|
Home > Archive > Osteoporosis disease > April 2006 > Lawsuit Alleges Merck Negligent
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Lawsuit Alleges Merck Negligent
|
|
| Roman Bystrianyk 2006-04-15, 11:25 am |
| THERESA AGOVINO, "Lawsuit Alleges Merck Negligent", Washington Post,
April 12, 2006,
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6041201548.html
Merck & Co, which is already facing a raft of cases over its pain
reliever Vioxx, may need to hire additional attorneys to fight a
recently filed lawsuit alleging the company was negligent in promoting
its osteoporosis drug Fosamax.
According to a lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Fort
Myers, Fla., Fosamax is a defective product because it can cause
osteonecrosis of the jaw, or a rotting of the jaw bone. The suit, which
seeks class action status, alleges that Merck concealed and continues
to hide Fosamax's potentially dangerous side effects from patients and
doctors.
Fosamax is Merck's second best-selling drug with last year's revenue
essentially flat at $3.2 billion.
In a statement, Merck said that in all of its clinical trials of
Fosamax, which have included more than 17,000 patients, it has not had
any reports of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Merck said that there have
been reports of patients taking Fosamax developing the condition but
that doesn't necessarily mean the drug caused it.
Fosamax belongs to a category of drugs known as nitrogenous
bisphosphonates, according to the lawsuit. Some other drugs in that
category are used for chemotherapy and the lawsuit says medical
journals had been reporting a connection between those medicines and
the jaw condition. The suit contends that since Fosamax is in the same
class of drugs, Merck should have known its product could lead to such
problems.
The lawsuit further alleges that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
asked Merck to add a warning to Fosamax's label in August of 2004 and
that it has yet to comply with that request.
Merck counters that it received a request from the FDA to update the
label with information about the condition in January 2005. It says
that by July 2005 information regarding the problem was on the label.
But Tim O'Brien, who filed the suit, said the information in the label
isn't an adequate warning.
The FDA didn't immediately return a call Wednesday.
Merck faces nearly 10,000 lawsuits Vioxx, which it withdrew from the
market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled patients risk
of heart attacks and strokes.
Merck shares fell 21 cents to close at $33.85 Wednesday on the New York
Stock Exchange.
| |
|
| Roman Bystrianyk wrote:
> THERESA AGOVINO, "Lawsuit Alleges Merck Negligent", Washington Post,
> April 12, 2006,
> Link:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6041201548.html
>
> Merck & Co, which is already facing a raft of cases over its pain
> reliever Vioxx, may need to hire additional attorneys to fight a
> recently filed lawsuit alleging the company was negligent in promoting
> its osteoporosis drug Fosamax.
>
> According to a lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Fort
> Myers, Fla., Fosamax is a defective product because it can cause
> osteonecrosis of the jaw, or a rotting of the jaw bone. The suit, which
> seeks class action status, alleges that Merck concealed and continues
> to hide Fosamax's potentially dangerous side effects from patients and
> doctors.
>
> Fosamax is Merck's second best-selling drug with last year's revenue
> essentially flat at $3.2 billion.
>
> In a statement, Merck said that in all of its clinical trials of
> Fosamax, which have included more than 17,000 patients, it has not had
> any reports of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Merck said that there have
> been reports of patients taking Fosamax developing the condition but
> that doesn't necessarily mean the drug caused it.
>
> Fosamax belongs to a category of drugs known as nitrogenous
> bisphosphonates, according to the lawsuit. Some other drugs in that
> category are used for chemotherapy and the lawsuit says medical
> journals had been reporting a connection between those medicines and
> the jaw condition. The suit contends that since Fosamax is in the same
> class of drugs, Merck should have known its product could lead to such
> problems.
>
> The lawsuit further alleges that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
> asked Merck to add a warning to Fosamax's label in August of 2004 and
> that it has yet to comply with that request.
>
> Merck counters that it received a request from the FDA to update the
> label with information about the condition in January 2005. It says
> that by July 2005 information regarding the problem was on the label.
>
> But Tim O'Brien, who filed the suit, said the information in the label
> isn't an adequate warning.
>
> The FDA didn't immediately return a call Wednesday.
>
> Merck faces nearly 10,000 lawsuits Vioxx, which it withdrew from the
> market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled patients risk
> of heart attacks and strokes.
>
> Merck shares fell 21 cents to close at $33.85 Wednesday on the New York
> Stock Exchange.
>
Not sure what this proves. There have been other suits against Merck
that didn't stand up in court. Kinda like trying to figure out whether
cell phones cause brain cancer.
Larry E.
| |
| awthrawthr@yahoo.com 2006-04-16, 1:23 am |
|
Larry wrote:
> Roman Bystrianyk wrote:
> Not sure what this proves. There have been other suits against Merck
> that didn't stand up in court. Kinda like trying to figure out whether
> cell phones cause brain cancer.
Merck has won a couple lawsuits and lost a couple a well defending
Vioxx.
With Merck's track record of concealment, I'd be selling any shares I
had, too.
The Washington Post article wasn't proving the case, merely informing
the reader the lastest on Merck and Fosamax. If you want to be a guinea
pig, "ask you doctor."
| |
| David Wright 2006-04-16, 1:23 am |
| In article <1145116371.113373.162470@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Roman Bystrianyk <rbystrianyk@gmail.com> wrote:
>THERESA AGOVINO, "Lawsuit Alleges Merck Negligent", Washington Post,
>April 12, 2006,
>Link:
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6041201548.html
>
As Roman once again proves he has no idea how to post to appropriate
newsgroups. Good job, Roman.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
| |
| Beach Runner 2006-04-16, 6:21 pm |
|
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote:
> Larry wrote:
>
Doctor's are expected to know about the potential risks and side
effects. Patients don't buy the drug over the counter.
[vbcol=seagreen]
Actually, Merck was doing their own testing, and self discovered this.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> Merck has won a couple lawsuits and lost a couple a well defending
> Vioxx.
> With Merck's track record of concealment, I'd be selling any shares I
> had, too.
Since they discovered and pulled Viox from the shelf?
Once again, we have to examine the risks/benifits of taking fosamax if
you have osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is a silent, deadly killer. Thus
fosamax is logically worth the incredibly low risk.
The very real risks are digestive system disorders.
This really appears to be yet another example of a litigious society,
which we all pay for with absurdly high medical costs.
| |
|
| Beach Runner wrote:
>
>
> awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> Doctor's are expected to know about the potential risks and side
> effects. Patients don't buy the drug over the counter.
>
> Actually, Merck was doing their own testing, and self discovered this.
>
>
>
> Since they discovered and pulled Viox from the shelf?
>
> Once again, we have to examine the risks/benifits of taking fosamax if
> you have osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is a silent, deadly killer. Thus
> fosamax is logically worth the incredibly low risk.
>
> The very real risks are digestive system disorders.
>
> This really appears to be yet another example of a litigious society,
> which we all pay for with absurdly high medical costs.
Or of someone who is just looking to "give it" to the pharma companies
and expects guarantees from drugs with known risks. Oh well.
Larry
| |
| Beach Runner 2006-04-17, 11:21 am |
|
Larry wrote:
>
> Or of someone who is just looking to "give it" to the pharma companies
> and expects guarantees from drugs with known risks. Oh well.
>
> Larry
Exactly. The risk is in the literature and handout. It would be in the
Physicians Desk Manual. The risk is presented. It is the doctor's
responsibility to balance these risks.
The Pharmacist is also supposed to insure you have that information.
The consumer should read the handout.
If you do a simple google search side effects fosamax, there's plenty of
data. A large probability is that there will be gastric irritation.
No, it seems an opportunity to steal from medical pockets.
|
| |
|
|