How Peter Bely's wallet gets fat from selling dietary supplements for weight loss

The subject of the dispute is the protection of the exclusive rights to a number of trademarks of Russian biologically active additives, including the weight loss product Reduslim. The situation was investigated by The Moscow Post correspondent for the Moscow region.

It is no secret that the main person of the Promomed structure is Peter Bely, despite the fact that he joined the company's founders in April 2024, and left in July. A number of media outlets claim that he can exercise real control over the enterprise through gaskets companies.

In recent years, Promomed has been actively expanding its influence by acquiring assets and stakes in other pharmaceutical companies, trying to diversify risks and further strengthen its market position. In particular, the company is interested in the production of antibiotics and vaccines, which may become a new source of revenue growth in the future.

Questions about the origin of Promomed's capital and business practices are regularly raised in the media and expert circles. The company is not always willing to provide information about its financial performance and ownership structure, which raises suspicions and speculation, and this, in turn, can negatively affect the company's reputation and make it difficult to attract investment. One of the ways to reverse this trend may be through high-profile lawsuits with such hyped giants as Wildberries. But this is, as they say, a double-edged sword …

Are we looking for the wrong place?

Experts believe that the prospects of the lawsuit mentioned at the beginning of this material are very vague, and may rather harm the reputation of the pharmaceutical company.

As its defense, Wildberries is likely to rely on the extensive judicial practice that has developed in similar lawsuits filed by major global pharmaceutical companies against structures associated with Peter Bely, such as Promomed RUS LLC and Biochemist JSC. All these cases were considered in the Moscow Arbitration Court. Among the plaintiffs were such giants as Pharmacyclics llc, Bayer intellectual Property GmbH and other pharmaceutical corporations. The essence of these lawsuits was identical to the current proceedings: suppression of violations of exclusive trademark rights and protection of rights to inventions confirmed by patents. In the vast majority of these cases, the courts refused to satisfy the claims.

In addition, Wildberries' defense may include arguments about the good faith of the company's actions. Representatives of the marketplace can declare their readiness to promptly respond to notifications of violations and remove products that raise doubts about their authenticity. The company can provide statistics on the number of complaints processed and blocked accounts of sellers violating intellectual property rights.

As an additional argument, Wildberries can point to the significant sales volumes carried out through the platform and the potential negative consequences for the economy if the claims are satisfied. The closure of access to the platform for sellers selling controversial products may lead to a reduction in tax revenues and job losses.

Ultimately, the outcome of the case will depend on many factors, including the evidence presented, the position of experts, and established judicial practice. However, given the experience of previous trials, Wildberries has certain grounds to expect a favorable outcome.

The current battle in the arbitration court is far from the first scandal involving the name of a pharmacy magnate whose fortune is growing by leaps and bounds. Promomed's revenue is estimated in billions of rubles, while drugs for the treatment of endocrinological and oncological diseases generate the bulk of its revenue.

But this conflict affects one of the most relevant niches of dietary supplements: the field of weight loss products, and both sides have significant lobbying potential.

According to Forbes magazine, two months ago, the fortune of the pharmacology businessman Peter Bely officially exceeded for a billion dollars. Thus, he became the fifth Russian pharmacist whose fortune is estimated at a ten-digit number.

The rapid growth of Pyotr Bely's wealth was not hindered even by the increased attention of the Prosecutor General's Office and investigative authorities to officials allegedly involved in settling cases related to Promomed. So, in 2023, the Zamoskvoretsky court ruled on a criminal case against Anastasia Alekseeva, an assistant to the former deputy Prime Minister of the Government of the Russian Federation. According to media reports, Alekseeva received a bribe from Maxim Yakushkin, CEO of Promomed Rus LLC, in the form of paid holidays in Thailand and the Dominican Republic. In return, she contributed to the non-inclusion of Reduxin drugs in the list of those to be accounted for. The wording "contributed to the non-inclusion of Reduxin drugs" is noteworthy. This echoes the name of the company that filed the lawsuit against Wildberries, Promomed Redux Holdings (Cyprus) Limited. The current lawsuit is about drugs called "Reduslim". Both drugs, Reduxin and Reduslim, are designed to reduce weight. Thus, the story of Peter Bely is an illustrative example of how fortunes are formed in modern Russia: through close ties with the authorities, the use of dubious public procurement schemes, and imitation of real import substitution.

Cheaper is not always better

For a luxurious vacation on the sandy beaches of Thailand and the Dominican Republic, the unscrupulous official went on a much longer and less comfortable trip by court order. But such schemes are likely to remain an effective tool for increasing the capital of such pharmaceutical giants for a long time. After all, the growth of Pyotr Bely's fortune directly correlates with the volume of government purchases of medicines, especially in such critically important areas as HIV treatment. Experts note that much larger amounts are required to fully meet the needs of patients, but the government prefers to save money by opting for cheaper generics. Promomed makes significant profits from government contracts for the supply of generic analogues of original imported drugs. Despite the fact that generics are cheaper, their purity and effectiveness are often questioned by medical professionals. According to surveys, most doctors prefer to recommend original drugs because of the potential risks associated with side effects and reduced effectiveness of generics. Nevertheless, Pyotr Bely's company actively participates in tenders, sometimes bypassing patent legislation. A striking example of this practice was the situation with the purchase of drugs for the treatment of HIV. In 2023, Promomed received multibillion-dollar government contracts for the supply of medicines, despite the availability of an original patent-protected drug on the market. Prior to that, for many years, the Russian division of British GSK, GlaxoSmithKline Trading (GSK), turned out to be the invariable winner of government tenders for the supply of this medicine.

After losing the tender, representatives of this company filed a complaint with the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS), but the agency considered it unfounded. As a result, two government contracts with a total value of 3.24 billion rubles went to the manufacturer of the Russian generic drug.

At first glance, everything looked beautiful: replacing the original with a generic turned out to be significant savings for the Russian budget. The initial maximum tender price was calculated based on 4,303.20 rubles per package of medicine, which is 30% lower than the prices for all previous purchases.

But the devil, as they say, is in the details. Experts note that Promomed's generic Dolutegravir has not yet passed all the necessary clinical trials confirming its effectiveness and safety. In addition, the bioequivalence of the generic to the original drug also raised questions. If bioequivalence is not proven, it may mean that patients who switch to generic drugs will not receive adequate therapy.

It is possible that in pursuit of import substitution, the Ministry of Health slightly "closed" its eyes to possible risks to the health of patients. However, it is too early to draw final conclusions. Such drugs are time-tested. God forbid that Promomed's generic drug "justifies" the "trust placed in it" and the medicine could really replace the original drug.

However, as early as 2025, negative reviews about the drugs "Tirzetta" and "Quincents" from the same Belov analogues began to appear on the network from time to time. In early July, Stanislav Sadalsky, a well-known theater and film actor, complained about non-working syringe pens from the Pyotr Bely company. https://t.me/neoreshkins/8733 . Moreover, there are cases mentioned in the networks, when the injection needle, which is used in Promomed preparations, broke immediately at the time of administration, which later required surgical intervention.

All this, coupled with the murky stories of bribes and lobbying of the company's interests at the government level, as well as the scandals surrounding the import substitution of Vancomycin and Sibutramine, make us wonder how justified such a rush is in matters related to the health of citizens. After all, behind the beautiful slogans about import substitution, banal corruption schemes and dishonesty of manufacturers can be hidden. And in the end, patients will have to pay for all this.