Oklahoma City Personal Injury Lawyer - FDA & Prescription Drugs - Most Popular

Wall Street Journal - Bush Rule Changes Could Block Product-Safety Suits

Jeremy Thurman — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 12:27:38 GMT

I don’t get it, why do so called conservatives dislike consumer protections so much? This isn’t conservatism, it’s a neocon movement of big business and big pharmaceuticals to rewrite consumers ability to hold them to account for lying, cheating and harming the public.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that “Bush administration officials, in their last weeks in office, are pushing to rewrite a wide array of federal rules with changes or additions that could block product-safety lawsuits by consumers and states.

The administration has written language aimed at pre-empting product-liability litigation into 50 rules governing everything from motorcycle brakes to pain medicine. The latest changes cap a multiyear effort that could be one of the administration's lasting legacies, depending in part on how the underlying principle of pre-emption fares in a case the Supreme Court will hear next month.”

Of particular interests is that just this year, the article reports that 10 new regulations, including one issued Oct. 8 at the Department of Transportation that limits the number of seatbelts car makers can be forced to install and prohibits suits by injured passengers who didn't get to wear one.

Now if your thinking a new President, from either party can undo this harm, the article reports that it can’t be done easily.

What is most funny is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform which spending on these issues drafts that of Trial Lawyers is supporting this as part of its campaign to "neutralize plaintiff trial lawyers' excessive influence over the legal and political systems," according to its Web site.

Talk about influence, check this: The chamber itself, which represents millions of businesses of all sizes, is the biggest spender on the lobbying. In 2006, it spent $72.7 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit research group that tracks money in politics. On the trial lawyers’ side, the American Association for Justice spent $8.3 million that year.

The article states that Bush wants this to be one of his lasting legacies. Now I’m not one who has ever piled on the President even when I should have. That said, with the war on terrorism, war in Iraq, economic troubles et al, this is what Bush wants to be one of his lasting legacies? That legacy would be denying injured people compensation by virtue of laws aimed at defending the uber-rich corporations.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

Lupron Litigation

Jacob Diesselhorst — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:50:42 GMT

Five women who claim to have suffered harm from injections of Lupron for treatment of endometriosis are suing the drug's manufacturer, Tap Pharmaceuticals, in U.S. federal court.

Samuel Bearman of Pensacola, Florida, one of two attorneys for the plaintiffs, told Redflagsdaily.com that the pre-trial discovery process is expected to begin shortly.

The five women claim, for example, that Tap Pharmaceuticals failed to properly test Lupron, failed to warn government agencies, including the FDA, of the results of company testing, failed to warn consumers of the dangers associated with Lupron, concealed the known dangers associated with Lupron, and failed to warn the physicians prescribing Lupron of its known dangers.

Tap Pharmaceuticals has steadfastly maintained over the years that Lupron is safe.

The FDA first approved Lupron in 1985 for treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer, and then approved it for treatment of endometriosis in 1990 and, in 1995, for the pre-operative treatment of anemia resulting from heavy bleeding associated with fibroids.

An estimated 7 million women in the U.S. suffer from endometriosis, a condition in which pieces of the lining of the uterus are found in other parts of the body, especially in the pelvic cavity. These pieces of endometrium respond to the menstrual cycle and bleed. Because the blood cannot escape, it builds up and causes the development of small or large painful cysts.

Lupron is a synthetic hormone that is said to act on this process by suppressing the ovaries and is supposed to temporarily interrupt estrogen output. This creates a drug-induced menopause. The goal of treatment is to shrink any lesions produced via endometriosis.

Many women with endometriosis who have been given Lupron injections have had severe side-effects, including cardiac arrhythmias, dizziness, swelling, chest pain, depression and confusion, bone pain, extreme fatigue, vision loss, high blood pressure, and nausea. Some of the women claim their side- effects last long after treatment is completed.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Tap claim, for example, to have experienced serious injury after Lupron injections, "resulting in pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of the capacity for enjoyment of life, expense of medical care and treatment, loss of earnings, loss of the ability to earn money."

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jacob Diesselhorst

Paxil CEO Testifies in First Paxil Birth Defect Case

Jeremy Thurman — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:31:45 GMT

Another tragic story about a company that is more concerned about profits than the safety of its customers:

Officials of GlaxoSmithKline Plc, the U.K.'s largest drugmaker, said in 2001 that a birth defect in the fetus of a woman taking its Paxil antidepressant likely was linked to the drug, according to court testimony.

After analyzing a 2001 e-mail from a Paxil user who aborted her fetus because it had a heart defect, Glaxo officials noted in company files they were "almost certain" the drug was related to the problem, Jane Nieman, a former Glaxo drug-safety executive, told a Pennsylvania jury.

"I don't know who made that assessment, but its there," Nieman testified in a videotaped deposition played yesterday for jurors. Nieman's testimony came in the trial of another Paxil user's lawsuit over birth defects suffered by her now 3-year-old son.

The first woman was taking Paxil as an antidepressant before she conceived her child, and was concerned that the drug would affect the development of the fetus. She emailed Glaxo in 2001 with her concerns, stating:

“If there is a chance that this might hurt or affect the baby I want to know up front and I will somehow stop taking it for the time being,” the woman said in the e-mail. “I love everything this drug has done for me. Please contact me as soon as possible. Please don’t forget about me.”

When she discovered that her fetus did have an irregular heartbeat, she decided to abort it. There are over 600 Paxil cases similar to this one, including the case of 3-year old Lyam Kilker, whose mother used Paxil while she was pregnant with him, and who was born with an irregular heartbeat that could potentially kill him.

Allegedly, Glaxo did know that Paxil could cause health defects, but hid this information from its customers to increase profits. In fact, Glaxo has records of the first woman's email, with officials noting in the files that Paxil almost certainly did cause her fetus' health problems. In spite of this knowledge, Glaxo launched a campaign to increase the prescription of Paxil to pregnant women, and as a result, Glaxo earned around $942 million in profits of of Paxil in one year alone.

Thankfully, people are now learning about the dangers of Paxil, and are victims of this deception are coming forward for compensation and justice.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

Spiriva Linked to Increased Heart Attacks and Strokes

Jeremy Thurman — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 22:52:58 GMT

Last week, a study in the Annals of Internal Medicine found a 34% increased risk of dying from a heart attack or irregular heartbeat in COPD patients using ipratropium, which is in the same class as Spiriva, compared with those using albuterol, another COPD drug, or using nothing. The study focused on veterans diagnosed before Spiriva was approved in 2004.

In case you are unaware, COPD refers to two incurable lung ailments, chronic bronchitis and emphysema. Most COPD patients have both. The most common cause of COPD is cigarette smoking. Spiriva (tiotropium bromide inhalation powder) taken as directed is being said to help manage COPD. Boehringer Ingelheim, a German company that markets Spiriva with Pfizer, says worldwide sales rose 35% in 2007. Boehringer also makes Combivent, and Pfizer makes Atrovent.

However in the article, Lung drugs might be taking toll on the heart, researchers say overall, 1.8% of patients given tiotropium or ipratropium died of cardiovascular disease or had a non-fatal heart attack or stroke, compared with 1.2% of patients on other drugs, a statistically significant difference.

Spiriva is said to not be a treatment for COPD but a maintenance medicine to help you control COPD and breathe better. Researchers pooled the results of 17 clinical trials of 14,783 patients that compared the drugs tiotropium or ipratropium with other COPD treatments. The studies followed patients for six weeks to five years.For every 40 people who got one of the drugs in a year, there was one extra death, says co-author Curt Furberg, a Wake Forest University epidemiologist. "It's a big drug, so it's affecting a large number of people."

In March, the Food and Drug Administration notified health care professionals that a pooled analysis comparing Spiriva with a placebo revealed a possible increased risk of stroke in patients on the drug. The analysis by Boehringer found that 8 per 1,000 Spiriva patients a year had a stroke, vs. 6 per 1,000 on a placebo.

At the time, the FDA said it had not confirmed the finding.

The Health and Science Institiute states that research is being done to try and help patients with COPD because currently any type of medicine on the market today can't cure COPD. Treatments currently being researched without the aid of medicine are:

· Literally poking holes in patients' lungs

· Shooting special "glue" into their lungs, and

· Putting one-way valves inside bronchial tubes to let stale air out

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

GLAXO SMITH KLINE DATA LINKS PAXIL TO INCREASED RISK OF BIRTH DEFECTS

Jeremy Thurman — Thu, 03 May 2007 09:03:58 GMT

On December 13, 2005, Glaxo Smith Kline released a follow up to a prior study comparing the effects of bupropion to other antidepressants. The preliminary study and it follow up are available on the GSK website [insert link to study]. Though not specifically powered to study the effects of Paxil (paroxetine), GSK concluded "In this study, the use of paroxetine in the first trimester of pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of congenital malformations, and a trend towards an increased risk of cardiovascular malformations, compared with the use of other antidepressants."

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of Paxil, please contact our firm, we are now reviewing these cases.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

JAMA Editorial Blows Whistle on Drug Companies Ghost Writers for Scientific Studies

Jeremy Thurman — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:10:20 GMT

I just ran across a Yahoo.com article describing a new editorial from JAMA which blows the whistle on drug companies using ghost writers for supposedly unbiased medical research.

According to Yahoo.com, "JAMA's editorial discusses two new reports involving the painkiller Vioxx and how drug companies influence the interpretation and publication of medical research.

The reports claim Merck & Co. frequently paid academic scientists to take credit for research articles prepared by company-hired medical writers, a practice called ghostwriting. They also contend Merck tried to minimize deaths in two studies that showed that the now withdrawn Vioxx didn't work at treating or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Merck called the reports in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association false and misleading. Five writers of the articles were paid consultants for people who sued Merck over Vioxx's heart and stroke risks; the sixth testified about Merck and Vioxx's heart risks before a Senate panel. Merck says those connections makes the reports themselves biased.

While Merck is singled out, the practices are not uncommon, according to JAMA's editors. In an editorial, they urge strict reforms, including a ghostwriting crackdown and requiring all authors to spell out their specific roles."

For attorneys who have been fighting goliath drug companies for many years, this comes as no suprise. The drug culture is rampant with fraudulent scientific data manipulated in order to sell drugs to an unsuspecting public.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

Doctor Says Drug Maker Tried to Quash His Criticism of Avandia

Jeremy Thurman — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 14:50:07 GMT

The New York Times just had an article about the Drug Avandia. It states that a Congressional committee hearing next Wednesday will try to determine whether federal regulators paid sufficient attention to potential risks of the diabetes drug Avandia. One witness, scheduled to appear at the hearing, claims that Avandia's maker, GlaxoSmithKline, attempted to silence his criticism of the drug. John B. Buse, a nationally recognized diabetes specialist, says that Glaxo engaged in tactics to intimidate the doctor to keep him from going public with his concerns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/business/02drug.html?ref=health

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

Blog on FDA

Jeremy Thurman — Sat, 17 Feb 2007 21:24:02 GMT

Thanks to Joe Sanders out of Florida for his blog where he discusses FDA approval and what it really means as to the safety and efficacy of a drug. I think the more drug litigation I become a part of, the more questioning I become on any new drug approved by the FDA. From Fen-phen to Ortho Evra, we see more and more drugs with dangerous side effects harming the public while drug companies suppress the evidence in favor of profits.

http://sarasota.injuryboard.com/drug-products/fda-approval-means-consumer-safety-not-so-fast.php

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

A Lawyers Utopia - My Rant Against Tort Reform

Jeremy Thurman — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 01:21:08 GMT

I was discussing tort reform with a friend today and I heard my favorite term, Jackpot Justice. Of course I convinced my friend of the error of his ways and the utter fallacy of the tort reform movement. However, I got to thinking, what is Jackpot Justice. I better add a disclaimer, after reading this, this is truly a late night rant against the rhetoric of politicians.

Now understand one thing, I have a sarcastic sense of humor. So my first thought was where is this Jackpot Justice in Oklahoma. I mean, someone please tell me where this "shakedown" is occurring of poor innocent broke insurance companies. I have decided that I really need to find this lawyers utopia where every frivolous case nets a million dollar verdict and insurance attorneys never churn a file to reach their billing goals. Where is this fairytale land where computers systems by insurance companies don't tell my clients that they can't be injured seriously because their car only has a $1000.00 in damage.

If someone could please guide me to this utopia, I would greatly appreciate it. I would immediately go and knock on doors and file case after case in search of that Jackpot.

Oh and while I am at it. Can someone please tell me where in Oklahoma I can go file my auto accident cases that I will get paid. Please tell me. Because in my years of practice I have yet to see this utopia. I have yet to see an insurance company pay on meritorious claims without a fight, much less frivolous ones.

I beginning to believe this utopia is more like a Fairytopia. See Fairytopia is where Barbie and the twelve dancing princes play and live in their enchanted world. Now I know your asking, where the heck did that come. Well here's my secret, I'm the father of three girls and have seen it over 10 times and have participated in the dancing. I've been the prince. (FYI, if you're a dad, listen to the new Steven Curtis Chapman song: Cinderella, it will hit you hard about your baby girls).

Oh wait, you mean me, the ugly trial lawyer has a family? You mean I actually spend time with my precious children? You mean I actually serve in a leadership position in my church? These things couldn't be could they? Surely those are just a spin on my life, see I'm just an ugly trial lawyer taking advantage of billion dollar insurance companies. Those poor souls, bless their hearts, they only want to pay the injured. They would never intentionally devalue a claim.

Now that I've said the above, the rant can truly start. Shame on politicians who sell me their so called morals. Who come to my house proclaiming morality. Shame on these politicians who would do what Isaiah 10 states" Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless. What will you do on the day of reckoning, when disaster comes from afar? To whom will you run for help? Where will you leave your riches? Nothing will remain but to cringe among the captives or fall among the slain. Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised."

Yes, I went their I quoted scripture. I'm tired of being lied by politicians on tort reform. I'm tired of telling me they believe the injustice of it but promised the doctors whom make up 1% of their district but donated 99% of their campaign funds that they would vote for it. I'm tired of sending politicians up to the capitol to make foolish laws to benefit whatever special interest they choose.

Therefore, I propose a moratorium on the writing of laws. These so called politicians should only be allowed to go up and vote on the state's budget. Then, every five years they can have a session to introduce new laws. Ok, maybe that's a little overboard, but do we really need laws when the ones we have had around over 200 years have done pretty well. Go figure, maybe we can stop these politicians from having lobbyists write the bills while we are at it.

So if your reading this understand. I have morals. I want to tell you the truth. I don't care if your liberal, conservative or independent, you should be against tort reform because it does just what Abraham Lincoln warned against when he stated: "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."

Wasn't honest Abe a republican? Geez, how far honesty has fallen. How have we delved so far from respecting humanity over corporate entities.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman

Paxil Birth Defects

Jeremy Thurman — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:46:11 GMT

In December, 2005 the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Public Health Advisory regarding Paxil, which was based upon two separate studies done by U.S. and Swedish researchers. The FDA warned doctors and patients that exposure to Paxil during pregnancy posed a serious risk to the fetus and was linked to an increased risk of Congenital Heart Defects. If you or loved one have been injured as a result of taking Paxil, please contact us immediately so that we can review your potential case.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jeremy Thurman