Chicago Tylenol murders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Chicago Tylenol murders occurred when seven people died after taking pain-relief capsules that had been poisoned. The Tylenol poisonings, code-named TYMURS by the FBI, took place in the autumn of 1982 in the Chicago area of the United States. These poisonings involved Extra-Strength Tylenol medicine capsules which had been laced with potassium cyanide.^[1] The incident led to reforms in the packaging of over-the-counter substances and to federal anti-tampering laws. The case remains unsolved and no suspects have been charged. A $100,000 reward, offered by Johnson & Johnson for the capture and conviction of the “Tylenol Killer,” has never been claimed.

Contents [show] 1 The incidents 1.1 Suspects 2 Aftermath 3 Ongoing investigations 4 See also 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External links

[edit] The incidents

Wednesday morning, September 29, 1982, 12-year-old Mary Kellerman of Elk Grove Village, Illinois, died after taking a capsule of Extra Strength Tylenol. Adam Janus of Arlington Heights, Illinois, died in the hospital shortly thereafter. Adam’s brother Stanley of Lisle, Illinois, and sister-in-law Theresa died after gathering to mourn his death, having taken pills from the same bottle. Soon afterward, Mary McFarland of Elmhurst, Paula Prince of Chicago, and Mary Reiner of Winfield, Illinois, also died in similar incidents.^[2][3] Investigators soon discovered the Tylenol link. Urgent warnings were broadcast, and police drove through Chicago neighborhoods issuing warnings over loudspeakers.

As the tampered bottles came from different factories, and the seven deaths had all occurred in the Chicago area, the possibility of sabotage during production was ruled out. Instead, the culprit was believed to have entered various supermarkets and drug stores over a period of weeks, pilfered packages of Tylenol from the shelves, adulterated their contents with solid cyanide compound at another location, and then replaced the bottles. In addition to the five bottles which led to the victims’ deaths, three other tampered bottles were discovered.

Johnson & Johnson, the parent company of McNeil, distributed warnings to hospitals and distributors and halted Tylenol production and advertising. On October 5, 1982, it issued a nationwide recall of Tylenol products; an estimated 31 million bottles were in circulation, with a retail value of over US$100 million. The company also advertised in the national media for individuals not to consume any products that contained acetaminophen. When it was determined that only capsules were tampered with, they offered to exchange all Tylenol capsules already purchased by the public with solid tablets.

[edit] Suspects

During the initial investigations, a man named James W. Lewis sent a letter to Johnson & Johnson demanding $1 million to stop the cyanide-induced murders. Police were unable to link him with the crimes, as he and his wife were living in New York City at the time. He was convicted of extortion, served 13 years of a 20-year sentence, and was released in 1995 on parole. WCVB Channel 5 of Boston reported that court documents, released in early 2009, “show Department of Justice investigators concluded suspect James W. Lewis, who now lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts, was responsible for the poisonings, despite the fact that they did not have enough evidence to charge him.” Lewis continues to deny responsibility for the poisonings.^[4][5]

A second man, Roger Arnold, was investigated and cleared of the killings; however, the media attention caused him to have a nervous breakdown, and he blamed a bar owner, Marty Sinclair, for the police investigation of him. In the summer of 1983, he shot and killed John Stanisha, whom he mistook for Sinclair, but who was, in fact, an innocent man who did not know Arnold.^[6] Arnold was convicted in January 1984 and served 15 years of a 30-year sentence for second degree murder. He died in June 2008.

Laurie Dann, who poisoned and shot victims in a May 1988 rampage in and around Winnetka, Illinois, was briefly considered as a suspect, but no direct connection was found.^[7]

[edit] Aftermath

The media gave Johnson & Johnson much positive coverage for its handling of the crisis; for example, an article in the Washington Post said, “Johnson & Johnson has effectively demonstrated how a major business ought to handle a disaster.” The article further stated that “this is no Three Mile Island accident in which the company’s response did more damage than the original incident,” and applauded the company for being honest with the public. In addition to issuing the recall, Johnson & Johnson established relations with the Chicago Police, the FBI, and the Food and Drug Administration. This way the company could have a part in searching for the person who laced the Tylenol capsules and they could help prevent further tamperings.^[8]analgesic in the US. While at the time of the scare the market share of Tylenol collapsed from 35% to 8%, it rebounded in less than a year, a move credited to J&J’s prompt and aggressive reaction. In November, it reintroduced capsules but in a new, triple-sealed package, coupled with heavy price promotions and within several years, Tylenol had become the most popular over-the-counter

A number of copycat attacks involving Tylenol and other products (see Stella Nickell for information on the 1986 Excedrin tampering murders) ensued during the following years. One of these incidents occurred in the Chicago area; unlike Tylenol, it actually forced the end of the product affected by the hoax, Encaprin, from Procter & Gamble. However, the incident did inspire the pharmaceutical, food, and consumer product industries to develop tamper-resistant packaging, such as induction seals and improved quality control methods. Moreover, product tampering was made a federal crime.

Additionally, the tragedy prompted the pharmaceutical industry to move away from capsules, which were easy to contaminate as a foreign substance could be placed inside without obvious signs of tampering. Within the year, the Food and Drug Administration introduced more stringent regulations to avoid product tampering. This led to the eventual replacement of the capsule with the solid “caplet”, a tablet made in the shape of a capsule, as a drug delivery form and with the addition of tamper-evident safety-seals to bottles of many sorts.

[edit] Ongoing investigations

In early January 2009, Illinois authorities renewed the investigation. Federal agents searched the home of Lewis in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and seized a number of items.^[9] In Chicago, an FBI spokesman declined to comment but said “we’ll have something to release later possibly.”^[10] Law enforcement officials have received a number of tips related to the case coinciding with its anniversary. In a written statement,^[11] the FBI explained,

This review was prompted, in part, by the recent 25th anniversary of this crime and the resulting publicity. Further, given the many recent advances in forensic technology, it was only natural that a second look be taken at the case and recovered evidence.

In January 2010, both Lewis and his wife submitted DNA samples and fingerprints to authorities.^[5] Lewis stated “if the FBI plays it fair, I have nothing to worry about.”^[5]

Johnson and Johnson

Johnson & Johnson

Not to be confused with S. C. Johnson & Son.

Johnson & Johnson

Type	Public (NYSE: JNJ) Dow Jones Industrial Average Component
Industry	Major drugs Health care Soaps Shampoos
Founded	1886
Founder(s)	Robert Wood Johnson I James Wood Johnson Edward Mead Johnson
Headquarters	New Brunswick, NJ, U.S.
Area served	Worldwide
Key people	William C. Weldon (Chairman) & (CEO)
Products	Pharmaceuticals Medical devices Health care products Toiletries Soaps Shampoos , etc.
Revenue	▲ US$61.9 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Operating income	▲ US$15.7 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Net income	▲ US$12.3 Billion (FY 2009)[1]
Total assets	▲ US$94.7 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Total equity	▲ US$50.6 Billion (FY 2009)[2]
Employees	118,700 (2009)[3]
Website	JNJ.com also JJ.com

Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) is a global American pharmaceutical, medical devices and consumer packaged goods manufacturer founded in 1886. Its common stock is a component of the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the company is listed among the Fortune 500. Johnson & Johnson is known for its corporate reputation, consistently ranking at the top of Harris Interactive‘s National Corporate Reputation Survey,^[4] ranking as the world’s most respected company by Barron’s Magazine,^[5] and was the first corporation awarded the Benjamin Franklin Award for Public Diplomacy by the U.S. State Department for its funding of international education programs.^[6] A suit brought by the United States Department of Justice in 2010, however, alleges that the company from 1999 to 2004 illegally marketed drugs to Omnicare, a pharmacy that dispenses the drugs in nursing homes.^[7]

The corporation’s headquarters is located in New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States. Its consumerSkillman, New Jersey. The corporation includes some 250 subsidiary companies with operations in over 57 countries. Its products are sold in over 175 countries. J&J had worldwide pharmaceutical sales of $24.6 billion for the full-year 2008. division is located in

Johnson & Johnson’s brands include numerous household names of medications and first aid supplies. Among its well-known consumer products are the Band-Aid Brand line of bandages, Tylenol medications, Johnson’s baby products, Neutrogena skin and beauty products, Clean & Clear facial wash and Acuvue contact lenses

Antipsychotics Pseuodoscience Death and Symbolic name fraud

Antipsychotics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  (Redirected from Major tranquilizers)

Jump to: navigation, search

An antipsychotic (or neuroleptic) is a tranquilizing psychiatric medication primarily used to manage psychosis (including delusions or hallucinations, as well as disordered thought), particularly in schizophreniabipolar disorder. A first generation of antipsychotics, known as typical antipsychotics, was discovered in the 1950s. Most of the drugs in the second generation, known as atypical antipsychotics, have been developed more recently, although the first atypical antipsychotic, clozapine, was discovered in the 1950s and introduced clinically in the 1970s. Both generations of medication tend to block receptors in the brain’s dopamine pathways, but antipsychotic drugs encompass a wide range of receptor targets. and

A number of harmful and undesired (adverse) effects have been observed, including lowered life expectancy, weight gain, enlarged breasts and milk discharge in men and women (hyperprolactinaemia), lowered white blood cell count (agranulocytosis), involuntary repetitive body movements (tardive dyskinesia), diabetes, an inability to sit still or remain motionless (tardive akathisia), sexual dysfunction, a return of psychosis requiring increasing the dosage due to cells producing more neurochemicals to compensate for the drugs (tardive psychosis), and a potential for permanent chemical dependence leading to psychosis much worse than before treatment began, if the drug dosage is ever lowered or stopped (tardive dysphrenia).

Temporary withdrawal symptoms including insomnia, agitation, psychosis, and motor disorders may occur during dosage reduction of antipsychotics, and can be mistaken for a return of the underlying condition.^[1][2]

 History

The original antipsychotic drugs were happened upon largely by chance and then tested for their effectiveness. The first, chlorpromazine, was developed as a surgical anesthetic. It was first used on psychiatric patients because of its powerful calming effect; at the time it was regarded as a “chemical lobotomy“. Lobotomy at the time was used to treat many behavioral disorders, including psychosis, although its effect was to markedly reduce behavior and mental functioning of all types. However, chlorpromazine proved to reduce the effects of psychosis in a more effective and specific manner than the extreme lobotomy-like sedation it was known for. The underlying neurochemistry involved has since been studied in detail, and subsequent antipsychotic drugs have been discovered by an approach that incorporates this sort of information.

Drug action

All antipsychotic drugs tend to block D₂ receptors in the dopamine pathways of the brain. This means that dopamine released in these pathways has less effect. Excess release of dopamine in the mesolimbic pathway has been linked to psychotic experiences. It is the blockade of dopamine receptors in this pathway that is thought to control psychotic experiences.

Typical antipsychotics are not particularly selective and also block dopamine receptors in the mesocortical pathway, tuberoinfundibular pathway, and the nigrostriatal pathway. Blocking D₂ receptors in these other pathways is thought to produce some of the unwanted side effects that the typical antipsychotics can produce (see below). They were commonly classified on a spectrum of low potency to high potency, where potency referred to the ability of the drug to bind to dopamine receptors, and not to the effectiveness of the drug. High-potency antipsychotics such as haloperidol, in general, have doses of a few milligrams and cause less sleepiness and calming effects than low-potency antipsychotics such as chlorpromazine and thioridazine, which have dosages of several hundred milligrams. The latter have a greater degree of anticholinergic and antihistaminergic activity, which can counteract dopamine-related side effects.

Atypical antipsychotic drugs have a similar blocking effect on D₂ receptors. Some also block or partially block serotonin receptors (particularly 5HT_{2A, C} and 5HT_1A receptors):ranging from risperidone, which acts overwhelmingly on serotonin receptors, to amisulpride, which has no serotonergic activity. The additional effects on serotonin receptors may be why some of them can benefit the “negative symptoms” of schizophrenia.^[74]

Controversy

Use of this class of drugs has a history of criticism in residential care. As the drugs used can make patients calmer and more compliant, critics claim that the drugs can be overused. Outside doctors can feel under pressure from care home staff.^[81] In an official review commissioned by UK government ministers it was reported that the needless use of anti-psychotic medication in dementia care was widespread and was linked to 1800 deaths per year.^[82][83] In the US, the government has initiated legal action against the pharmaceutical company Johnson and Johnson for allegedly paying kickbacks to Omnicare to promote its antipsychotic Risperidone (Risperdal) in nursing homes.^[84]

There is some controversy over maintenance therapy for schizophrenia.^[2][85] A review of studies about maintenance therapy concluded that long-term antipsychotic treatment was superior to placebo in reducing relapse in individuals with schizophrenia, although some of the studies were small.^[86] A review of major longitudinal studies in North America found that a moderate number of patients with schizophrenia were seen to recover over time from their symptoms, raising the possibility that some patients may not require maintenance medication.^[85] It has also been argued that much of the research into long-term antipsychotic maintenance may be flawed due to failure to take into account the role of antipsychotic withdrawal effects on relapse rates.^[2]

There has also been controversy about the role of pharmaceutical companies in marketing and promoting antipsychotics, including allegations of downplaying or covering up adverse effects, expanding the number of conditions or illegally promoting off-label usage; influencing drug trials (or their publication) to try to show that the expensive and profitable newer atypicals were superior to the older cheaper typicals that were out of patent. For example in the US, Eli Lilly recently pleaded guilty to violating US laws for over a decade in regard to Zyprexa (olanzapine), and was ordered to pay $1.42 billion to settle criminal and civil allegations, including the biggest criminal fine for an individual corporation ever imposed in US history; while Astrazeneca Seroquel (quetiapine), amidst federal investigations of its marketing practices.^[87] By expanding the conditions for which they were indicated, Astrazeneca’s Seroquel and Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa had become the biggest selling antipsychotics in 2008 with global sales of $5.5 billion and $5.4 billion respectively.^[11] is facing about 9,000 personal-injury lawsuits from more than 15,000 former users of

Some critics have also analyzed the use of alleged front organizations and conflicted patient “advocacy” groups funded by pharmaceutical companies that seek to set the mental health agenda, including the use of the law to force people to take antipsychotics against their will, often justified by claims about risk of violence.^[88]