Homes pharmaceuticals, in strong conflict of interest, today they finance countless institutions and private doctors. They finance popular science bodies, journals that publish scientific studies, medical and pediatric societies, hospitals, research institutes, private foundations and private doctors. They pay training for doctors, many companies connected to AIFA and ISS, and most of the scientific societies that have drawn up the new vaccination calendars (FIMG, SIP, FIMP).
YVS Front Page – December 19, 2017
It is the pharmaceutical companies themselves who declare it, since there has been a regulation for a couple of years, called EPFIA (1), a sort of code of ethics for pharmaceutical companies designed to make transparent all the funding that multinational drug companies give to individuals and entities. So let's see what and how many are these loans:
- in 2015, GSK granted loans for more than 11 million euros (2);
- Merck & Co 12 Million Euros in 2016 (3);
- Sanofi 4 Million Euros in 2016 (4);
- Bayer 8 Million in 2016 (5);
And this only in Italy! But who are the subjects and how much do they receive from these benefactors? Well, Big Pharma try to please everyone. From the long lists it can be seen that the first are private doctors, who receive from a few hundred euros to several thousand. Then there are the marketing companies, the companies that organize events and congresses and the major scientific journals of the sector, which obviously will give free space to the publications of dissonant voices (ed: ironic!). Then there are scientific societies (including pediatric ones), universities, foundations of all kinds, medical orders, local health authorities and so on and so forth. So it is evident that Big Pharma, donating large sums of money, holds the fortunes of research, hospitals, scientific publications and everything related to medicine in its hands. The doubt that today the medical science is equal to multinational pharmaceutical science it's legitimate.
AIFA and most of the press have stated that the turnover of vaccines is a tiny fraction of the total turnover of these multinationals (6). Except that there is ample evidence that Big Pharma spends far less to bring a vaccine to market than any other drug, given that they have far fewer obligations (7). Then there's the aspect of the reparations for adverse events. If I suffer a contraindication from a traditional drug (and I can prove it), the pharmaceutical company compensates me. If I take vaccine damage (and can prove it), it is State Italian which compensates me, the pharmaceutical company comes out unscathed! Do you think it is normal?
So let's start thinking about these data:
As can be seen from the ranking of the pharaonic turnovers of pharmaceutical companies, PZIFER is in first place with only 43.112 billion of $. One billion in Italy alone (8). And the "top seller" product, the one with the highest turnover, is a vaccine. It's about PREVNAR13. GSK also has on the podium, in second place, PEDIARIX, a vaccine. So not only do vaccine products achieve significant turnover, but they enjoy a wider margin since it costs much less to place them on the market.
Many conflicts of interest lurk behind political choices. The same ANAC (National Anti-Corruption Authority), in the name of the president Raffaele Cantone, claims that the conflict of interest exists and an attempt is being made to put an end to it (9). The question is which government will do it?
Sources:
(1) Sobiitalia.it – The EPFIA code on transparency – PDF
(2) VacciniInForma.it – Pharmaceutical companies report – PDF
(3) Msd.com – Final disclosure report 2015 Italy – PDF
(4) Sanofi.it – Code of ethics
(5) Bayer.com – Transparency report 2016 – PDF
(6) Corriere.it – Vaccinate those who really earn
(7) IlGiornale.it – Vaccines? They are all approved without proper studies
(8) Pfizer.it – The numbers
(9) Fedaiisf.it – Alleged conflict of interest on vaccines
