Bristol-Myers Squibb
[back] Drug Industry
[The Corporation that produces most of the genocidal poison known as Chemotherapy (also notable for its suppression of Laetrile at Memorial Sloane Kettering). Not content with killing hundreds of thousands of humans purely for profit they then ignored the dozens of plants designed for the job (eg 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, most used for centuries by herbalists around the world) and went after the sacred Yew (a tree that was worshiped by many cultures like the Celts; the Magna Carta was signed under one---the Ankerwycke Yew) by making a poisonous brew (like the traditional witch) out of its bark, called Taxol. No doubt, they got double points from Satan.]
Website: http://www.bms.com
See: Memorial Sloane Kettering
[April 2008] Drug Executive Is Indicted on Secret Deal
The book is about how Bristol-Myers Squibb ripped off U.S. taxpayers and U.S. cancer patients and their insurers. ....The deal the NCI struck with Bristol-Myers raises two questions: Why Bristol-Myers? Why did the NCI fail to extract from Bristol-Myers a promise to return some of the profit from the sale of Taxol to the taxpayers who had financed three decades of research on Taxol? Goodman and Walsh make a reasonable effort to answer the first question; they make no effort to answer the second. They discuss the possibility that Robert Wittes, an NCI employee from 1983 to 1988, was the link between the NCI and Bristol-Myers who cemented the NCI agreement with Bristol-Myers. Wittes became a vice president at Bristol-Myers in November 1988 just as the discussions about finding a partner for NCI were beginning. He became an NCI employee again in August 1990. But, NCI denied any wrongdoing by Wittes. The authors conclude, “[T]he reasons why Bristol-Myers Squibb emerged as the successful contender remains hidden from public view.” [Review by Kip Sullivan] The Story of Taxol . Nature and Politics in the Pursuit of an Anti-Cancer Drug By Jordan Goodman & Vivien Walsh
The Bristol-Myers/NCI CRADA gave the firm exclusive rights to NCI's government-funded research, including the records of research completed before Bristol-Myers entered the Taxol picture, as well as all "new studies and raw data" from future NCI-funded Taxol research, which NCI agreed to make "available exclusively to Bristol-Myers," so long as the company is "engaged in the commercial development and marketing of Taxol." The company also received the exclusive rights to harvest the Pacific Yew trees found on federal lands. In return, the government receives no money or royalties, but only Bristol-Myers Squibb's "best efforts" to commercialize Taxol, including a commitment to supply Taxol for government-run clinical trials, which were needed to obtain FDA marketing approval for the drug, and to an ambiguous "fair pricing" clause for Taxol [2002] The Other Drug War by James Love
If you look at the board of directors of MSK you will find that the drug industry has a dominant position on that board. One company in particular, Bristol Myers, which produces between 40 -50% of all the chemotherapy in the world, and they have top positions at MSK hospital. They are selling their own drugs to that particular hospital but they have written into the by-laws of the centre that it does not constitute a conflict of interest to sell their company drugs to the centre. They get around it by not taking a salary. They are not paid, they are volunteers. Look what happens. You have a man like Benno Schmidt, who was first head of the president's cancer panel under Nixon, then becomes head of MSK. He then goes on using the knowledge he gained at MSK to set up his own drug company to make tens of millions of dollars......The chairman of the board of Bristol Myers, the main company producing anti-cancer drugs, who also happens to be on the board of MSK, is also on the board of the New York Times. Everybody's brother in law is an oncologist, or on the board of somebody else's something or other, so it is a money making thing for the establishment. A hundred and seven billion, with a B, dollars a year business, and we are not going to get rid of it easily. Interview of Dr Ralph Moss, Ph.D.