Glaxo-Wellcome was awarded a "prestigious" award for the "best health web site". It was presented at an AMA conference. Duh.

The AMA recognizing Glaxo for their health achievements is something like the Pentagon recognizing General Dynamics or Lockheed-Marietta for their contributions to peace.

Could it be that the AMA is grateful for Glaxo funding its websites? Whatever the reason, Glaxo has played the political game masterfully. Even AIDS activists generally see the company as a frontrunner in the Fight Against AIDS. And why shouldn't they?

Glaxo is quite a peach of a company. Activists thought they were really moving the political wheels when they screamed for quicker drug approval. The overhaul that came about, though, was more due to Glaxo's $107,304 in lobbying contributions over a six m onth span than anything activists could have come up with. And why was Glaxo so eager to get the FDA overhauled? Was it to save more AIDS lives?

Not a chance. Glaxo was the number one contributer to that cause because they will make a pile of money off of the deregulation. The bill allows them to pay third parties to review their drugs rather than have the FDA do it, to name only one perk of the bill.

In fact, the pharmaceutical giants had been trying to get that piece of legislation through since Gingrich and the Boys first got into office in 1994. But it was only the post-antiprotease frenzy whipped up by the media and bought by the activist community that the bill could ever get through.

So is Glaxo working on behalf of AIDS patients? Follow their dollars.

They were just behind Exxon in lobbying dollars spent in 1996. Who did the money go to? Well, Gingrich got a cool 4K to work on their behalf. But most ironic of all, Jesse Helms, that antithesis of homosexual sentiment, made out like a bandit on Glaxo's tab. Helms got to use Glaxo's corporate jet in exchange for a few Congressional f avors, while dozens of other Congresspersons received thousands for everything from speaking at Glaxo headquarters to granting patent extensions to the drug giant. Glaxo spent $20,000 on Helms and another right winger to help them defeat their Democratic competition in 1996, and Glaxo's PAC contributed $10,000 to Helms, more than Helms received from the NRA and equal to what he recieved from the Free Cuba PAC. Free Cuba's money bought then the moronic Helms-Burton Act to tighten the illegal embargo on Cuba. One can only imagine what Glaxo's money is doing.

So Glaxo is an award-winning promoter of health. Activists should, of course, forgive Glaxo's favored Senator for his slightly troublesome remarks about gays and AIDS. And Even the AMA sho uldn't think that Glaxo's lobbying to pass legislation to raise drug prices in developing countries is a sign that they are unconcerned about health there.

Should we expect the media to point out some of Glaxo's more questionable activities? Doubt it.