THIS Is Why You Can’t Trust Big Pharma

the fda the food and drug administration is the agency that regulates big pharmaceutical companies and it's funded by those same big pharmaceutical companies can you see any potential problems in the fda being funded by the big pharma companies that is regulating the fda used to be funded entirely by taxpayers meaning it was sort of a public funded body and i'm sure there was some room for corruption or whatever but ultimately the fda sort of was housed within governmental authority now is increasingly funded by the institutions and corporations that it regulates what kind of problems could you imagine that might lead to the fda has moved from an entirely taxpayer-funded entity a one increasingly funded by user fees paid by manufacturers that are being regulated user fees this is our fee for using you today close to 45 of its budget comes from these user fees that companies pay when they apply for approval of a medical device or drug when it mental like when people say this all right there's no way we can improve our systems of government yes you can here's a few things don't have the fda funded by the people it's regulating ban lobbying right now immediately oh shoot all right that would definitely be better that would yeah when we say it couldn't be improved we mean we'd prefer you didn't improve it because it's perfectly good for us the way it is now because we can all make loads of money from it even if it causes tremendous unimaginable suffering for ordinary people that is in fact irrelevant oh aren't those ordinary people meant to be who the government represents yeah that is what it's meant to be but it ain't that so shut up changes in more recent years have also increased the number of standard new drug applications approved the first time around by the fda from 38 in 2005 to 61 in 2018 what could have changed in diseases where there are not many medication options for patients 89 of new drug applications were approved the first time around so it seems that there is an impact when the fda is funded by the people that make the product that is meant to be assessing and regulating just based on you know data most recently the kovit 19 pandemic has seen the fda provide emergency use authorization for potential treatments in a matter of weeks not months the infrastructure and capacity to review the available information so rapidly is due in large part to the funding from user fees while the number and speed of drug approvals have been increasing over time so have the number of drugs that end up having serious safety issues coming to light after fda approval wow that's amazing so there's a consequence to that when you approve things quickly because of economic reasons profit driven reasons down the line there are problems of course there are of course if like the free market capitalism it's done wonderful things brilliant things have been achieved we didn't know enough then the same way as in science continued to remember when they used to put those mercury fillings in their mouths oh we're not going to do that no more it's poisoning your blood but at the time it was like oh this is the best we got so we're not condemning science for being a precipice of understanding we are condemning it for not responding to the knowledge that they have currently if you know that having a set of pharmaceutical companies regulated by an agency that they fund leads to bad drugs being released change it stop it stop it immediately and if you don't do that don't claim that what you have is a system that's for ordinary people just just declare outright on the news behind a podium flag waving in the background we're doing this for corporations saying about you shut up shut your mouth we're not interested stop the pretense it's irritating to watch in one assessment investigators looked at the number of newly approved medications that were subsequently removed from the market or had to include a new black box warning over 16 years from the year of approval these black box warnings are the highest level of safety alert that the fda can employ warning users that very serious adverse events could occur 21 of medications were removed or had a new black box warning 21 that's terrible if 21 of our videos were just lies i was like i'll stick a black box on them that's not good enough is it some potential reasons that more adverse effects are coming to light after the drug approval includes senior fda officials overturning scientists recommendations we'd like to overturn that oh we recommend you don't do it overturned and a lower burden of proof for medication approval yeah there's some medication here can you prove it works oh there's too much of a burden proving stuff a yale-led study showed that nearly one out of every three drugs approved by the fda have a new safety issue detected in the years after approval have you not noticed people in the public space now talk about science hey it's science trust science trust the scientists these are the scientists i'm not anti-science look at all this glory well not necessarily this t-shirt this was made by a scientist in a t-shirt shop i mean the camera the laptops all the stuff i love it i love the gadgetry it's fantastic it's wonderful we can communicate it's wonderful that my mother didn't die a cancer them eight times she had cancer because of the national health service in the uk and because of brilliant medications presumably but what all be addressed is that the profit incentive has become so powerful it's evidently corrupting based on this evidence the fda is increasingly green light in expensive drugs despite dangerous or little known side effects and inconclusive evidence that they curb or cure diseases as patients or their insurers shell out tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for unproven drugs manufacturers reap a windfall for them expedited approval can mean not only sped up cells but also if the drug is intended to treat a rare disease or serve a neglected population fda incentives worth hundreds of millions of dollars that's mental the system's not working correctly then instead of a regulator and a regulated industry we now have a partnership said dr michael carome director of the health research group for non-profit advocacy organization public citizen that relationship is tilt with the agency away from public health perspective to an industry friendly perspective public health is not about public health it's about being friendly to the industries don't those little words tell you the truth don't they tell you everything you need to know it's not about public health it's about being friendly to the industry public health should be a priority in public health the fda also increasingly allows drug makers to claim success in trials based on proxy measurements instead of clinical outcomes like survival rates or cures which take more time to evaluate in return for accelerated approval drug companies commit to researching how well their drugs work after going to the market but these post marketing studies can take 10 years or longer to complete leaving patients and doctors with lingering questions about safety and benefit of course what they say is well we need to get these drugs out there now these people are sick now we've got to help them now would you want your mum or your kid to wait 10 years while we don't make enough i mean while we prove that the drug is effective but when you know that what's at the beaten heart of these systems is mendacious greed and malfeasance then it's very difficult to trust them the fda's growing emphasis on speed has come at the urging of both patient advocacy groups and industry and wonder who funds them patient advocacy groups don't look into that too hard which began in 92 to contribute to the salaries of the agency's drug reviewers in exchange for time limits on reviews in 2017 farmer paid 75 or 905 million dollars to the agency's scientific review budgets for branded and generic drugs compared to 27 in 1993. industry also sways the fda through a less direct financial route many of the physicians caregivers and other witnesses before fdi advisory panels that evaluate drugs receive consulting fees expense payments or other remunerations from pharma companies this is what i've been telling you for a while science is a subset of capitalism so it behaves in accordance with the principles of capitalism maximum profit so it's not like science is bad or whatever slightly neutral but if it exists as a subset of a fundamentalist ideology and i know you think oh cochlear what would you probably no i'm not saying communism there's millions of alternatives there's thousands of different ways to do things what i mean by capitalism is profit or all costs late capitalism advanced capitalism rampant mutant capitalism that we're living within now i'm not criticizing the right of people to come up with an invention and sell it i'm talking about a warped corrupt system that fell apart in 2008 it's been kept alive like frankenstein ever since then and is still churning out bogus products and living in a kind of phantom dream space it is not surviving according to the principles that it espouses it's kept alive artificially and it's not even properly competitive these drugs don't work they're failing they're hiding the truth they're paying people off that's not science that's capitalism that's corruption it's cronyism think of a word that you like for it what might be called pay later conflicts of interest have gone largely unnoticed and entirely unpleased in examining compensation records from drug companies to physicians who advised the fda the journal science found widespread after the fact payments or research support to panel members among the investigation's key findings over nearly a four-year period of 107 physician advisors who voted on the committees signs examined 40 received more than 10 000 in post-hoc earnings or research support from the makers of drugs that the panels voted to approve 26 of those game 100 000.6 more than a million so they're sort of closing down potential avenues for the truth getting out by paying off every single person shutting down proper review research and understanding it's a sort of totalitarian dome of deception the fda says its rules along with federal laws stop employees from improperly cashing in on their government service but science that journal found that employers at the agencies often reap later awards jobs or consulting work from the makers of the drugs it's like they'll go to any lengths isn't it oh you can't pay them while they do yeah but what about if down the line i suppose you could do anything what's the focus meant to be the folks meant to be can we effectively treat diseases whole things got out the window in 2016 a study found that 15 of the 26 employees who left the agency later worked or consulted for the biopharmaceutical industry of the more than 24 million in personal payments or research support from industry to the 16 top earning advisors 93 came from the makers of drugs those advisors previously reviewed so there you are 93 that's basically all of it that's basically all of it so they've got is sewn up from every potential angle you're not dealing with the truth i wonder what other areas that kind of mentality is at play out other areas where you're told to just trust the science trust the data not question it look at how they operate you know that these companies and organizations are not trustworthy here is the information from a journal ironically called science presumably they're not like oh at science we all sit around with crystals and just reading about like illuminati conspiracies and that they're scientists aren't they they're science reviewers that's their peers these are the findings of their peers this is proper science analysis of data and conclusions reached reasonably from that data imagine if the people that were doing this would start getting paid by oh can we you know could you say it's five percent could you say then this wouldn't even be out there would it congress has authorized one initiative after another to expedite drug approvals in 1988 it created fast track regulations in 92 accelerate approval and priority review in 2012 congress added the designation breakthrough therapy enabling the fda to waive normal procedures for drugs that showed substantial improvements over available treatments you would need to be some sort of mad pinocchio style optimist to sort to go oh yeah this is all cool this is all trustworthy nothing to see here we would take a level of gullibility of credulity difficult to imagine these agencies being funded by the corporations that they're meant to be assessing and regulating is a fast if you want a better world demand that that stops demand that lobbying stops it's not impossible to change the world it's just the people that benefit from it staying the same tell you that change is impossible that's all that's happening if you enjoyed this video let me know in the comments below what you think about it give it a like give it a thumbs up turn on the notification bell if that's your thing you can subscribe to my podcast on luminary as well you can get that off of apple if you enjoyed this video have a look at this saucy little fella and if you uh want to learn to meditate now to get some mental space from the chaos of this world have a look at this on my side channel awakening which i'd also ask you to subscribe to sign up to my mailing list at russellbrand.com so i can get direct contact with you thank you

Channel: Russell Brand

Views: 609,518

Rating: 4.9604816 out of 5

Keywords: Russell Brand, Brand Russell, BrandThe, Russell Brand video, Russell Brand news, Russell Brand politics, News, Brand, politics, Russell, USA, UK, Russel, Russel Brand, FDA, Big Pharma, Corporations, Funding, Big Pharma funds FDA, Corruption, Pharmaceutical, Pharmaceutical companies, vaccines, Pfizer

Id: 7fQ6JklHjBc

Length: 12min 33sec (753 seconds)

Published: Sun Sep 19 2021

Reddit Comments

[u/redditrisi]

Funding is the least of it. Lifelong individual rewards are the real incentive.

For example, Lieberman's wife was a lobbyist while he was in the Senate and he became one after he became so unpopular that he could no longer win a Democrat primary. And that's just what is immediately obvious from his wiki article (which links to hers).

And, then, of course, there are the Clintons, the Obamas, the Bidens, et al.

[u/unagisongs]

Russell Brand is moron.

See? No need for any extraneous shitlib post about Russel's intellectual capacity. Move along now little shitlib. Rest assured we have your worthless comment covered.

[u/veganmark]

Excellent video by Russell. But one other key point has come to the fore - these fully corrupt agencies will go out of their way to deride inexpensive generic and nutraceutical therapies that threaten the profits of their Big Pharma masters.

[u/Scarci]

Jesus Christ, I thought FDA only recieved 45% of its fundings from big pharma.

Turns out it was 61% in 2018.

Oh well. I'm sure there's no conflict of interest anywhere, what with FDA's ex-chairman sitting on the board of Pfizer.