Once agan we are exposing Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas in our opinon his continued greed for money and continued lack of care for his patients, who it is our experience that Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas only spends about five minutes with each patient. This is not enough time to really evaluate the needs of each patient. A full evaluation time normally is about one hour for each patient in order to have a proper evaluation of a patient’s problems and needs and, if needed, to prescribe a drug, but they each comes out after the five minute session with some kind of drug prescribed. They even have a code if you do not buy into their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DMS) of voted upon “conditions” or “labels”, it is called “V15.81 Noncompliance with treatment” it means you are mentally ill if you do not go for their treatment which always means Psychotropic drugs, you must admit they covered everything to get you on Psychotropic drugs .
See the Forbes Article: How Medicalizing Grief Turns Into Dollars
In our opinion, drug companies are a major contributor to this lack of analysis. Drug companies do not have an interest in patients understanding the impact of specific prescriptions and what the effects could be. Rather, drug companies simply want to sell their product at any cost regardless of the impact on pateints. How do the drug companies do this? The drug companies pay doctor’s to perform various “services.” In effect, what the drug companies are really doing is paying doctors to push their specific products. In our opinion in this case of Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas, Pfizer we have now found out paid Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas fees of $28,686 for “Meals,Travel,Speaking.” In our experience, let’s tell it like it is that is. The $28,686 has nothing to do with Meals/Travel/Speaking/and everything to do with prescribing Pfizer products to patients – regardless of whether or not they need it. Combine this with the money, Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas gets from Elli Lilly and it shows in our opinion that Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas , along with his five minute evaluations, the excessive causing of divorces because of poor medical care, and himself unethically telling people to leave their mates voliating the doctors oath of “do no harm”, that he does not care about his patients and the harm he does to them and their families, all he cares about is the money he can make, and we are proving it with the more payments we are comming up with that he gets from the drug companies.
Source Dr. Mercola
Psychotropic drugs is a story of big money. These drugs fuel a $330-billion psychiatric industry, without a single cure — and now kill an estimated 36,000 people every year, with the death toll still rising.
This is part one of a riveting 10-part documentary containing more than 175 interviews with lawyers, mental health experts, the families of victims and the survivors themselves.
Read these white papers (click on the titles to open then):
- DOCTORS’ OPEN LETTER TO GOVERNMENTS
- Psychiatry’s Diagnostic System: A Manual for Selling Drugs
- The Chemical Imbalance Lie: Marketing Disorders to Sell Drugs
- Psychiatry’s Massive Fraud
- See previous posts dated December 10 on Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas and his fraud of prescribing medication in which he cannot prove that the drug is needed. In our opinion, Dr. Grant simply dispenses medication whether you need it or not .
- Texas Tribune: Drug Company Payments to Texas Doctors Raise Questions
The data regarding Pfizer payments to Dr.Grant comes from a recent study from propublica.org (used with permission of the site):
- Keep in mind that our database only includes the seven companies that have disclosed payments nationwide. This is only 10% of the major drug companies. The provider may or may not get money from companies not included in this database.
To get the latest payment being made to Dr. Cathal P Grant MD, Bedford,Texas by the Drug Companies
Look at this video:
Doctors Paid Big By Drug Companies?
- Consumer Reports
Consumers Wary of Doctors Who Take Drug-Company Dollars
Most Americans are skeptical of financial relationships between doctors and companies, according to a new, national from the Consumer Reports National Research Center.
Lawsuits Say Pharma Illegally Paid Doctors to Push Their Drugs
Oct. 18, 2010, 10:55 p.m.
Drug companies say the millions of dollars they pay physicians for speaking and consulting justly compensates them for the laudable work of educating their colleagues. But a series of lawsuits brought by former employees of those companies allege the money often was used for illegal purposes — financially rewarding doctors for prescribing their brand-name medications.
In several instances, the ex-employees say, the physicians were told to push “off-label” uses of the drugs — those not approved by the U.S. regulators — a marketing tactic banned by federal law.
In the past three years alone, pharmaceutical companies have anteed up nearly $7 billion for settlements in cases such as one filed by Angela Maher, a former drug sales rep for Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical.
Maher sued the company in Massachusetts federal court in 2003, alleging it pushed an anti-seizure drug for 27 off-label uses. She said company officials rigorously tracked whether their payments to physicians were worthwhile.
Maher said she would regularly hear commentary from her boss after a physician spoke at a dinner program: “‘After he talked last week, our sales went up 8 percent’ or ‘I listened to doc ABC and he barely mentioned’” the drug.
The company settledfor $81 million earlier this year and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of misbranding a drug; Maher was awarded $3 million.
Allegations in other whistleblower lawsuits provide a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the drug marketers:
- Allergan, the maker of Botox, created faux advisory boards solely “to reward hundreds of its top injectors,” federal prosecutors charged this month. More than 200 doctors, for example, were put up at an oceanfront resort in Newport Beach, Calif., in 2005 and 2006 and paid $1,500 to listen to presentations, according to their sentencing memorandum.
Allergan settled with the government for $600 million last month and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for misbranding Botox. Allergan said in a statement that it is “committed to conducting its business with the highest ethical standards and in compliance with all applicable laws.”
- Forest Laboratories created “preceptorship” programs in which physicians were paid up to $1,000 each to allow a sales rep to spend time observing their practice. “In reality, Forest sales representatives used the preceptorships to induce physicians to prescribe [anti-depressants] Celexa and Lexapro,” according to a 2009 complaint filed by federal attorneys in Massachusetts.
The reps filled out “return on investment” forms to justify the payments from 1999 until 2003. One rep noted that a psychiatrist’s prescription “numbers were trending up,” and “we need to keep a good thing going as long as we are still getting this kind of growth,” the complaint said.
A Forest subsidiary pleaded guilty to one felony and two misdemeanors and the company paid $313 million in criminal and civil fines. In a statement, Forest’s CEO said the firm had improved its “compliance program since the events at issue in this investigation, which occurred a number of years ago.”
- In a 2005 lawsuit pending in Pennsylvania , Wyeth Pharmaceuticals is accused of hiring speakers until 2003 based on how often they prescribed the kidney transplant rejection drug Rapamune. “Wyeth management was able to exclude speakers who did not promote Rapamune, and reward those who did so with repeated speaking engagements and resulting honoraria,” according to an amended complaint filed this year by two former sales reps.
Speakers who were “unfavorable or even unenthusiastic” about Rapamune were counseled by drug reps on the “ways in which the speaker might treat Rapamune more favorably,” the complaint said.
The federal government has taken over the lawsuit, which is pending in federal court in Pennsylvania. Pfizer, which owns Wyeth, said in a statement last month that the company is “committed to ensuring that information provided to physicians on the uses, benefits and risks for Rapamune is consistent with its FDA-approved label.”
Last year, Pfizer paid $2.3 billion to settle allegations in other cases that it had illegally promoted its drugs.
- Cephalon was accused of rewarding even poor speakers if they heavily prescribed its narcotic lollipop Actiq and other drugs, according an amended complaint filed in 2008 by a former sales manager. Physicians were paid to attend speaker training even though the company never intended them to speak. Some were paid even when no one showed up to hear them, said the complaint filed in federal court In Pennsylvania.
“Even good public speakers have been dropped by Cephalon,” the lawsuit said, “if experience later showed that they did not themselves write substantial off-label prescriptions.”
Cephalon pleaded guilty in 2008 to a misdemeanor count of selling misbranded drugs and paid $425 million in penalties. In a statement, an official said the company had put a “strong compliance infrastructure” in place that has “improved the accountability of our employees and the transparency of our actions.”
One company continued to pay doctors to discuss its products even after it settled a lawsuit that singled out those speakers for alleged misconduct.
The case, filed against AstraZeneca, detailed how California psychiatrist Rimal Bera discussed the antipsychotic Seroquel for “conduct disorders” in children even though it was not approved for that use.
- AstraZeneca settled with the government for $520 million in April, and like the other firms, signed a corporate integrity agreement promising to follow federal rules.
AstraZeneca paid Bera at least $10,530 for speaking this year, company data show. It paid another doctor named in the case nearly $42,000. A company official would not discuss Bera but said speakers are terminated if they violate company standards. In an interview, Bera said he has become more conscious of when it is permissible to discuss off-label uses.
“We have done a better job certainly as speakers — and I think the industry really has hammered this home,” he said.