Dr Nageen Hashmi Scientific Assessor, Advertising Post-Licensing Division
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
Market Towers, 1 Nine Elms Lane
London SW8 5NQ	2 June 2006

 

Dear Dr Hashmi,

RE: EFEXOR & EFEXOR XL (venlafaxine): PL 00011/0223-0224 & 00011/0199-0201 Advertisement in BMJ of 16 April 2005

Thank you for your letter of 26 May, responding to my 10 May enquiry about the corrective statement for Efexor.

You wrote that the corrective statement appeared in the General Practice edition of the British Medical Journal of 12 November 2005 and sent me a photocopy to prove it. The photocopy was overprinted with a stamp "Market Media Voucher Check" and says that the corrective statement appeared on p. 1145. However, I have checked that issue of the BMJ and found no corrective statement, and page 1145 is devoted entirely to letters.

There are several possible explanations, one of which is that I’m blind as a bat. However the most likely explanation seems to be that the advertisement appeared not in the ‘General Practice’ edition of the BMJ, but in a supplement, stuffed with job advertisements. If so, this would be cheating.

Please will you check the position and, if appropriate, treat this is a complaint. Please would you also let me know whether the stamp, "Market Media Voucher Check" originated from the MHRA or (as I suspect) from Wyeth. This is material to the complaint, through which I hope to establish either [a] if the company sought to mislead the MHRA (sending a photocopy that indicated the corrective advertising had been placed in the ‘General Practice’ edition of the BMJ – where it clearly belonged); or [b] whether the MHRA sought to mislead me, and/or failed to verify the company’s submission.

On another matter, in spite of numerous requests, I have now been waiting for three weeks for a copy of the response to my FOI request of 11 November 2005. You assured me that you replied to this on 9 December 2005 but I have no record of receiving it – and the longer the delay, the more I am inclined to doubt that a reply was ever sent. Please reassure me. To recap, I requested:

Copies of all documents and records directly relating to the vetting of this advertisement by the MHRA, prior to its publication, including all communications between Wyeth and the MHRA relating thereto.

Copies of all documents and records directly relating to the investigation and handling of complaints about this advertisement, including all communications between Wyeth and the MHRA relating thereto.

I look forward to receiving copies of the MHRA reply, and to your response on the above. [Addendum, 16 May 2006 - these copies were received and have been posted here]

Sincerely, 

Charles Medawar cc Richard Goldfinch

 

CLICK HERE TO READ ON