Quantcast

Man claims Glaxo drug made him ‘gay sex addict’

By Agence France-Presse
Monday, January 31, 2011 13:59 EDT
google plus icon
Topics:
 
  • Print Friendly and PDF
  • Email this page

A French father-of-two is to take GlaxoSmithKline to court on Tuesday, alleging the British firm’s drug to treat Parkinson’s disease turned him into a gay sex and gambling addict.

The 51-year-old’s lawyers say their client’s behaviour changed radically after he was first administered the drug in 2003 for the illness, which causes tremors, slows movement and disrupts speech.

Didier Jambart, a married father-of-two who says he has attempted suicide three times, claims he became addicted to Internet gambling, losing the family’s savings and stealing to feed his habit.

He also became a compulsive gay sex addict and began exposing himself on the Internet and cross-dressing. His risky sexual encounters led to him being raped, his lawyers said.

The behaviour stopped when he stopped taking the drugs in 2005 but by then he had been demoted in his defence ministry job and was suffering from psychological trauma resulting from his addictions, his lawyers said.

The plaintiff is seeking a total of 450,000 euros ($610,000) in damages from Glaxo, which he accuses of selling a “defective” drug, and from his neurologist for having failed to properly inform him about the drug.

The drug, Requip, has been known for years to have undesired side effects but a warning only appeared on its package insert in 2006, his lawyers said.

Glaxo said it did not wish to comment on the case.

Agence France-Presse
Agence France-Presse
AFP journalists cover wars, conflicts, politics, science, health, the environment, technology, fashion, entertainment, the offbeat, sports and a whole lot more in text, photographs, video, graphics and online.
 
 
 
 
By commenting, you agree to our terms of service
and to abide by our commenting policy.
 
  • Anonymous

    wait wait.. so it’s okay for someone to sue vioxx for heart disease but a compulsatory reaction to a dopamine pathway agonist/modulator whatever kind of drug this is, isn’t grounds for a lawsuit. These psychiatric drugs are prescribed to thousands, millions in some cases before we even have a definite mechanism of action. Even when that mechanism does arise, there are still multiple pathways causing adverse side effects. I would say I hope he wins so our the drug regulators and pharmaceutical companies could be held accountable for prescribing dangerous medication without adequate testing (they take long enough to develop it because of in-vitro studies, then test it once in-vivo and stamp an approval on it) but the truth of the matter is 600,000 is like a penny to these people, and because they have lobbyists in the government, the pharmaceutical companies can do whatever the hell they want. Then we wonder why there aren’t any cures for diseases? what would make them more money, curing your disease in one go-round, or giving you something to suppress the symptoms that you have to take the rest of your life. If we developed cures for diseases, 90% of these companies would go out of business, that means government would lose on buy-outs too. Not never gonna happen.

  • Anonymous

    wait wait.. so it’s okay for someone to sue vioxx for heart disease but a compulsatory reaction to a dopamine pathway agonist/modulator whatever kind of drug this is, isn’t grounds for a lawsuit. These psychiatric drugs are prescribed to thousands, millions in some cases before we even have a definite mechanism of action. Even when that mechanism does arise, there are still multiple pathways causing adverse side effects. I would say I hope he wins so our the drug regulators and pharmaceutical companies could be held accountable for prescribing dangerous medication without adequate testing (they take long enough to develop it because of in-vitro studies, then test it once in-vivo and stamp an approval on it) but the truth of the matter is 600,000 is like a penny to these people, and because they have lobbyists in the government, the pharmaceutical companies can do whatever the hell they want. Then we wonder why there aren’t any cures for diseases? what would make them more money, curing your disease in one go-round, or giving you something to suppress the symptoms that you have to take the rest of your life. If we developed cures for diseases, 90% of these companies would go out of business, that means government would lose on buy-outs too. Not never gonna happen.

    homosexuality has nothign to do with the argument.. it’s hypersexuality.. which is in the DSM

Google+