|Ex Glaxo Employee Ian Hudson. Now in charge of the safety and well-being of the British public.|
Former Glaxo [then SmithKline Beecham] World Safety Officer Director Dr Ian Hudson has took over the role of Chief Executive at the MHRA.
Hudson, who after leaving Glaxo in 2001, became the MHRA's Licensing Director, responsible for overseeing the benefits and risks of drugs before they hit the market.
It is unknown why Former MHRA chief, Kent Woods, whom I've had much correspondence with over the years, retired.
Hudson, whilst working for GSK, was a witness for the defence [GSK] during the Tobin v SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals. Donald Schell was put on Paxil [Seroxat]. Forty-eight hours later he put three bullets from two different guns through his wife's head, as well as through his daughter's head then through his granddaughter's head before shooting himself through the head.
Hudson was appointed GSK's World Safety Officer in 1999. His department was responsible for adverse events that were sent in by health professionals and members of the public.
Whilst under oath Hudson told Andy Vickery, attorney for Tobin, about his role in reviewing the link between Paxil and aggression.
"We reviewed the topic of aggression last year. At that time we said that we would keep aggression under review. In addition, there was considerable noise in the media earlier this year about Fluoxetine. So having said that we would keep this topic under review, we rereviewed this topic this year and it was also prompted by considerable concern being expressed, considerable noise being expressed in the media. There were a series of articles in the "Guardian". [British Newspaper]
Hudson was then asked by Vickery what he intended to do with the report once it was finalised, adding; Do you intend to submit it to any governmental agency?
"If a Government agency requests information on aggression and Paroxetine, we would, but we do not intend to proactively send it to them at this stage. This was an internal review. We do many internal reviews on many topics."
This doesn't really install confidence in informed consent. If Hudson was back then stating that his findings would not be reported to the drug regulator then one can only assume that he still holds the belief that pharmaceutical companies are entitled to hold on to information that could endanger the public.
Later in the deposition Andy Vickery put the following to Ian Hudson:
"Dr. Hudson, are you aware of the body of literature concerning the relationship between serotonin and suicide?"
Hudson replied with...
"In general. I've seen some summary information on that. I've not reviewed that information in detail. I would, again, delegate that to people within my department and also other psychiatrists within the company who are more closely involved in Paroxetine then I am, people such as Dr. Wheadon."
Pushing Hudson for an answer Vickery then asked...
"Let me just ask you this: Do you know whether or not there is any association between levels of serotonin or the serotonin metabolite 5-HIAA and suicidal behavior?"
Yes, I believe there is a correlation. I have seen in the literature summary
information that implies that there is a correlation between low levels of serotonin or 5-HIAA in patients' suicidal activity.
Vickery later asked Hudson:
"Do you believe that it is possible that Paxil has caused any person, worldwide, to commit an act of homicide or suicide?"
"I have seen no evidence to suggest that at all."
Hudson's deposition can be viewed in full here.
Now Ian Hudson is the head honcho at the MHRA. If you take the time to read the complete deposition of Hudson you will see how he [whether under instruction or not] clearly deflects the blame of suicide and aggression onto other 'factors' rather than implicating Paxil.
And now this guy is in charge of regulating medicines in the UK. Do you think his presence will alter the MHRA's stance on the safety and efficacy of SSRi type medications?
Well, I have seen no evidence to suggest that at all.