’s page comments when it came across Autism Investigated’s and automatically sided with GSK. Right.

How stupid does GlaxoSmithKline think everybody is? Considering what it has already gotten away with, one can’t totally blame GSK for being cocky. The company did engineer the retraction of the 1998 autism-vaccine paper’s interpretation and steal vaccine-injured children’s medical records, don’t forget.

Meet Emma Walmsley, GlaxoSmithKline’s New Shampoo She-E-O

Emma Walmsley has only been CEO of GlaxoSmithKline for 18 months, but she’s already getting lots of publicity. Fortune Magazine just named her its most powerful woman. Yet the former L’Oreal exec’s entire pharma experience does not predate 2010 when she was first hired at GSK. In stark contrast, her predecessor who hired her had racked up 32 years at Glaxo, GlaxoWellcome and GlaxoSmithKline respectively by the time he retired. Big pharma’s first She-E-O is clearly nothing but a smokescreen.

Walmsley knows she’s inexperienced, asserting her lack of “pharma baggage” is an advantage. She is obviously not oblivious to GlaxoSmithKline’s problems. After all, a GSK-funded doctor who was knighted with her predecessor stole medical records of vaccine-injured children at his hospital. Her appointment was mere reputation management, a diversity diversion by a company run by crooks.

The announcement of her takeover was conveniently made before the 2016 election. GlaxoSmithKline wanted to shatter the pharmaceutical glass ceiling before Hillary Clinton broke the presidential one. Needless to say, the latter glass ceiling wasn’t shattered. Still, Walmsley took over in early 2017 not long after Clinton would have become president had she not lost.

What makes this promotion all the more remarkable is that Emma Walmsley is supposedly the mother of four children. That raises the question: who is raising her kids now?

She is married, but she couldn’t possibly fulfill her maternal role and run GlaxoSmithKline at the same time. Either she is a corporate figurehead or an absentee mother. Neither speaks well of her ethics, the lack of which clearly reflect her crooked company.

GlaxoSmithKline has threatened journalists into becoming its opposition researchers and bullied scientists into retracting their own work on the dangers of its vaccines. Whatever her actual involvement is in running the company, Walmsley has chosen to attach her name to Glaxo. That speaks volumes all by itself.

Brian Deer Became Opposition Researcher for Glaxo to Avoid Litigation

“THE ‘COMPLAINANT'” -Cartoon satirizing Brian Deer’s denials of pharmaceutical industry support outside the General Medical Council hearing where Drs. Andrew Wakefield and John Walker-Smith were found guilty of publishing on the vaccine-autism link and ordered to be struck off as a result of Deer’s complaint.  http://adversevaccinereaction.blogspot.com/

How do you go from writing articles critical of a crooked pharmaceutical company to being its biggest opposition researcher-for-hire? For Brian Deer, the answer was that it threatened to sue him.

He became a Glaxo opposition researcher to avoid a Glaxo lawsuit. The law firm that issued the threat was the same firm that defended the company against DTP vaccine injury cases and would defend it against MMR vaccine injury cases.

In 1994, Deer wrote articles for The Sunday Times critical of the safety of the antibiotic Septrin made by GlaxoSmithKline’s precursor Wellcome. That company’s lawyers responded with a legal threat in the form of a preservation letter:

We refer to our letter of 18th February when we informed you that we were acting for Wellcome Plc in the context of the article that you were then planning to publish about our clients.

Our clients were appalled at the nature and content of the two articles that appeared in your paper on 27th February, and are considering their legal position. We note than it is intended to publish a further article on 6th March, and as a matter of fairness, we would request that you provide our clients with details of what this article is to cover, so that the have an opportunity to comment and make you aware of any inaccuracies.

Further, we must ask you to preserve all materials that have been generated and used in compilation of the various articles as they may be required to be disclosed in the course of legal proceedings.

Yours faithfully,
DAVIES ARNOLD COOPER

Within weeks, Deer completely stopped his investigation of the company that would become GlaxoWellcome one year later and GlaxoSmithKline five years after that. He would never conduct another investigation into that company again. He would instead conduct many “investigations” into those injured by its vaccines.

His first victim was Margaret Best. She was the mother of a vaccine-injured man and was interviewed in the very last article from Deer’s 1994 Septrin investigation.

She had just won a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Wellcome and was quoted recommending Septrin victims seek specialist lawyers for possible litigation. Years later, Deer would publish an article claiming her son’s disability was not caused by vaccination.

In 2011, Autism Investigated’s editor showed he omitted any mention of her in the version of the Septrin article posted on his website. He chopped the two paragraphs of text in which she was quoted.

Deer would subsequently claim he just posted a shorter version published in one of the newspaper’s editions. Yet in his later article denying her son’s vaccine injury, he would lie that he had not spoken to her prior to his work for that piece.

Margaret Best was not the only person Deer turned on following his very short-lived Septrin investigation. He also turned on investigative journalist Martin Walker, an old ally from Deer’s earlier investigations of Wellcome’s AIDS drug AZT.

In 1993, Walker published the book Dirty Medicine that discussed Deer’s AZT investigations and the blowback he faced from pro-AZT activists. The book also mentioned Septrin’s defects and Margaret Best’s vaccine case, likely inspiring Deer to write about both.

Just after Wellcome’s legal threat against Brian Deer’s newspaper, he made an angry phone call to Martin Walker attacking him for his book’s criticism of Wellcome. Walker later wrote of the exchange in an epic open letter to Deer in 2008:

I knew that was the case the day that I picked up my phone to hear your angry voice berating me for having groundlessly criticised Wellcome in my book. This call came around the time you wrote your lengthy but anodyne feature in The Sunday Times on the Wellcome Foundation and it’s Trust. In your phone call, the first one I had from you since I worked with you on your chapter in Dirty Medicine, you accused me of writing terrible things about Wellcome, without giving them the right of reply. I recall you saying something like ‘you’re no better than the mafia, you just attack people without them being able to defend themselves’. I must admit that I was very confused and shocked by this call, but I did get the firm impression of someone trying to cover their past tracks, brushing the soft earth with a piece of driftwood.

So Brian Deer told Martin Walker, “you’re no better than the mafia, you just attack people without them being able to defend themselves.” Just before that, Wellcome’s lawyers told Deer’s newspaper in their legal threat, “we would request that you provide our clients with details of what this article is to cover, so that the have an opportunity to comment and make you aware of any inaccuracies.” Wellcome was speaking to Martin Walker through Brian Deer.

No wonder he cut any mention of Margaret Best in his final article of his Septrin exposé on his website. Had he left it in, it would point to the fact that he completely turned on her so Wellcome won’t sue him into bankruptcy.

Even that wasn’t enough for the company that is now GlaxoSmithKline. In 2004, Brian Deer would use stolen medical records from children that developed autism from MMR vaccination to begin his attacks on MMR-autism research. Deer obtained them from the GlaxoSmithKline-funded Head of Medicine Sir Mark Pepys at the hospital where those children were seen.

Deer’s attacks were prompted by the withdrawal of legal aid from families suing for MMR vaccine injury. At that time, GlaxoSmithKline was represented by lawyers from Davies Arnold Cooper. That was the same firm that threatened Deer’s newspaper all the way back in 1994.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield Turncoat Author DENIES Retraction Was of Autism-Vaccine Link Possibility

The Lancet

“the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health…we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings” – 10 of the 13 coauthors of Andrew Wakefield’s paper.

“That’s [autism-vaccine possibility retraction] not what we said. We retracted the interpretation that was all. We retracted the interpretation that was all.” –One of those turncoat authors to Autism Investigated

Autism Investigated has spoken with one of the turncoat authors of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s landmark 1998 paper. That author denied retracting the autism-vaccine link possibility to Autism Investigated, repeatedly insisting just the “interpretation” was retracted.

“I don’t want to carry on with this conversation,” the author said and then hung up on Autism Investigated.

So what was retracted then if not the possibility but the interpretation? Apparently, the possibility wasn’t retracted just the fact that the possibility was raised from seriously ill children who developed their first symptoms after vaccination.

What a disgusting individual GlaxoSmithKline’s “superstar” Sir Mark Pepys is for engineering this fraudulent retraction. What a disgusting company GlaxoSmithKline is for continuing to fund him. They have such control over the United Kingdom but they won’t have that same control over the United States.

ROYAL FREE SOURCE Implicates Mark Pepys in Dr. Andrew Wakefield Coauthors’ Retraction

Mark Pepys

Photo Credit: University College London, of which Royal Free is an affiliate

Autism Investigated spoke to an inside source of the Royal Free Hospital from when coauthors of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 paper retracted its interpretation of a possible vaccine-autism link. That source has confirmed the hospital’s role in sanctioning the retraction and also implicated then-Head of Medicine Mark Pepys. Pepys forced Wakefield out of the Royal Free two years before the retraction.

When Autism Investigated asked if Pepys was personally involved, the source responded:

“It’s been so many years I can’t say for sure categorically, but I would expect so.”

The source also indicated Pepys was one of “two or three” Royal Free officials who supported the retraction. Prior to the retraction, the hospital released a statement signed by the Royal Free and University College Medical School’s Vice Chancellor lying that Andrew Wakefield concealed his work in vaccine injury litigation from the hospital.

Throughout Pepys’ time at the hospital, he enjoyed considerable support from GlaxoSmithKline and its precursor GlaxoWellcome. He would win the GlaxoSmithKline Prize in 2007 as well as a knighthood from the Queen in 2012 alongside the corporation’s CEO.

Mark Pepys has praised the use of medical records stolen from the Royal Free Hospital for GlaxoSmithKline-sponsored vaccine propaganda. Instead of investigating the theft, he “investigated” his own hospital’s doctors for doing their jobs. That’s because he leaked them just as he forced the Wakefield coauthors’ retraction.

GlaxoSmithKline’s longtime involvement in vaccine misconduct didn’t begin or end with Pepys. Dr. Wakefield has himself stated that he believes he was targeted because GlaxoSmithKline was indemnified from vaccine injury liability over its since-withdrawn measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

The company also hired an epidemiologist while he was manipulating safety studies of the vaccine preservative thimerosal for CDC. A GlaxoSmithKline adviser was involved in an as-yet-failed attempt at making another CDC scientist recant his statements acknowledging evidence of a vaccine-autism link.

Just last week, a doctor who co-founded Britain’s Cochrane Collaboration was ejected from the organization he helped establish. His dismissal followed his criticism of Cochrane’s favorable review of HPV vaccination: another GSK market. GlaxoSmithKline’s name comes up an awful lot in vaccine issues, more so than any other pharmaceutical company it seems.

However, there have been no greater targets of attack by GlaxoSmithKline than Dr. Andrew Wakefield and the children in his paper whose medical records it stole. There is also no worse GlaxoSmithKline shill than Sir Mark Pepys.

Sir Mark Pepys Was Knighted with GlaxoSmithKline CEO in 2012

Sir Andrew Witty, CEO of GlaxoSmithKline 2008-2017, The Irish Times

Glaxo-funded Mark Pepys was knighted with GlaxoSmithKline’s CEO in 2012. That was after Pepys forced autism-vaccine scientist Andrew Wakefield out of his job, forced his coauthors to retract and leaked vaccine-injured children’s medical records to an opposition researcher. Pepys was knighted for “services” to biomedicine. Witty was knighted for “services to the economy and to the UK pharma industry.”

GSK’s Andrew Witty knighted

Published on 03/01/12 at 11:31am

GlaxoSmithKline chief executive Andrew Witty and former ABPI director general Richard Barker were among the recipients in the 2012 New Year Honours List.

Witty was knighted for services to the economy and to the UK pharma industry, while Barker – who stepped down from his post in June – received an OBE for his work in the pharma sphere.

Elsewhere, there were knighthoods for John Buchanan, chairman of medical devices company Smith & Nephew, for services to industry.

In keeping with the government’s insistence that this year’s Honours were also about ‘local heroes’, there were gongs for people working in less high profile parts of the healthcare sector.

Christine Mills, founder of the cancer charity Hope for Tomorrow, whose fundraising efforts led to the UK’s first mobile chemotherapy unit, received an MBE – as did Terence Monaghan, who set up Stock Cares, a transport service that takes vulnerable residents in Essex to essential health appointments.

Six GPs also got awards, including OBEs for William Cunningham of Corbridge Health Centre in Northumberland and James Kingsland, president of the National Association of Primary Care.

Academics in health and medicine were well-represented in the list: Professor Stephen Bloom, head of diabetes and endocrinology at Imperial College London was knighted for services to medical science.

And Professors John Sissons of the University of Cambridge and Mark Pepys of University College London Medical School received knighthoods for services to research and education in clinical medicine, and to biomedicine, respectively.

There was also an OBE for Gideon Ben-Tovim, chair of Liverpool NHS Primary Care Trust, for services to health.

Adam Hill

Originally published on Pharmafile

Non-Profit Co-Founder Ousted By Vaccination Ideology He Supported

Cochrane Gøtzsche

Founder of non-profit Cochrane Collaboration Dr. Peter Gøtzsche, John McDougall YouTube

“We acknowledge the concerns that groups ideologically opposed to vaccination may exploit scientific uncertainties or propagate fraudulent research, e.g. Andrew Wakefield and co-workers’ unfounded claim that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine can cause autism. However, this does not mean that we should not openly discuss and investigate possible harms of vaccines in a misguided attempt to protect their reputation.” – Gøtzsche et al. to the European Ombudsman, November 2, 2017

What Peter Gøtzsche claimed to denounce in the second sentence is exactly what happened to Dr. Andrew Wakefield and what has just happened to Gøtzsche himself. A co-founder of the non-profit Cochrane Collaboration and director of the Nordic Cochrane Centre has been evicted from the board of the organization he helped establish after publishing critically on the HPV vaccine. Sound familiar?

Wakefield’s GlaxoSmithKline-funded ex-boss Mark Pepys admitted, “We paid him to leave.” Then Pepys forced Wakefield’s coauthors into a retractionsabotaged vaccine injury litigation in the United Kingdom and leaked medical records to a freelance opposition researcher.

Yet the victim, according to Gøtzsche as recently as last May, is the opposition researcher who illegally obtained disabled children’s medical records (translated from Danish):

“He (Wakefield) is a fraud. And it is quite unreasonable that people are shooting at Brian Deer who revealed it. He has made a sober contribution, and BMJ’s chief editor also calls Wakefield’s study a fraud. It takes a lot for an editor-in-chief to say such things. I have nothing more to say.”

It takes a lot of Merck and Glaxo money to say such things. That’s the same editor who ironically cites Wakefield not joining his coauthors in the fraudulent, Pepys-forced retraction as evidence of fraud. But Gøtzsche probably thought he could insulate himself from attack by throwing Wakefield under the bus. Sorry doc, doesn’t work like that.

Either you can criticize any vaccination or none at all. Either all doctors are safe from pharmaceutical industry retaliation or none are. Obviously, no one is safe. Wakefield was the rule, not the exception. Criticizing vaccinations brings you into “disrepute” no matter who you are.

Too bad Peter Gøtzsche didn’t get the memo before he was ousted from his own non-profit organization. GlaxoSmithKline wants to profit off all its drugs and vaccines. The doctor is no economist. He’s also no crusader against the pharmaceutical industry, just an opportunistic hypocrite.