http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26970873
"UK drug company GlaxoSmithKline is facing a criminal investigation in Poland for allegedly bribing doctors, BBC Panorama has discovered.
If the allegations are proved, GSK may have violated both the UK Bribery Act and the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It is illegal for companies based in either country to bribe government employees abroad.
A former sales rep for GSK in the Polish region of Lodz, Jarek Wisniewski, said: "There is a simple equation," he said. "We pay doctors, they give us prescriptions. We don't pay doctors, we don't see prescriptions for our drugs."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
GlaxoSmithKline Allegedly Bribed Polish doctors
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 23 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @12:46PM
So, what the sales rep was really saying was "these drugs aren't that good, if they were we wouldn't have to take these steps". Just, WOW.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 14 2014, @01:00PM
On the contrary, they are good. So good that once hooked is very hard to quit [wikipedia.org].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Informative) by Nobiscuit on Monday April 14 2014, @03:20PM
I worked for GSK for many years, including before the various mergers, GSK, Glaxo Wellcome and formerly Glaxo.
Their wet dream is a drug that is required to be taken for life(however long or short that maybe). It is not in the interest of the shareholders for drugs to be administered that cure the patient after one dose or short term course of treatment. HIV/Aids treatment is a classic example. Why on earth would they cure it when you can take various cocktails for life. The USA is a huge market for GSK(at the time). The majority of what was manufactured where I was employed was exported to the USA.
Used to make me laugh when I used to see their mission statement. Disease being the enemy or whatever it was at the time. No, its generating dividends for the shareholders.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @01:09PM
There is often very little difference between competing drugs when it comes to their efficacy. The differences are usually in the side effects and administration methods, and even those could be debated (for example, is constipation better or worse than dry mouth?).
Given the strong similarities between certain drugs, it's possible that the difference comes in form of a bribe, especially if the culture doesn't frown on such a practice.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @01:52PM
I read that as, all the doctors are corrupt too, not just the sales reps.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday April 14 2014, @01:56PM
At least in the US, when a major corporation is caught committing a crime, they are sentenced with a token fine and a very stern warning to never ever do that again. One of my favorite Dave Chappelle sketches [cc.com] gives an idea of what the world might be like if crack dealers received the same treatment.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Monday April 14 2014, @05:40PM
This is because you can't put an entire corporation in jail.
Therefor all penalties end up being monetary. And since they are usually the result of corporate policy rather than acts of individuals own will, there is seldom any one person you can point to and threaten with jail time. Nor can you just toss the CEO in the slammer, especially if he/she can irrefutably claim no knowledge or approval of the crime.
In the US, drug companies don't bribe doctors. (At least not with things so crass as stacks of money. There may be junkets and private yachts and vacation villas that get used by some doctors under nebulous terms, but the IRS is cracking down on that). The drug companies do contribute to doctors' favorite causes, clinics, etc, and they give a lot of free samples.
My brother in law, a doctor, built several clinics in many rural areas, and the funding of these was never totally transparent, because the resident population was pretty much strictly low income folks. He always claimed he had just enough government grant money to make the total funding seem plausible, and held fund risers, where he received "anonymous donations" (which he always stated while making the "QUOTE" sign with his fingers. I learned not to ask.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday April 14 2014, @08:05PM
Corporate policy didn't just spring out of the ground. Some person or people wrote that policy, and sent memos/emails to the appropriate people that said what the policy was. Some person or people enforced that policy to ensure that it was actually corporate practice, and made decisions based on that policy such as firing people that protested and promoting people that followed the policy. Some person or people made sure that there was the necessary budget to follow the policy.
So yes, you can't put a corporation in jail, but you can treat it like the criminal conspiracy it is. Jailable individuals all had roles to play, and whether or not the CEO is responsible is irrelevant - somebody was, and just because they organized their crime in a comfortable conference room rather than the back of Fronty's Meat Market.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Boxzy on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:16AM
...This is because you can't put an entire corporation in jail.
Yes, yes you can.
What you do, is you confiscate the corporations letters of incorporation and lock those up.
Then when the corporation next tries to pay its employees it finds the bank accounts have been legally sealed for the length of the jail term.
THIS is exactly what happens to real human beings, why not to a corporation?
Don't give me BS about suffering of innocent employees, corporations are people remember? If your employer commits a crime you expect to suffer.
Go green, Go Soylent.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:32AM
The law does not allow for leisure of bank accounts for for petty bribery.
Jeezus I hope you never are put in charge of enforcing the laws.
Petty things become hanging offenses just by snapping your fingers?
There is no man quite as dangerous as a man with a plan to reform society.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Boxzy on Tuesday April 15 2014, @06:27AM
This sort of attitude is why society is on a death spiral into fascism. If proper penalties are not given to corporations then you get everything you deserve. Either Corporations are legal constructs that can be disbanded by law, OR they are people that can be subject to law. ANYTHING else is tantamount to removal of law.
Go green, Go Soylent.
(Score: 4, Informative) by umafuckitt on Monday April 14 2014, @02:00PM
Check out Ben Goldacre's book, Bad Medicine [theguardian.com]. It's pretty eye opening, and covers these sorts of bribes and more.
(Score: 1) by gidds on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:34PM
Actually, the book's called Bad Pharma [wikipedia.org]. But yes, it's pretty eye-opening. I'm about half-way through; it's quite heavy going, but covers a lot of important stuff that most people will get pretty angry about once they know.
Ben Goldacre's previous book, Bad Science [wikipedia.org], is a shorter, lighter, and easier read, covering a wide range of quackery such as nutritionists, placebos, homeopathy, and the MMR hoax. Recommended.
[sig redacted]
(Score: 2) by umafuckitt on Wednesday April 16 2014, @01:13PM
My bad.
(Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Monday April 14 2014, @02:01PM
I think the story is significant because GSK's reps were recently caught paying off doctors in China in a similar scheme. So is this a part of GSK's corporate culture, and tacitly allowed in all regions? Is it common practice among all pharma companies doing business in the developing world? Does this also happen in the developed world? I suspect the answers are all "yes" to greater or lesser degrees, and we'll be hearing more about the issue over the next few years.
- fractious political commentary goes here -
(Score: 2) by MrGuy on Monday April 14 2014, @02:22PM
I agree with everything you said except the last fragment "we'll be hearing more about the issue over the next few years."
As traditional media outlets slowly slide onto the dustbin of history, I'd argue that the number of organizations/individuals with the time, resources, and ability to do in-depth reporting on issues like this lessens by the day.
The press of the next decade will be less well equipped than the press of the last decade to investigate large-scale long-running issues like this.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday April 14 2014, @03:23PM
Well its not like "big media" has been anything but a corporate lapdog and government asskisser for the better part of 40 years anyway. Ever since Watergate those in power realized its better to simply buy out the press than to try to spin it so the big corps sucked up all the news orgs and now its like the bit in Airplane "4 alarm fire makes way for glorious new tractor factory!".
If you wanna see which ones are the worst bought simply go back to the Wikileaks story and see which ones jumped as fast as they could to the "ZOMFG Assange didn't use a rubber!" non-story as soon as their handlers passed it out. You look and ALL the major media outlets, the Post, the Times, they dropped every bit of reporting on all the dirty deals reported in the leak to do NOTHING but talk about where/when Assange got laid. Of course when you follow the money and see how many of these corps that own places like the Times ALSO have big government contracts? Don't bite the hand that feeds and all that.
As for TFA? Probably a good 75% of the everyday ailments could be treated by generics so its really not surprising that the big pharma bribes docs to push the name brands, I always thought it hypocrisy that they banned cigarette ads because they were bad for you but at the same time allowed all those "ask your doctor" ads for drugs with more side effects than a cigarette has ingredients. I guess I'm lucky as I have an old family doc that works on the "if it ain't broke" rule of medicine so if some 30 year old drug works good for you? That's what ya get.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 1) by Hawkwind on Monday April 14 2014, @06:02PM
I find myself wanting to agree with you, but why is this issue being raised now? It appears they've been knocked down for the same thing in China, and in December they felt the need to announce changes in their sales tactics: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25415485 [bbc.com].
Does anyone know why all of the concern for a practice that has been around for a long time?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by frojack on Monday April 14 2014, @05:59PM
There is another possibility. Namely that your/our western moral indignation is not universal, and that bribes are not considered criminal in all cultures. In short, our indignation may be just another example of western arrogance.
Many cultures can't afford to pay petty government officials enough, and look the other way when these petty bureaucrats supplement their income with bribes, (under a variety of names [jdsupra.com].)
In the west, we bribe (tip) waiters and waitresses for better service. We "tip" doormen for access to the club, Nobody thinks anything about it.
I once found myself waiting forever while a Mexican police man slowly filled out the parking ticket, tearing it up and starting over. Finally it dawned on me, he was waiting for me to cross his palm. Not having a clue about how much was expected, I simply asked him strait out in my broken spanish: "We gringos don't know what the going rate is for "pre-paying" this ticket, could you suggest an amount that would cover the fine?". It turned out to be 25% of the fine, and no ticket was issued. I know. I'm a bad boy. I did in Mexico as the Mexicans.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Monday April 14 2014, @06:25PM
> bribes are not considered criminal in all cultures
Absolutely a possibility. My travel experiences in the developing world lead me to believe that bribes are common and accepted there. Whether they are thought of as criminal, I can't say.
I would say the same about speeding in the US. It's common and accepted, and there is a moral ambiguity about it which leaves it sometimes considered criminal and sometimes not, regardless of the actual law.
- fractious political commentary goes here -
(Score: 2) by MrGuy on Monday April 14 2014, @02:25PM
I get the UK Bribery Act applying, but how does the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act come into play? Isn't GSK still a UK-based company? Last I checked, it listed on the LSE.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday April 14 2014, @08:44PM
This makes me wonder too, why does the US even have a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act? What's the point? It's perfectly legal to bribe politicians in the US, so why do they want to restrict it elsewhere?
(Score: 1) by monster on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:52PM
Didn't you receive the memo? USA laws are expected to be applicable [wikipedia.org] worldwide [wikipedia.org]. What? what is that "jurisdiction" thing you talk about?
</rant>