Amgen's unethical practices - Page 2 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-05-12, 23:16
TheGame TheGame is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxiton View Post
Was this connection known before now? In any case, in light of this fact, I can't see the federal case not being reopened. They pretty much have to reopen it, the implications of criminality are too clear.

Yes, this connection was well known. Weisel also had business dealings with the company behind actovigen. Amgen are also sponsors of Livestrong.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-05-12, 23:43
Darryl Webster Darryl Webster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,054
Default

When I learnt that Amgen sponsored the Tour Of California and were makers of EPO I was totally gobsmacked that cycling fans seemed indifferent to this fact.
Its testament to the utter lack of morality and ethical concerns of the UCI/ Promoters that this sponsorship was ever approved.
Many have commented that drug companies are to big to want ever have there names tarnished by any direct link to there products being used as PED,s..but I have to say I had my suspicion for a long time that they would find a way to get there products into the hands of elite athletes.
There " get out" is, as always with big business, to have " plausible deniability".
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-06-12, 00:12
spetsa's Avatar
spetsa spetsa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle
Posts: 451
Default

Did the Cycling News cut and paste journalists just find this news (it is at least a year old), or did it resurface due to some unmentioned connection to USADA testimony?

There was speculation from some here in the Clinic, that there was or most likely was a mole from either the UCI or possibly Amgen etc. Those thoughts just may prove to be true. Amgen is ripe with people trying to save there own behinds. This could get good.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-06-12, 00:31
mastersracer mastersracer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 929
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxiton View Post
Was this connection known before now? In any case, in light of this fact, I can't see the federal case not being reopened. They pretty much have to reopen it, the implications of criminality are too clear.
what exactly are the implications of criminality you think are so clear?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-06-12, 00:38
MarkvW's Avatar
MarkvW MarkvW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Webster View Post
When I learnt that Amgen sponsored the Tour Of California and were makers of EPO I was totally gobsmacked that cycling fans seemed indifferent to this fact.
Its testament to the utter lack of morality and ethical concerns of the UCI/ Promoters that this sponsorship was ever approved.
Many have commented that drug companies are to big to want ever have there names tarnished by any direct link to there products being used as PED,s..but I have to say I had my suspicion for a long time that they would find a way to get there products into the hands of elite athletes.
There " get out" is, as always with big business, to have " plausible deniability".
The Amgen ToC was hilariously shameless. The promoters shoved their doped sport right in our faces. And the media remained pretty much dead silent about it.

And we watched . . .
__________________
May 20, 2010: Floyd tells truth.
June 10, 2010: Floyd files qui tam.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-06-12, 00:48
veganrob's Avatar
veganrob veganrob is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The D
Posts: 1,720
Default

Seriously, how can one make up a story so crazy yet be true. It totally boggles the mind. The crinminality in this sport runs so deep. Just insane.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-06-12, 00:54
epluribusnev epluribusnev is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Queued View Post
Thanks for posting this.

I had more than one reason for support of Amgen. They were incredibly helpful with a friend / Amgen employee who had terminal cancer. They went way beyond conventional corporate support.

They also ended up as a sponsor of a team I used to ride for.

But, flagrantly violating business ethics and law is not justified.

Dave.
I hope that I'm not calling you out here D-Queued, but as I was reading the article it triggered a memory of something that you had posted a couple of years ago on that other (Daily Peloton) forum regarding the off-label marketing and tacit encouragement of the illicit product usage by some of these Big Pharma companies. You had linked a few articles regarding the fines & penalties that some of these companies had agreed to pay, even though the fines paled in comparison to the profits that they were raking in due to the off-label usage. If you still have those links at the ready, I think that they would give some additional insight to the size & scope of this problem. I tried searching the archives over there to locate your post, but I was unsuccessful. You were a rather prolific (ahem) poster there! I hope that this request doesn't contravene any of the accepted forum protocols.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-06-12, 01:16
Tom375's Avatar
Tom375 Tom375 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEnoculator View Post
It is quite sickening that Amgen engaged in these behaviours. Just goes to show the huge amount of power and money involved in the world of drugs.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/...po-makers-feud
This is actually a more sickening story than the Lance Armstrong case - particularly as it is a mere side story when actually it involves a lot more people's lives and unlike Pro-cycling most of these people wouldn't have had any choice in whether they took it or not in the dangerous dose prescribed.

This will never be a big story like Lance but far more sickening and i didn't think i'd say something like that about a story relating to this website.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-06-12, 01:21
mikeNphilly mikeNphilly is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 245
Default

I could care less if 9 schmucks on a team were juiced on EPO, and beat other juiced up schmucks in a bicycle race, and we all had a blast watching, and calling riders boring when they are not attacking 100% of the time. The benefit that Amgen's EPO gives to dialysis patients alone, is worth all of that.

EDIT: After reading the article on CN, the author used the results of the drug on Chemo patients, (Lance, cancer...blah, blah)..the author should have also included the results of EPO on renal patients, and suddenly Amgen is doing alot of good for people.

Last edited by mikeNphilly; 11-06-12 at 01:32.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-06-12, 01:28
D-Queued D-Queued is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by epluribusnev View Post
I hope that I'm not calling you out here D-Queued, but as I was reading the article it triggered a memory of something that you had posted a couple of years ago on that other (Daily Peloton) forum regarding the off-label marketing and tacit encouragement of the illicit product usage by some of these Big Pharma companies. You had linked a few articles regarding the fines & penalties that some of these companies had agreed to pay, even though the fines paled in comparison to the profits that they were raking in due to the off-label usage. If you still have those links at the ready, I think that they would give some additional insight to the size & scope of this problem. I tried searching the archives over there to locate your post, but I was unsuccessful. You were a rather prolific (ahem) poster there! I hope that this request doesn't contravene any of the accepted forum protocols.
Thanks!

Yes, I am certain that I did comment on it. Actually had an argument with a fellow cyclist on a ride the other day about it. Of course, they also think Lance is being unjustly singled out.

Didn't have to look far, as Wikipedia has a nice page on the problem:

Up to one-fifth of all drugs are prescribed off-label and amongst psychiatric drugs, off-label use rises to 31%.

That math is pretty simple.

Q: How do you increase your market? Even more important, how do you increase your profits when your fixed costs are already covered?

A: Find a new market for the current product. Enter off-label usage.

Hugely profitable.

Q: Want to extend the market some more? What else can the product do, and who would you like as a front man?

A: Sports, anti-aging, vanity. Perfect. Bristol Meyers Squibb? Enter Lance Armstrong and the 'Driven by What's Inside' campaign. Any surprise Lance is out there promoting that he wants to be the fittest 40(plus) year old in the world? He knows his customers.

The Psychiatric drug reference on Wikipedia caught my attention given the notable usage of Ritalin in cycling. No less than four cases of Ritalin positives in the 1982 Giro.

But, think about that. Off-label use of psychiatric drugs? One-third of all psychiatric prescriptions - powerful mood and behavioral modifying drugs - are not for the psychiatric ailment that they were developed for?

The links you are referring to did include EPO. The reference in the OP touches on this already.

EPO - is it really just another aspirin?

Dave.
__________________

Lance says he will cooperate with Landis Investigation


"I've done too many good things for too many people"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.