All Episodes
Previous Next
March 26, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
54:41
Big Pharma's massive bribery network exposed_ the Health Ranger on the Alex Jones Show, July 2012
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Let's go to another caller, Allie in Illinois.
You're on the air.
Go ahead, Allie.
Hi, Mike.
It's so nice to talk to you.
I listen to the show every day, and I've never called in before, but when I heard Blair's story, I had to call in because I used to work for a company that managed that Speaker Bureau program.
Really?
Tell us more.
Yes.
Well, they paid out.
We paid out those honorariums, quote-unquote, to speakers to go around and tell other doctors to prescribe.
And get this, the company's name that I worked for was called Scientific Voice.
That's some Orwellian speak right there.
But we would pay them up to $3,200 for an hour's worth of work.
And these doctors got to think that they were rock stars.
They would go around thinking that they were so cool.
I mean, making a living off of talking to other doctors.
And honestly, the only thing bigger than their heads was their wallets.
They were so egotistical and so rich from it.
It was insane.
This is awesome that you called, Allie.
Let me ask you some more questions then.
So your company was the in-between, like a pharma company would hire your company to sign up a lot of doctors to be speakers and would manage that relationship?
Exactly.
And we would try to manage all of the little regulations in between.
What Blair was saying earlier also about the slide presentations that the doctors would use, absolutely those were written by the marketing people.
My direct clients were the marketing people at Sanfio Ventus, AstraZeneca, YS... And absolutely, the doctors were paid to prescribe.
Wow, wow.
So what was the behavior of the doctors?
Were they willing to sell out to get this money?
What was their attitude about all this?
Are you kidding me?
They loved it!
They would, like, tack on these speeches into a vacation.
They would go off, they would have dinner, lunch, breakfast with other doctors, and then get the hotel paid for them, get their airfare paid, and they would take a couple of days also extra and just go on vacation.
And these are the people responsible for your health, many people believe.
Remember that, folks.
When you go see your doctor, you're probably dealing with a criminal who accepted bribes.
That's what these are.
These are bribes.
These are kickbacks.
But they were never talked about that way, right, Ali?
They were just sort of honorariums, that kind of language.
Absolutely.
And it's so funny because I'm sure all of the listeners right now are shocked by this.
This was every day obvious for us.
I knew it was wrong in my heart and my soul.
I knew that this was wrong, which is why I had to get out of it.
But it was so blatantly obvious what was going on.
But everybody just, like, she kept walking toward the edge of the cliff, just kept doing it, just didn't care.
I mean, the doctors wanted the money.
The reps...
We're getting money.
The more prescriptions that they got, the better their sales were, the better their region did, the more kickbacks they got.
Everybody was complicit.
It was not a big secret.
Everybody knew what they were doing.
We're not going to break you up, but when we do, could you stay on the line?
We want to get your number and talk to you off the air.
You know, you don't have to share your name or make it public or anything, but I'd like to talk to you more.
It sounds like you know some other inside details that the public needs to know about this.
Would you be willing to give our producers your phone number?
Sure, I'd love to talk to you guys.
Thank you.
Okay, great.
Just don't give it live on the air.
You get a million calls.
So let me ask you some other questions.
So how many doctors overall did your company deal with in your estimation?
I mean, it was doctors for each and every single drug.
So it was, for instance, Sanofi Aventis had their overall list of quote-unquote speakers, and then each individual drug had their speakers.
It had to be thousands of Wow.
And what was the highest amount that you saw paid to doctors for these speaking gigs?
$3,200 was the highest that I ever saw.
Well, it was for, usually that was for a day's work.
But, I mean, they could very easily, there were some, sometimes where they would make up to maybe $1,500, $1,800 for an hour for a visit, a lunch, breakfast, or dinner.
But they could go do a breakfast and then a lunch and then a dinner, stack it up, and all of a sudden they're racking up Five or six grand a day.
Yeah, that's what Blair was telling us, exactly that.
They would do a breakfast speech, a lunch speech, a dinner speech, and of course all the meals are paid for by the drug company.
The travel was paid for, the hotel was paid for, even other things, you know, like tickets to concerts and baseball games and Disneyland and places like that were paid for by the drug companies, and then the doctor would walk home from this vacation with an extra, you know, 12 grand in their pocket for two days of giving speeches while they eat.
Absolutely.
And there were so many little things that they could get reimbursed for.
Dry cleaning, meals at the airport, just anything that was incidental toward the trip, they got picked up too.
So what was your position then?
Were you recruiting doctors or what exactly did you do?
Yes, I would recruit the doctors based on the pharmaceutical reps' suggestions.
So they might find a doctor who they thought was in on the deal, so they'd submit their paperwork to get this doctor signed up to be on the Speakers Bureau, and then I would just physically coordinate the meetings and cut the check.
So I would set up the To get the speaker's airfare, hotel, and to get him the slide presentation, everything he needed to do to go to this meeting.
I would set up the on-site meeting, you know, all of the little details.
I mean, it might be a meeting that had 50, 60 people.
It might be one doctor, like Blair was saying.
There were times where the doctor would get paid two grand to go talk to one guy.
Wow, that's funny because I volunteer here to talk to two million people.
I do it because I believe in liberty, but these doctors are just pocketing money to tell lies about pharma.
It's all propaganda education.
Amazing.
Absolutely.
Unbelievable.
I'm really glad you called.
So you said in your heart you felt you knew this was wrong.
Did you eventually leave because of that?
Obviously you're not working with that organization anymore.
What happened?
I was just happy to be getting a paycheck.
And honestly, I didn't know what I was doing at first.
Ali, stay with us.
We've got to go to break.
Sorry to interrupt you.
We've got to go to a quick break.
But stay with us, if you would, please, Ali.
We'll be right back on the other side with a lot more.
Stay with us, folks.
All right, continuing here with our caller, Ali, who helped coordinate these kickbacks, these that would have been called bribes to doctors, these so-called speaking fees.
You know, here's what's going on here, folks, and you're getting this here first on InfoWars.com, The Alex Jones Show.
There is a revolution taking place in medicine.
The exposing of the pharma crimes, the mafia, the corruption, it's all coming out.
The whole thing is a facade of just disinformation, falsified clinical trials, doctors getting kickbacks, FDA bureaucrats getting paid off.
CDC officials getting lucrative multi-million dollar jobs with the vaccine manufacturers.
It is a giant orgy of corruption that's called medicine.
And if you take that medicine out there, folks, if you take these drugs, if you take these vaccines, you are a sucker of these industries.
Who are using your body to make profits for their own rich, filthy rich executives.
You are a sucker if you fall for that.
And the doctors are going to line you up for it too because they're making money under the table at the same time.
You trust your doctor?
You're a fool.
Let me tell you, you trust your doctor?
Unless that doctor is into holistic health and alternative complementary medicine and understands nutrition, if you trust a mainstream drug-taking, drug-pimping doctor, you're a fool.
And yeah, you can quote me on that.
And we're going to continue with Ali right here, who's on the phone.
Ali, amazing information that you were bringing to us.
It just backs up everything else that we've been talking about here with Blair Hamrick, the Glaxo whistleblower, all the other information that's coming out.
What do you think about the big picture, Ali?
Well, I think, as you said, don't let them use your body, but more importantly, don't let them use your mind either.
As I was saying before we broke, I was just a young kid doing this job, and I just needed the money.
And as I got deeper and deeper into it, I worked for the company for three to four years.
I knew it was wrong.
I was unhappy every day.
I just felt bad and icky in my soul.
So I got out.
I started my own business.
I It was completely unrelated to pharmaceuticals, but I started following my own passion and my own heart, and that's what the overall message is.
Follow your passion, follow your heart, and you can't go wrong.
Yeah, I bet you made less money, but your soul felt better for it.
Is that accurate?
Oh, I'm making a fraction of the amount of money that I made, but I'm happy.
I feel like a happy person now.
I never had that before.
What do your family and friends say about all this?
Are they aware of what you just shared with us, that all this is going on, or is it just this big secret that nobody talks about?
I think my, you know, I only really have my parents, and they're very skeptical as well.
So to them, it's, yeah, they kind of get it.
It's no big surprise.
I mean, here in the Midwest, it's the secret that everybody knows, but nobody talks about.
Everybody knows.
It's the Leonard Cohen song.
Everybody knows the dice are loaded, and it's just time to start talking out about it.
It's time to start making life changes about it.
Absolutely.
It's time to catalyze the whistleblowers.
It's time to unleash that truth-telling everywhere.
Why bury your head in the sand out there, folks?
There's no more need for that.
If everybody just told the truth, we could eliminate the corruption, eliminate the fraud, eliminate the suffering.
Bring back liberty.
Bring back honesty.
Honest medicine.
Hey, what about free market medicine?
You know, so people have a real choice.
That's what we need to bring back.
Ali, you sound like a very credible whistleblower.
I really appreciate you bringing your experience to the show today.
We're almost out of time, but any final thoughts before we let you go here today?
Just thank you for letting me talk.
I love Alex.
I love you.
I listen to the show every day.
I never call in.
I'm a little shy, but I finally heard Blair talking today, and I thought, if there's any day to call, it's today.
So I hope that the information has been helpful to you guys, and best of luck, best wishes.
God bless you for everything you've done.
Thank you, Ali.
And you don't sound shy at all.
You sound like you should have been in the InfoWars reporter contest video or something, actually.
So you're doing a great job.
Thanks for calling in.
We have a worldwide exclusive for national radio interview coming up for you right now.
The interview is with Blair Hemrick.
He is one of the two people.
The other is Gregory Thorpe, who were former employees of GlaxoSmithKline.
And Blair, in particular, was a drug rep.
And as he began to see some, I'll say, not quite so above-the-board activities going on inside the company, he raised the alarm.
And he ended up losing his job and has been out of work for many, many years.
We'll talk about that.
And ended up turning information over to the Department of Justice, which then reached a $3 billion settlement with GlaxoSmithKline.
That was widely distributed or widely publicized in the last week or so.
And it's the largest settlement in the history of big pharma.
Now, Blair joins us now here on the Alex Jones Show to give us details about what he saw going on inside the company.
This will give you a clue about the runaway criminality that exists today in what I call mafia medicine.
And Blair Hamrick joins us by Skype video to give us the details.
Blair, welcome to the Alex Jones Show.
Hey, Mike, nice to be here.
Thanks a lot for having me.
You bet.
It's great to have you on.
Now give us just a quick background for the many listeners across the country and around the world.
How did you start out with Glaxo?
What position did you have there?
I started out with GLATSO as a sales rep, just a sales rep calling on primary care physicians.
After a couple of years with the company, I was promoted to what was called a therapeutic area specialist.
And what that is, is basically you call on specialists, more specifically neurologists, Doctors who have not your primary care guys, but your specialists.
And my job, essentially, was recruiting these specialists to speak to other physicians about Glaxo products.
Now, I know that we spoke before, and I asked you about the kickbacks and the bribery to doctors.
I know that in that position as a specialist, one of your jobs was to recruit doctors and make sure they were paid very well to go on speaking gigs.
You told me they could make as much as $2,000 for a 30-minute speech promoting a drug to other physicians.
Tell us about how that worked.
Well, how that works is, you know, depending on how desirable the physician is.
You know, interestingly enough, there's a website where people can look and see if your personal physician is in the pocket of big pharma.
It's called propublica.com.
And you can, and now it only goes back for about a year.
You know, of course, pharma doesn't want to disclose what they've been paying the physicians before that.
But, you Anyway, it's based upon how desirable the speaker is, meaning how well thought of he was, or if they were a high writer, if they wrote a lot of prescriptions, if they had a lot of business.
And it could be anywhere from $500 a talk to $2,500 was one of the most that one of my physicians got.
But they could stack these, they could have multiple talks in one day, I remember you saying, so they could rack up, let's say $6,000 in one day, and it was so lucrative for some doctors, these kickbacks, that they actually stopped seeing patients in their own practice and just became sort of professional speakers making all this money.
Right.
Well, I mean, as I told you before, I mean, some of these offices I would go, I'm sorry about the dog barking.
He's enthusiastic about this, too.
Yeah, she sure is.
Anyway, a lot of these, you know, many times I'd walk into offices and docs are like, oh, you're the guy who sets up the programs?
Can you give me a gig, you know?
And so, you know, these docs...
You know, all their travel was paid for.
They would schedule them for sometimes a breakfast meeting, a lunch meeting, and a dinner meeting all in one day.
And so they get three honorariums is what they call it.
And so they get three of their speaking fees.
So this was characterized by the Department of Justice as a system of kickbacks, and it really is generally just called bribery.
It seems like these doctors were being financially incentivized or sort of paid as a, quote, speaking gig when they would write higher prescriptions for the GlaxoSmithKline drugs.
But a lot of these doctors really in the open market wouldn't command those kinds of speaking fees, and often they would just speak to just maybe six people at a time or things like that.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
I even had one physician, we flew to Louisiana and he wanted me to go with him and he spoke to one physician.
So there was five drug reps, one physician, the doctor that I brought in and we went to a fish camp in Louisiana.
And I don't recall what his honorarium was at the time, but, you know, it was a nice weekend for him to go home to his hometown.
And, you know, so, I mean, it's a pretty nasty business.
I mean, it's, you know, and as I said, you know...
If you read ProPublica, you can see that there's guys still making a lot of money doing this.
Well, yeah, one doctor, this came out in the Department of Justice lawsuit or settlement documents.
One doctor was paid, I believe, around $2 million It also came out that another celebrity radio doctor had received, I think, $275,000 that was reported in the Wall Street Journal, and that he then went on the air and discussed, I think, intimacy or depression during intimacy, but trailed to disclose to his audience that he was taking money from the drug company.
That's right.
Yeah, I think that was Dr.
Drew.
Yeah, right, Dr.
Drew.
Dr.
Drew, and yeah, he was discussing intimacy and depression because many of the SSRIs have sexual side effects, a decreased libido.
And so what Glaxo decided to do was that because Welbutrin is not an SSRI, they decided to promote it to increase libido.
And that's when they came up with that catchphrase, you know, the happy, horny, skinny drug.
And, you know, it was, you know, I mean, these are, you know, these are not, these are chemical compounds that are very dangerous and they're not toys.
You know, it's not a game.
And unfortunately, the company just seems very cavalier in the way that they handled it.
Now, you told me in a previous conversation, and folks, you can check out some of these quotes on naturalnews.com, also on infowars.com.
I'm sure these quotes will be there.
Remind the guys to post that from our site, that most of the slideshows that these physicians used during their speeches, for which they were receiving pretty big dollars, some of them, or most of them, actually came from the company marketing departments.
That's correct.
So essentially the company would hand them money, pay their airfare, set up the hotel, and then give them a PowerPoint presentation to go out and speak?
That's correct.
Give them a PowerPoint presentation.
And then, you know, it was one of the thing, one of the jobs of the representative, you know, because there would always be a representative or manager at these conferences or these these continuing medical education, you know, full tongue in cheek there.
And right.
But but but just along those lines, this kind of, quote, education is required by state medical licensing boards for doctors to keep their licenses.
They have to go and submit themselves to this kind of propaganda, right?
That's correct.
That's incredible.
It's a big facade.
It's absolutely a facade.
At some point in time, myself and Greg Thorpe Just said, you know, this is wrong.
And if a child has a seizure because of the drug that we're promoting is given to a child when it's not even indicated, it's for 18 and above.
It's clearly stated in the package insert it's not for children.
You know, who's at fault there?
And where does the buck stop?
Right.
I have that question for you.
What caused you to stand up and speak out when most people would be happy to have a cushy job?
I mean, you've been out of work.
I think you were blackballed by the pharmaceutical industry.
I know you're not claiming that, but that's just what it looks like to me.
You've been out of work for now, what, 10 years during this battle?
I've had some odd jobs since then, but on all intents and purposes, I have never financially recovered.
When I left the company, I was making about $140,000 a year.
Because of pending litigation, I can't discuss the circumstances that led to my dismissal.
Sure.
And by the way, the law firm, I want to give a shout out to Kenny Ann McCafferty out of Philadelphia.
That law firm specializes in whistleblower cases, and they took on your case, and they achieved quite an amazing victory, the largest settlement in the history.
And that law firm specializes in fraud cases, medical fraud, sometimes tax fraud.
I see your dog very much approves of that as well.
Yeah.
I wish I could, you know, I know we're under time constraints, so I'd go and try to get her to stifle.
I apologize.
Izzy!
That's right.
That's right.
Let me throw in a comment here.
Yeah, go.
If you want to do that.
Let me grab the dog.
I'm sorry.
Okay, let me throw in some comments here while you're doing that.
We'll have better audio clarity for everybody.
But, you know, folks, this is real radio.
This was live radio.
And Blair Hamrick, you know, that's where he lives.
He gave up a cushy job.
It could have been a very wealthy situation for him.
He gave that up to tell the truth, to blow the whistle, so that he could then help protect other people from this kind of thing going on.
And by the way, he told me in a previous interview that at the time he left GlaxoSmithKline, they had over 40,000 speakers on their speakers bureau.
So just as we were talking about this $2,000 for 30 minutes that the doctors were getting paid as, quote, kickbacks, It turns out there were more than 40,000.
The court documents revealed there were 49,000 speakers on Glaxo's Speakers Bureau, which, again, even the Department of Justice characterizes as a kind of an elaborate network of kickbacks.
That Glaxo has pleaded guilty to conducting.
This is not a debate.
It's not like Glaxo is denying this.
They have pleaded guilty to this, and they said we're going to make some changes and we're going to do better, but they pleaded guilty to criminal fraud.
Go ahead, Blair.
Well, I mean, one of the things that's interesting, and why, I mean, I'm not with the company anymore, and I've been away for a while, so I can't attest to what's going on currently, but you're talking about compounds.
Right now in the newspaper, they made a big to-do about Stop paying, you know, stopping paying the reps on market share and going to educating physicians, and that's how they're going to start paying their reps.
But how much can you educate a physician on a compound that's 30 years old or 25 years old?
I mean, you know, you've got a drug like, for instance, Advir.
That is a new compound, but it's basically two very old compounds together.
So how much more education is a person with a business degree going to give a physician that did 10 years of school on a compound that's 25 years old?
Well, that's a really good point.
And, you know, the drug companies are desperate to try to come up with new combinations that they then spin as being breakthrough drugs when, like you described, they're really the same old chemicals just sort of repackaged.
But let's talk about off-label marketing and marketing to children because this is something else that Glaxo pleaded guilty to.
They admitted that they were illegally or in violation of FDA regulations, I should say, marketing these drugs to children that were never approved for children, never even tested for children, no safety record for children.
Give us the lowdown on that, Blair, as the insider who saw it firsthand.
Well, sure.
I mean, you're talking about drugs where just a percent market share can mean a huge sum of money.
So, you know, the company was very concerned about patent expirations on these compounds, and they were trying to squeeze every penny they could.
So, you know, they would say with, like, Wellbutrin or Paxil, you know, they were trying to squeeze every penny they could, so they were trying to find New avenues to generate more money.
And, you know, one of the things that you got to ask yourself is like when you are selling off-label to a child, you know, the package insert has dosing and administration.
Well, what do you tell a doctor, you know, who's going to use it on a 12-year-old?
I mean, how do you tell them to dose it?
I mean, there's some inherent dangers with that.
But just to be clear, Blair, so when you were in meetings with your managers being trained on how to approach doctors and what to say, I just want to be clear, were they telling you specifically, you pushed this drug for children, you know, wink, wink, or how did that go down?
What actually took place?
Well, sure.
Well, there was absolutely.
In fact, you can look in some of the court documents.
There's some documents to the effect that show that they were wanting to promote Wellbutrin for children in a diseased state.
And, you know, I don't want to say too much, but the allegations in the document are for ADHD in children.
So, you know, it was a nod, nod, wink, wink.
We all, you know, there was a written set of rules, and then there were the real rules.
And the real rules were basically, if you didn't sell off-label, you weren't going to get the market shares.
And if you didn't get the market shares, you wouldn't be employed very long.
So there was this really aggressive push, and obviously your salary was tied into probably bonuses for how many prescriptions were written by doctors off-label and on-label both.
Is that how it worked?
That's correct.
And with the way that they were tracking the prescriptions, they couldn't distinguish what was on-label or what was off-label.
It was just get the prescriptions at whatever cost.
And like you said, if you weren't making the numbers, if you were falling to the bottom half of the pool, then they would target you and coach you To start pulling your numbers up.
And so the way to get numbers up was to do speaking programs, bringing these thought leaders in to engage with your physicians, whether it was just bringing a doctor in for a lunch.
Or having a dinner program.
And, you know, many times, I mean, so often they would talk off-label, whether it was for, you know, Wellbutrin for weight loss, or for, you know, ADHD, for sexual dysfunction, or, you know, just children, and the whole gamut.
I mean, it was just, you know, you would have thought that the drug should have been in the water.
Well, they're trying to do that, too.
Yeah, don't say that to too many people.
They're going to try that.
They want to put cholesterol drugs in the water supply.
That's how crazy they are.
But you mentioned, Wellbutrid in particular, that the catchphrase that you would repeat to doctors if you only had a minute to talk to them was the, quote, happy, horny, skinny drug.
And yet, there was no data, there was no clinical trial data whatsoever on the treating sexual dysfunction or weight loss of At all, right?
So that was just a fairytale.
There may have been some shady trials or some data.
They also did this thing called the faxback, where you would engage with your doctor And of course, they would instruct you to, according to our allegations in the complaint, they would instruct you to write doctor request off-label information on whatever drug, and then you would call an 800 number, enter their phone.
We've got to go to a break here.
Stay with us.
We'll continue with you on the other side of this break.
Incredible information here from an insider previously with GlaxoSmithKline.
Stay with us.
We'll be right back with much more straight ahead.
Alright, thanks for continuing with us here on the Alex Jones Show.
Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, filling in, and we are talking with former Glaxo employee and now whistleblower Blair Hamrick, who is one of the top two key people responsible for taking evidence to the Department of Justice that resulted in the $3 billion settlement, the largest in the history of medicine.
Wow, incredible.
Hey, Blair, let me ask you this.
The typical uninformed consumer out there, let's say just a mainstream news watching someone who's not really informed doesn't, for example, listen to the Alex Jones show so that they're not really awakened that much.
That kind of person thinks, this is what they believe, and I want you to tell us why this belief is wrong, if you think so.
But they believe that all the drugs are meticulously tested by upstanding scientists, that it's the gold standard of evidence-based medicine, and that the FDA... What's
So what's wrong with that view of medicine today?
When they start testing it for approval, according to the FDA, a new drug only needs to show that it's better than placebo, that it works better than placebo.
So there's many compounds out there that have been available for years and years and years, that are available generically, that are pennies on the dollar, and these drug companies would never put these products up against Those products sometimes, head-to-head, they only put it through against placebo, because if it's better than placebo, then they get the approval.
Whereas if they put it head-to-head against something that is already approved and is cheap and is efficacious and safe, and they show inferiority to that product, well then, you're taking a drug that may be eight,
nine dollars a pill, and something that may take three cents a Yeah, just to rephrase what you're saying, a lot of the new drugs that are hyped up that are expensive, like you say, $8, $9, $10 a pill, some are even a lot more than that, $50 a pill in some areas.
It may be an old nickel a pill drug actually works better, but they never run the head-to-head test because that would show that the new drug isn't worth the extra $10.
Right.
That's correct.
You know, and maybe safer.
You know, I mean, there's many compounds out there.
For instance, they've got, Glaxo has a new product called Trexamate, which is a combination of an older product of Imatrex and Naproxen.
I think it's either Naproxen or Naproxen.
It's like a common painkiller, yeah.
Right.
And naproxen has been, you know, that drug is like 45 years old.
And Imitrex came out in 19, I want to say 1991, I think is when that drug was launched.
So there you have, you've got a 20-year-old drug and a 40-year-old drug.
They mix them together and they call it a new drug.
Well, and then at the same time, you've got the drug companies actively interfering with the generic drug manufacturers trying to bring drugs to market for cheaper prices.
I saw, for example, I think AstraZeneca just got slapped by the court for trying to engage in that.
Pfizer's being sued under allegations of price fixing and monopolization to prevent a competing generic cholesterol drug from entering the market that would potentially reduce their sales of, I believe, Lipitor.
So you've got these drug companies actually working against the interests of consumers.
Right.
You know, why doesn't the FTC get involved in anti-competitive practices with these companies?
I don't know.
I can't answer that question.
But, you know, what I can say is that for every day that a generic stays off the market, they make tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars a day.
Yeah, they're making money every minute.
Stay with us, Blair.
Please stay with us.
We're going to continue in just a minute with much more from Blair Hamrick.
Welcome to the third hour.
Is it already the third hour of the Alex Jones Show?
Wow, time flies when you're telling the truth, doesn't it?
We're joined in this segment continuing with Blair Hamrick, the whistleblower, former employee of GlaxoSmithKline, one of the key informants that went to the U.S. government that then took action and got a $3 billion settlement out of Glaxo.
Now, we're going to continue with Blair for this segment, and in fact, for the next half hour, so I hope you can stay with us, Blair.
But here's some of the stories we just spoke about.
AstraZeneca tries to block generic drug approvals, gets slapped by the court.
And there's just another case of pharmaceutical companies trying to interfere with free market practices that would actually benefit consumers.
And this is routine.
You probably weren't in that area of the company, Blair, but do you have any other knowledge about drug companies blocking generic drugs that would benefit consumers?
Well, you know, if they don't block, they can also do things like manufacture the compound for the generic companies.
Many times after the drug is made, it gets the approval generically, and they were unsuccessful...
Usually successful at making that time a lot longer, but then when the generic finally comes out, then they'll cut a deal with the generic house to manufacture either the raw compound for them to press it into a pill or maybe even manufacture it themselves.
Sometimes they'll have two Two lines running at the same time, the exact same pill on each line.
One's going in a generic bottle, one's going in a brand name bottle.
So, I mean, there's a lot of malfeasance going on here.
Well, I mean, there's nothing, let's say, technically illegal about having a generic line, but where I have issues is, where are these drugs manufactured?
because I remember reading a lot of stories talking about manufacturing facilities, for example, in Puerto Rico and in India, where they would find machine parts in the pills and they would find specks of paint from the machines.
Well, you know, Cheryl Eckert was the whistleblower in another Glaxo case about a year ago where she was reporting malfeasance going on in Puerto Rico where the drugs were mislabeled.
You know, I mean, all kinds of things.
And even having the reports written to North Carolina in Spanish so that the people at the main office couldn't read the reports.
So, I mean, you know, I mean, Unfortunately, Cheryl, because I was in sales, I'm a pretty good communicator, where Cheryl was on 60 Minutes, and her specialty was something else.
And so she wasn't a communicator, and so she was dismissed very quickly.
But her story is significant in itself.
And so what these companies are doing, it's a very filthy business.
And like I said to you in our last interview, I mean, what are they?
They're a corporate defendant.
And what's a corporate defendant?
It's nothing but a table full of attorneys justifying behaviors and making it up.
I mean, when they can't justify a behavior, they just make a story up.
Yeah, I want to talk to you about that in more detail.
This segment is not carried by all of the radio affiliates, so when we get into the next segment, I want to ask you about CEOs being held criminally responsible, which hasn't happened yet, but I believe that should happen, and I want to get your views on that, Blair.
Sure.
How come these companies can simply admit to felony crimes, admit to fraud, admit to violating federal law, pay a fine, get away with it.
Nobody gets arrested.
Nobody goes to jail.
Nobody goes to prison.
And they just keep doing it over and over again.
In this case, for example, Glaxo paid its $3 billion fine out of, quote, cash reserves.
Yeah, this company is so big.
They have $3 billion sitting around.
Can you imagine?
More than that sitting around.
Hey, is there $3 billion under this table anywhere?
They just pull it out, pay it to the government, keep doing business.
It's incredible.
But stay with us, Blair.
We've got to go to a quick break, and then we'll be right back on the other side with more insider details.
Alright, we're continuing our interview with Blair Hamrick, the insider with GlaxoSmithKline.
Thank you for joining us, continuing with us on the third hour of the Alex Jones Show.
This is Mike Adams, the health ranger, the editor of naturalnews.com filling in.
And if you want to find some documents related to this story, they're on the front page of naturalnews.com right now, by the way, a PDF that you can check out some of the court documents.
I also want to apologize to the callers.
We need to clear the board.
Of callers that are in the queue right now, please, guys.
And I want to invite new callers to come in to ask questions about medicine or the pharmaceuticals in particular as we have Blair Hamrick on as a guest.
And then, again, I apologize to the callers who are on the board about the gun confiscation issue.
Maybe we'll bring that up later in the show.
Again, get back to that.
The number is 1-800-259-9231.
So go ahead and call in if you've got questions or comments about big pharma in general.
Just remember, Blair can't answer your health questions, and I cannot either.
We're not doctors, so please don't ask us health questions.
But Blair, getting back to you, we spoke about the importance of having some corporate responsibility for these kinds of actions.
Why is it that nobody's going to jail?
Nobody's being arrested.
The CEO of Glaxo is not being investigated or prosecuted for these crimes that his company has admitted to committing.
Why is that?
How does that make you feel?
Well, I mean, it's the veil of the corporation.
I mean, you know, a corporation is basically a sociopath, and they have so many veils of protection that...
You know, and so many attorneys, you know, nobody's going to face the music.
And, you know, unfortunately, maybe somebody in the UK will wake up.
I mean, I've already heard that some prime ministers in the UK are calling for an investigation of Glaxo to see if they really have changed like they say they have.
And, you know, quite frankly, if they are a changed company, then why doesn't GlaxoHR give me a call and try to hire me back in their...
In their compliance department.
I'd gladly go back to work for them in their compliance department.
Oh yeah, I bet they would love that, you in their compliance department.
Yeah.
But hey, who knows?
Maybe that's some way they could actually show that they're serious about reforms.
But here's something interesting.
Interesting.
In the natural products industry, if a, let's say, a provider of cherry supplements is investigated by the FTC for what is essentially the same as off-label marketing or making invalid marketing claims, the FTC will often go in and seize all their inventory, shut down their entire the FTC will often go in and seize all their inventory, shut down their entire company, seize the entire customer email list, seize all the This happened to the Life Extension Foundation many years ago, by the way, in an FDA raid.
And then they will require the company to refund the money to every customer in the history of that company.
So my question is, as someone who's covered this journalistically, why doesn't the FTC or the FDA go in and require Glaxo to refund all the money from all the sales of these drugs that they admitted to off-label fraudulent criminal marketing?
Wouldn't that make sense?
Refund everybody.
Wow.
Well, absolutely.
I mean, you know, listen, one of the things...
I mean, I've suffered.
My family and I have suffered from me blowing the whistle, no question.
But I haven't suffered nearly as much as, say, some mother or father whose child committed suicide because their child's doctor was marketed...
Paxil for off-label.
I keep that in perspective.
I don't know.
It would be a breath of fresh air if the punishment fit the crime.
It really would be.
Because then it would be a disincentive.
Exactly.
And the companies would stop doing the Doing the behavior.
That's the issue.
You just nailed it right there, Blair.
It's a disincentive because right now, let's say Glaxo might have made, I'm just guessing, $30 billion off of selling these drugs.
So, okay, $30 billion, they set aside $3 billion and have a stack of cash in the CEO's office, let's say.
That'd be a pretty big stack, even in fiat currency.
But they take the $3 billion, when they get caught, they take the $3 billion, hand it to the feds and say, we're going to keep doing business.
And they never have to pay back their profits that they made illegitimately in the first place.
So they just keep doing business.
It's just a cost of business.
It never ends.
And the way the law reads, the false claims act reads, it's supposed to be $10,000 per violation.
So when you start thinking about every prescription, a $10,000 fine per violation, you know, the company, and the company's not allowed to do business with the, if convicted, the company's not allowed to do business with the federal government at all.
Well, that's the other thing.
It's all smoke and mirrors.
Why does Medicare and Medicaid keep doing business with these companies that admit to felony crimes?
Why does ObamaCare force us to do business with these companies by forcing us to buy into a health insurance system And I know your thoughts on, you know, you like the fact that everybody needs some kind of healthcare safety net.
I understand that.
Right.
But shouldn't we have a choice and not be forced to do business with criminal companies?
I concur with that completely.
I mean, I think that, you know...
Like our education system, everyone has a right to a basic high school education.
I think that everyone should be able to get healthcare, but I don't think what's been proposed is the right way to go about it.
No, look, I used to live in Taiwan, and that's where I went out of college, because we're in an economic recession at that time.
And there, they have a healthcare system that is kind of a government-run system, but it's dirt cheap.
An employer at that time, literally, they were paying about $4 a month per employee for full coverage.
Four bucks a month.
Now, today that might be 20 bucks a month, but imagine if U.S. employers only had to pay 20 bucks a month for each employee.
I don't think there would be much debate about that.
Part of the problem with Obamacare is that it's so expensive it bankrupts the companies.
It bankrupts families, and now it's going to be hit with a tax.
I mean, I didn't mean to get you to the political issue, Blair, but, you know, the criminality of the drug companies becomes an issue when we're forced to do business with those companies.
Right.
I mean, you wouldn't do business with a known criminal if you could help it.
Absolutely not.
And one of the things that's interesting you brought up is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the United States is medical bills.
That's right.
Medical bills.
And I don't remember what the percentage was, but it's like of those people who declare bankruptcy, many of them have insurance.
So, I mean, just because you have insurance doesn't guarantee that they're not going to come after you and bankrupt you.
Well said, Blair.
Let's go to some calls.
We've got callers on the line.
And let's go to Cindy in Iowa first.
Cindy, you're on the air.
Go ahead.
What's your question?
Hi, Mike.
Thank you so much for having this guest.
I work at a research facility that has all the companies that y'all named.
I wanted to say that I don't think the efficacy of a lot of the drugs can be, you know, pure as they're reporting to the FDA when When we perform procedures on subjects that they do these studies for a living,
and you're supposed to have a 30-day washout, but yet they do, because there's not like a main database to show all the research places who have done a study, people will do it with those drugs in their system.
Because of money and the financial benefit, way before 30 days, and I know this because I've been working at this facility over 10 years, and I've heard, you know, subjects talk.
And so that is so, to me, how in this age of, you know, technology, how can that be going on?
Because that's the efficacy and what y'all were talking about, the safetiness of these drugs.
So you're saying that about the 30-day washout, you're saying that then they decide, what, they eliminate people from the trial that are having bad results to shape the data to look better, that kind of thing?
No, what I'm saying are the subjects, there's no regulation because the subjects are lying.
They're going to other facilities before that washout and doing studies, and there's no database in the research industry to And so how can the efficacy of the drugs, you know what I'm saying?
Yeah, so they're actually involved in multiple clinical trials at the same time and stacking drugs and things like that.
Good question.
Good question, Sandy.
Thanks for your call.
Blair, your comments on that.
I know you weren't in the research side of the company, so your comments may be limited, but does that ring a bell to anything?
What are your thoughts?
Well, I mean, I do know how to read the studies, and I can pick apart a good study and a bad study.
And unfortunately, many of the people that are in these studies, they're doing it for financial reasons.
They're not doing it because they just coincidentally happen to be at a doctor's office and have this disease state.
So if you have people in multiple studies taking multiple products, Then you're going to have, you know, you're going to have skewed results, whether it's going to be, you know, skewed positive or skewed negative.
You're not going to have the reason you're going to have inappropriate results.
You know, the results.
What kind of person would would I mean, I guess, you know, the economy is being destroyed by Obama policies.
Well, virtually every every president has been destroying the economy lately, but.
People are desperate for work and income.
So, I mean, are they literally just selling their bodies into multiple clinical trials to get drugged up and paid something?
I mean, that sounds like suicide to me.
Yeah, I wouldn't do it.
I mean, as desperate as I've been in the past 10 years, I wouldn't do it either.
But you see it in the newspaper all the time, you know.
Drug study, we'll pay you for your time.
And so, you know, you get to see the doctor for free.
And so, you know, they coerce you into this.
And yeah, you become a human guinea pig.
Wow.
Wow.
And then, of course, well, I remember the quote.
This was a pharma discussion behind the scenes.
Why do you use human guinea pigs?
And the answer is they're cheaper than monkeys.
I mean, lab monkeys cost more money than paying a human down the street to do it.
It's incredible.
And, you know, the animal rights folks, you know, would be offended if they, you know, if, you know, what they do to the rats and the rabbits, but what they do to humans, it's, you know, hey, we've got to get rid of all the human beings.
It's incredible, isn't it?
Then there's experiments like in Nigeria on children.
There's experiments in Guatemala on the prisoners that took place.
The whole history.
Jonas Salk and his experiments on antibiotics in prisoners and all kinds of things.
Mental asylums.
Incredibles.
A lot more straight ahead.
Stay with us here on the Alex Jones Show.
We'll be right back.
All right, we're back.
Thank you for continuing with us.
We've got Blair Hamrick for just about five more minutes, and thank you for continuing to stay with us, Blair.
Wow, a lot of great information you've already shared with us.
We've also got callers on the line.
Are you okay to take another call, Blair?
Sure.
All right, here we go.
Roger from Minnesota calling in.
Roger, you're on the air.
Thanks for joining us.
What's on your mind?
Yes, first of all, I want to congratulate Blair for being a whistleblower because it takes a lot of guts and a lot of courage to do that.
But what's on my mind, Blair might be able to respond to this too.
I just had my first granddaughter about a year or so ago, and I've been able to convince my daughter and son-in-law of the evils of vaccination.
I'm totally anti-vaccination, anti-big pharma.
But my daughter has supposedly done some reading herself also, and she just thinks that a minimum my daughter should have two shots, the pertussis and the polio vaccine.
Of course, I read about the polio vaccine, and the reason my daughter thinks she ought to get the polio vaccine, they plan to travel, go to Europe, and, of course, India has high incidence of polio, and I know it's caused by the vaccinations they're receiving over there.
So my daughter is very intelligent, my son-in-law is very intelligent, and they respect me, they respect my knowledge, but I just can't get them to convince them, hey, don't give my granddaughter any vaccinations.
None of them are any good.
Well, you know, the polio vaccine, I mean, we've run those right here on InfoWars.
I'll ask you, Blair, for your comments in a second.
I know you weren't involved in the vaccine division there, but, you know, the polio vaccine has had stealth viruses, SV40, in it throughout history, and there's a lot of paralysis happening today in India, in particular, From the vaccine itself, so people get the vaccine and then they end up with paralysis.
So we know, we know these vaccines are not clean.
I mean, just come on, just look at, I mean, the caller's right.
You can't trust these companies.
Blair, your thoughts?
Well, I tell you what, I was watching Alex's show a couple of weeks ago, and he had the, I forgot the lady's name, who has that movie that's on Alex's website, The Common Good.
Oh yes, right.
Yeah, I don't recall her name at the moment either.
Manukian, right.
Right, right, right.
And, you know, I haven't seen them film, but I did see her interview, and I found her interview captivating.
I like the fact that, you know, she's not so skewed one way or the other.
She's trying to bring both sides of the issue.
Yeah.
And let you decide for yourself.
So I would recommend for Roger to, you know, buy that video.
I think that's great.
I haven't seen it, so I can't endorse it.
That's a great idea.
In fact, I think that's available at Infowarsstore.com, isn't it?
The video?
Yeah.
Yeah, I think so.
Yeah, I think so.
And, you know, I'm not sitting here trying to temp one of your products.
But at the same time, it's, you know, I mean, information is power.
Well, yeah, and I think it's important to hear both sides of the story.
First, there's the deceptive, evil, lying pharma side.
And then there's the truth side to the story.
So, yeah, here are both sides.
I mean, hey, if you want to believe, folks out there, if you want to be injected with the DNA and RNA fragments from diseased animals, go ahead, get vaccinated.
Bill Gates wants you to be a lower population, infertile.
Infertility, reduce human population, you can be part of that.
You win the Darwin Award.
You can give yourself the Darwin Award by getting vaccinated.
That's my answer to that.
Let's take another call, Blair, because I love those calls.
We've got Ed in Arizona now joining us.
Ed, you're on the air with Blair Hamrick.
Go ahead.
Hey, great to talk to both of you guys.
I just wanted to get your take on the massive drugging of the youth we have going on in America right now.
I, as a teenager, was kind of rebellious, kind of questioning the system.
So, you know, my parents, they meant no harm.
They thought they were doing what was best for me at the time.
Took me to see a doctor.
And long story short, got put on a sexer and had some real nasty side effects.
I mean, I turned just into an absolute zombie, gained a bunch of weight.
I mean, there's no way you can wake up if you're taking those drugs.
So I just wanted to get your guys' take on that.
Good point.
Go ahead, Blair.
Well, I tell you what, you know, I mean, unfortunately, you know, what pharmaceutical companies have done to bastardize the research is You know, and, you know, when I was a rep, they used to call, you know, some of the reps, other reps from competing companies would call Effexor side Effexor.
And, you know, I mean, just beating up drugs for no reason.
But, you know, I don't know whether it was a primary care physician that put you on the medication or whatever.
Whether it was a psychiatrist that did so.
I mean, you know, unfortunately, these compounds have side effects, and they're dangerous.
So, you know, to cavalierly, I mean, I'm sure your parents were just trying to help you out.
And because, you know, going through, you know, the problems of adolescence.
But, you know, I mean...
Yeah, because childhood is a disease, I guess, is the thing.
It's called the human condition.
You know, people get sad.
Blair, we're out of time, but I want to thank you for joining us.
It's been an inspiration to hear you telling the truth.
You're awesome.
And please keep us posted about the outcome with the Department of Justice.
Will do.
I really appreciate you having me.
All right.
Great to have you on.
That was Blair Hamrick, everybody.
And I'll talk to you after the show, Blair.
Just touch base with you.
A great guy, just willing to tell the truth.
Stay with us.
▲
Export Selection