165. Or, i1 n'existe aucun element

165. Or, i1 n'existe aucun element probant78 etablissant l'existence d'une telle « strategie » de la part de
Sanofi-Aventis France, pour la bonne raison qu'une telle strategie n'a jamais existe.

166. Premierement, la Decision ne cite aucune declaration ambigue ou douteuse de la part des visiteurs medicaux de Sanofi-Aventis France, alors que ce sont eux qui sont censes avoir delivre l'information soi-disant abusive.

167. La seule declaration citee dans la Decision emanant d'un employe de Sanofi-Aventis France concerne le propos suivant tenu par une deleguee pharmaceutique :

« Un patient qui fait un syndrome coronaire, c'est un patient qui a un haut risque de recidiver ou de mourir. Plavix a fait l'objet d'essais cliniques. Par rapport aux generiques, qui n'auraient pas (au
conditionnel, car a l'epoque nous ne connaissions pas tous les generiques) toutes les indications,
cela permet au patient d'avoir le traitement de reference. »79

Résultats (Anglais) 1:

165. gold, i1 is no probant78 evidence establishing the existence of such a "strategy" from
sanofi-aventis France, for the reason that such a strategy was never there.
166. firstly, the decision cites no questionable or ambiguous statement from the medical visitors sanofi-aventis France,then they are the ones who are supposed to have issued the so-called information abusive.
167. the only statement cited in the decision emanating from an employee of sanofi-aventis France concerned about the next run by a pharmaceutical Representative:

"a patient who is a coronary syndrome, this is a patient who has a high risk to reoffend or die.plavix has been the subject of clinical trials. compared to generic, which would not (conditional
as at the relevant time we did not know all the Internet) all indications
it allows the patient to the treatment of reference. "79

Résultats (Anglais) 2:

165. However, i1 no element exists probant78 establishing the existence of such a "strategy" on the part of
Sanofi-Aventis France, for the good reason that such a strategy has never exists.

166. First, the Decision cites no ambiguous statement or questionable on the part of the Sanofi-Aventis France medical visitors,. While they are the ones who are supposed to have issued the so-called abusive information.

167. The only statement quoted in Decision emanating from an employee of Sanofi - Aventis France concerns the following remarks by a pharmaceutical delegate:

a patient making a coronary syndrome, it is a patient who has a high risk of given or die. Plavix has been the subject of clinical trials. Compared to generics, that would not (in the
conditional, because at the time we knew not all generics) all indications,
this allows the patient to have the standard treatment. ' 79
.

Résultats (Anglais) 3:

165. However, i1 there is no evidence78 establishing the existence of such a "strategy" on the part de
Sanofi-Aventis France, for the good reason that such a strategy has never existed.

166. First, the Decision did not cite any statement ambiguous or doubtful of the share of medical visitors of Sanofi-Aventis France,While they are the ones who are supposed to have issued the information so-called abusive.

167. The only statement quoted in the Decision from an employee of Sanofi-Aventis France concerned about the next held by a delegate pharmaceutical:

"a patient who makes a coronary syndrome, this is a patient who has a high risk to reoffend or die.Plavix has been the subject of clinical trials. In relation to the generic, which would not (at
conditional, because at the time we did not know all the generic) all indications,
This allows the patient to have the reference treatment. " 79