MERCK WINS IN COURT: VIOXX WARNING WAS SUFFICIENT!

ap

[SoFloFreeper]

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) -- In a major victory for Merck & Co., a jury has found the drugmaker properly warned consumers about Vioxx risks. The finding means Merck will not be held liable for the 2001 heart attack suffered by a man taking the painkiller.

[CindyDawg]

As long as fraud was not committed , IMO drug companies should be exempt from damages if a medication has been approved by the FDA.

[WalterSkinner]

I am grateful to see Vioxx back on the market

Dr., I haven't seen anywhere that Vioxx is back. Could you tell me where that is?

[Redbob]

What kind of shape would your 19-year-old be in if he'd been taking massive doses of aspirin for 6 months?
Bleeding stomach ulcers perhaps?

And are you sure he didn't have a pre-existing heart condition? It's not unknown, you know.

[Cinnamon]

good

[BrynS728]

Just wondered since you stated you had multiple cases involved.

You know, regarding the detail reps - in many cases you're dealing with persons without a secondary education and their priority of course, is sales. It always behooves you to consult the literature regarding the efficacy of any medication - but I know you know that. Also - and this is for everyone's benefit - don't be afraid to speak to a pharmacist regarding any concerns involving a particular medication. They have no "brand loyalty" and are usually the most current and knowledgeable about any medication on the market.

[pageonetoo]

As a licensed physician...

Good, I have a pain in my...

Seriously, I was posting the warning on a cigarette pack. I smoked them from 13-28. I quit one day, because I decided I did not enjoy them any more. I never tood vioxx. I take hztz, and baby asperin.

However, I can remember standing on the corner across from the high school, with many friends, smoking them. I can't count all the people, who asked to bum "cancer sticks". I don't think anybody should have gotten a dime in cigarette claims. All it has done is feed a zillion trial lawyers and bankrolled new attempts to find "causes". One of their prime causes is the defeat of Mr. Bush, etal.

As far as salesmen are concerned, don't blame them. They are trying to make a buck. You are probably completely altruistic in your chosen vocation, but most salesmen only get paid when they make a sale.

I think some of the blame could be on doctors, as well. Responsible doctors know what they are giving their patients will help... they don't just rely on their hopes!

A good friend is an orthopedic surgeon. He has to deal with some hard addictive drugs. He despises that characteristic oxycontin, but prescribes it, because it works. However, he watches people CAREFULLY, and won't hesitate to WARN them to get off the stuff.

I read a couple years ago about the inadvisability of taking tylenol and drinking booze. They say it WILL cause liver damage. But, I see plenty of it on the shelves, and the warning sure doesn't look anything like that on a cig pack!

[Recovering Hermit]

I'm shocked to find out a giant pharma's not going down the drain. Like cig warnings, let the buyer beware.

So they should go "down the drain"?

The fact is that Vioxx helps people.

I have a buddy with back problems, and he said on more than one occasion that Vioxx was the only thing that really touched it.

He would rather take the risks and live a semi-normal life than not have Vioxx and be in constant pain.

[Recovering Hermit]

1 down and about 6,500 to go...

[HonestConservative]

"I submit all these people had one thing in common the misfortune of taking Vioxx."

I submit that before Big Pharm's deep pockets were available for mining, people blamed God. Unfortunately, he's really tough to sue.
But if it could be done, I'm sure there are those that would try.
People get sick and die, young and old alike.

It isn't sensible or fair.
It never will be.

[GoldwaterChick]

Thank you for your expert opinion. My husband and I are blessed with a wonderful doctor and I'm sure your patients are too.

My problem with these lawsuits has been the billions of dollars made by the lawyers--it's truly outrageous. Perhaps if there was a limit on the percentage of awards they could take we would see fewer lawsuits.

I study the side effects of any medication I take very seriously. My doctor gave me samples of Celebrex and Becstra(?)--I noticed no improvement, the side affects worried me, and I went back to aspirin. If Merck did not advise physicians of all of them, or falsified their research in any way, I have no sympathy for them.

I don't think the public is aware of the effect of these suits,especially in the production of vaccines. I tried to get a tetanus shot at my doctor's office--for prevention--and was advised they do not have the vaccine, that it is very difficult to get. Apparently it is only available in hospitals, for the most part.

Thank you for your tip on sugar. I've heard that before and thought it was an old wives' tale.

[HonestConservative]

"As a licensed physician, while I am grateful to see Vioxx back on the market as a drug that has shown positive results, there is no doubt that Merck did a cover up on initial research "

With all due respect, doc, you may have no doubt, but you do not know that at all as evidenced by your own statement as follows....


".....we at least need to admit that IF conclusively proved that Merck hid research from FDA and/or willfully neglected its ethical responsibilities, then Merck is still in for a deep pocket ride based upon....

Your being subpoenaed by numerous attorney's re Vioxx proves nothing except that you are willing to state what they want to hear.

If anyone at Merck or anywhere else falsified clinical research data to obtain licensure of Vioxx or any other drug or vaccine, then criminal charges should be brought and time should be dealt to the offenders with abandon. And if people died because of it, I'll be happy to push the plunger for the execution of the offenders.

Anyone still taking Vioxx is doing so against Federal Regulations, but you knew that.

[Humidston]

I wonder why the drug companies even bother to bring new drugs to market.

Yep. And we all know why drug prices are going through the roof too, thanks to VICIOUS BLOODTHIRSTY BOTTOM-FEEDING LAWYERS.

[Blood of Tyrants]

This is just round one. The cigarette companies won for many years until the trial lawyers were allowed to write a law that basically mandated that the tobacco companies give up the dough.

[antiUNcitizen]

I guess you wanted a piece of the pie too. How about working for your money, scumbag. RINO. DUmmy.

[I'm ALL Right!]

Knowing it was a new drug, I specifically asked my doctor about known side effects before I took Vioxx. He said "nothing significant." I took it. It killed my gall bladder. Perfectly healthy in that area before, and my pain and symptoms began 1 week after starting the Vioxx. No coincidence. Incidentally, there is one mention of gall bladder failure as a possible side effect on the last page of the information sheet (font size: 2) that comes with the drug.

Now I read the warnings. Every drug out there is bad for you, it seems.

[antihannityguy]

Just popped over here from DU huh
I'll bet you think abestos cases are have merit too. It is people like you and your trial lawyer buddies that are ruining this country.

[discostu]

They all can be, you're messing with the biochemistry of the body in order to make it stop doing something it wants to do (or start doing something it doesn't want to do), there's always bad potentials.

Pharmacists are usually better people to talk to than doctors, pharms spend more time paying attention to the side effects list and drug reaction information. Doctors know what the drug is supposed to cure and work from there, pharms know what the drug might do to you and work from there. More than once after the talk with the pharmacist my wife, whose on tons of medication, decided she wasn't going to take that drug and went back to the doctor for something else.

[Almondjoy]

YOu people are so wrong.

The jury found that the label was sufficent in warning consumers. Meaning that the drug may cause heart attacks but the label is enough warning to permit people to take their own informed risks.