Big Pharma Pays ‘Independent’ Journalist to Slander Company

As the investigation into allegations of widespread Big Pharma corruption and criminality in the UK pharmaceutical sector is progressing, bad actors are now bribing journalists to publicly disparage innocent companies in the media.

Following email correspondence from journalist Rosie Taylor to food supplements company Dr Corbyn, it has become apparent that Big Pharma and their cronies are now resorting to slanderous media publications against the company to prevent public disclosure of widespread corruption in the UK pharmaceutical sector.

Mrs Taylor contacted Dr Corbyn on 7 October expressing her intention to publish an article in the Daily Mail on the topic of “unregulated black cohosh supplements” in the UK. Mrs Taylor stated that, following extensive laboratory testing of Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement, she proposed to publish an article claiming that the product contained a smaller amount of active ingredient than stated on the product packaging.

According to Mrs Taylor, Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement had been subjected to extensive specialist laboratory analyses, including chromatography fingerprinting, the cost of which is expected to have exceeded several thousands of pounds sterling.

Mrs Taylor claimed that Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement had been tested for 5 markers for the black cohosh plant.

Mrs Taylor purported to have subject a number of other black cohosh products to the same laboratory testing procedures, stating that Dr Corbyn’s food supplement had been chosen due to having received “Amazon’s Choice” badge on

But how did Mrs Taylor afford the cost of such extensive and specialised testing?

On average, the cost of chromatography fingerprinting reaches £1,000 quite comfortably. The actual cost depends on a variety of factors, but it is generally based on the substance (or ‘marker’) being tested. 

For the testing of five markers, it is likely that Mrs Taylor had spent upwards of £5,000 at a single laboratory for the testing of Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement.

Let’s not forget that the journalist claimed to have tested the product at two different laboratoties, and that several other products had been subjected to the same laboratory analysis regime.

In total, Mrs Taylor’s purported ‘investigation’ is expected to have costed several tens of thousands of pounds sterling. Hardly the amount of money that any newspaper, let alone a journalist, would spend on a single ‘investigation’.

However strong Mrs Taylor’s drive for protecting the interests of public health and safety may have been, it’s unlikely that this is what she had in mind with her proposed article.

The reasonable conclusion would be that the funding for the so-called ‘investigation’ had been provided by interested third parties. But interested in what? Quite simply, in damaging the reputation of the Dr Corbyn brand, causing pecuniary losses and deterring the company from pushing the investigation forward.

Mrs Taylor claimed that the laboratory tests had revealed that Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement contained a smaller amount of active ingredient than stated on the product label, concluding that the product label was purposefully misleading customers as to the quality and efficacy of the product.

She also incorrectly claimed that Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement did not include specific safety warnings. Not only do food laws not require such warnings to be present anywhere on the product label or packaging, but both the packaging and printed product guide for Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh food supplement voluntarily include such warnings.

Most interesting of all, Mrs Taylor proposed to compare Dr Corbyn’s food supplement to herbal medicinal products granted a THR, crowining the latter with ‘benchmark’ status.

But how can such a comparison be made when the products being compared are distinct in all respects? On one hand there’s Dr Corbyn’s black cohosh product, which is appropriately classed as a food supplement under food laws and which is subject to the same regulatory regime as all food supplements. Food supplements require no authorisation to be placed on the UK market, so the term ‘unregulated black cohosh supplements’ is entirely wrong.

On the other hand there are black cohosh herbal medicinal products granted a THR licence, which are subject to the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 and which require approval from the UK medicines regulatory (MHRA) before they are placed on the UK market.

To compare the two would be like comparing water and oil.

Was this an error of judgement, pure ignorance or something more sinister?

Given the grave accuracy issues and pointed bias, there’s no doubt that Mrs Taylor is working for the benefit of Big Pharma bad actors.

Mrs Taylor’s email correspondence came shortly after Dr Corbyn continued to push for an investigation into widespread Big Pharma corruption within the MHRA as well as within other governmental agencies and departments. The proposed article, far from protecting the interests of public safety, was intended as retaliation for the company’s pursuit of justice.

A complaint against journalist Rosie Taylor has been submitted to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) but the investigation is still in its earliest stages.