Vioxx is NOT GUILTY . . .

[Hillbeans]

I'm glad Merck was found not liable for this death. What people sometimes forget is that Vioxx helped a lot of people. For those with rhuematoid arthritis and other related conditions, Vioxx allowed many of them to have a much better quality of life. I know I'd choose to live with better controlled pain even if it meant some other small risks. Lawsuits like this serve to make a few people rich and limit the future choices and opportunities for the rest of us. In my opinion, Merck acted ethically with regard to Vioxx and should not be put out of business with lawsuits like this.

Thank you for saying this - and for each and every day where I wonder if my husband will come home and tell me that he got fired today (yes, he works for Merck). I know in the media Merck is portrayed as some money-hungry drug company that tried to put profits over people, but that's just so far from the truth. We all take risks taking any OTC drug or prescription drug - and I know many people personally who had a better quality of life taking Vioxx and still take it to this day because they "stocked-up" on it before it was pulled from the market.

 

[Crazoo]

There's about 6,400 cases left...I don't know how they're going to try them all, but I guess if a few of them are unsuccesful, they will settle for a small amount less than what Merck would spend on legal fees anyways.

 

[Poohbear123]

This happens to be my Older Brother, Mike Humeston. I am here in Miami with power by Generator due to hurricane Wilma. Saw this on CNN news when I got home from work and DH hooked up the generator. just a side note: My Brother was ORIGINALLY suing for the co-payment he had to pay for the Drug which was 30.00. The lawyers apparantly talked him into this trial. All I know is what I have seen written in the article, I just hope my Brother recovers from this, and I wish him well.

 

[sodaseller]

Wow, talk about having a connection to the case

 

[Poohbear123]

Yes, indeed, you never know, its a "small world" after all....

 

[dennis99ss]

The Texas case was very different from the New Jersey case, on a lot of different levels. The Texas case had direct evidence of a causal relationship. I do not know if the New Jersey case did. I do not know the New Jersey lawyers, but the Plaintiff's in Texas had one of the best lawyers in the country at limiting his arguments to issues that the jury can understand.

That being said, there is likely an appeal, I have not really looked at it) but, the verdict will be reduced as the punitive award is capped under Texas law. The testimony Merck complained of was already heard on mandamus and no relief was granted. Of course, it does not mean there is no error, but itt does mean that the Court does know the issue, and ruled against Merck once. The same court that heard the mandamus will hear the appeal.

To those of you who say it is just money grabbing, shame on you. If someone runs into your car, do you look to them to pay the damage? If someone placed food before you that was tainted, or had rat poison, or had glass, etc in it, and you were injured, would you want them to compensate you? Or, is that a risk you take for driving the car, eating the food, etc. ust because the pill is on the market does not mean that Merck did nothing wrong. Merck knew of the dangers, did not tell anybody of the dangers, and pushed Viuoxx to market as a result of their losing the patent rights to several lucritive medicines. Pure and simple, Merck knew, didn't tell, and grabbed the money.

 

[ebaynut31]

I think sometimes what we forget is that EVERY drug, even over the counter medicines has the potential to seriously hurt or kill someone. Not everyone takes the meds correctly and there is no way that you can make a drug safe for everyone. Everything we do has risks and we rely on our information we give to our health provider (be it doctor and pharmacist) and the suggestions from them on how to treat us the best they can.

 

[Hillbeans]

The Texas case was very different from the New Jersey case, on a lot of different levels. The Texas case had direct evidence of a causal relationship.

.

Interesting point you brought up there....lets see, causal relationsip.

If i'm 45 years old, am obese, smoke and have a family history of heart disease and hbp, but take Vioxx - - and have a fatal heart attack - - what was the "cause" of my death?

I'm not trying to make light of this gentleman who died in Texas either, because I can't say that Vioxx has not caused his death -or any death - every drug has - but I do think that a large majority of people filing lawsuits for relatives who died had many, many other factors leading to their death which were far worse than any affect Vioxx had on their health. In fact, I believe that short term use of Vioxx was not in question, only if you took it for 2 + years.

 

[Deb in IA]

This happens to be my Older Brother, Mike Humeston.

From what you posted, it almost sounds like the lawyers decided your brother would be a good poster child for big Vioxx damages.

I hope he continues his recovery as well, Poohbear . . .

 

[lsyorke]

This happens to be my Older Brother, Mike Humeston. I am here in Miami with power by Generator due to hurricane Wilma. Saw this on CNN news when I got home from work and DH hooked up the generator. just a side note: My Brother was ORIGINALLY suing for the co-payment he had to pay for the Drug which was 30.00. The lawyers apparantly talked him into this trial. All I know is what I have seen written in the article, I just hope my Brother recovers from this, and I wish him well.

Poohbear, please let your brother know that there are some who are in his corner. Yes, all drugs have side effects. But when a side effect is discovered an not made public that is a BIG problem. If Vioxx came out with a patient guide that warned against the possibility of increased risk of cardiac side effects with long term use then it's patient beware. Risks for any drug should be spelled out in plain language available in some other form than the miniscule, printed drug insert that the patient never sees. Vioxx has helped thousands in the treatment of arthritis pain, but that doesn't mean that those patients should take a drug that they might not take if they knew ALL the risks. To some it's worth that risk, to others it may not be. We, as consumers, have the right to that information to make an informed decision.

 

[Poohbear123]

Poohbear, please let your brother know that there are some who are in his corner. Yes, all drugs have side effects. But when a side effect is discovered an not made public that is a BIG problem. If Vioxx came out with a patient guide that warned against the possibility of increased risk of cardiac side effects with long term use then it's patient beware. Risks for any drug should be spelled out in plain language available in some other form than the miniscule, printed drug insert that the patient never sees. Vioxx has helped thousands in the treatment of arthritis pain, but that doesn't mean that those patients should take a drug that they might not take if they knew ALL the risks. To some it's worth that risk, to others it may not be. We, as consumers, have the right to that information to make an informed decision.

Thank you, very much. He sued for the "principal" and I guess his Lawyer wasn't very good. I think it should be a class action suit and all that took the drug should be rewarded with some type of compensation. Whether to thier insurance company or cash for themselves, according to my other Brother that lives here in Broward Co. "They are an EVIL company."

 

[Poohbear123]

The only article I read on this said he had his heart attack while eating milk and cookies...and all I could think was "Well, if that was usual for him, MAYBE his diet contributed to it." I think it's very hard to prove WHAT caused the heart attack.

My Brother stands 6 foot 2 and only weighs 10 pounds more than he should. HE HAS NO HISTORY of HEART PROBLEMS the PILL GAVE him the Heart Attack!

 

[becker1123]

Thank you, very much. He sued for the "principal" and I guess his Lawyer wasn't very good. I think it should be a class action suit and all that took the drug should be rewarded with some type of compensation. Whether to thier insurance company or cash for themselves, according to my other Brother that lives here in Broward Co. "They are an EVIL company."

I must respectfully disagree: Merck is NOT an evil company. I don't work for them but know people who do and they are very ethical and IMHO behaved in an ethical manner with Vioxx ... as soon as they found there might be a health risk, they pulled it from the market. That was huge. Many people at Merck were then out of a job, and they lost a lot of money, but they did it anyway, as soon as possible to minimize any further problems. If they hadn't done that, I would wonder, but they pulled it so fast it made my head spin.

 

[Poohbear123]

I am sure they did not make the pill to do HARM to people, its just a side affect that they "didn't make known to the public" until it was too late for some.

 

[becker1123]

I think they made it known to the public as soon as they were aware of it. The study in which it first came to light was not a study about heart disease or even Vioxx in heart patients. They were studying Vioxx and it's potential benefits to another condition when this anomoly showed up. Then they immediately pulled the drug. It had already affected some people, but I just don't think they had knowledge about it until it was too late.

 

[Geoff_M]

My Brother stands 6 foot 2 and only weighs 10 pounds more than he should. HE HAS NO HISTORY of HEART PROBLEMS the PILL GAVE him the Heart Attack!

I'm sorry about your brother's health problems, but there's a common medical quote about this situation: "The first symptom of heart disease is often sudden death." Though risk factors are just that, risk factors aren't required before suffering a heart attack.

If you want a good explaination of what research data Merck had, and when they had it, and what in the scientific world is all meant... Read This