VIOXX INJURIES AND DEATHS LEAD TO THOUSANDS OF LAWSUITS

[Guest guest]

Vioxx Injuries and Deaths Lead to Thousands of Lawsuits

 

Then Why Is It Being Returned to the Marketplace?

 

Ronald Grisanti D.C., D.A.B.C.O., M.S.

 

 

The heading in the " A " section of my local newspaper calmly states

that " patients still must decide on painkillers " .

 

And I say, yea right!

 

Are they serious?

 

The general consumer has trusted the FDA to protect them from the

dangers of drug therapy for years.

 

But as everyone now knows, the FDA has failed and failed in a big

way. Can you believe to the toll of 30,000 to 100,000 lives?

 

That's right.

 

According to Cleveland Clinic researcher Eric J. Topol, it is

possible that there are tens of thousands of patients who have had

major adverse events attributable to Vioxx.

 

In an interview, he estimated the number of people who have had heart

problems and strokes as a result of taking Vioxx to be 30,000 to

100,000.

 

Of course as everyone now knows, Vioxx has been returned to the

marketplace by a vote of 17-16.

 

Think about that, 17 of the votes were in favor of allowing the likes

of Vioxx to re-enter the arena of painkillers.

 

However, 16 (50%) of the votes were against putting the arthritis

drug back in the hands of the medical physicians and their patients.

 

During the three-day FDA hearing, cardiologists testified to the

dangers of Vioxx, recommending not to put it back on the market.

 

Nevertheless, despite the pleas from cardiologist against Vioxx, the

panel recommended Merck remain free to sell the painkillers.

 

The only stipulation made by the advisers was for the drugs to have

a " black box " warning on them to alert consumers to potential risks.

 

Not good!

 

According to Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of consumer watchdog Public

Citizen's Health Research Group, these drugs are weapons of mass

destruction.

 

Dr. Wolfe is one of the most vocal critics of the pharmaceutical

industry and the FDA. He said the decision to leave COX-2 inhibitors

on the market " defies common sense. "

 

Here are the Grim Facts

 

Serious problems with Vioxx were first noted shortly after the drug

was approved in 1999, and the first Vioxx lawsuits were filed in

2001.

 

An article published November 5, 2004, in the British medical

journal, The Lancet, stated that Merck should have pulled Vioxx in

2000, when numerous data already showed the dangers.

 

Ponder on These Facts

 

Researchers at the University of Berne, who found that the risk of

heart attack more than doubled in patients who took Vioxx, reached

their conclusions by performing an analysis of the same data that had

already been analyzed in 29 different studies prior to 2000 –

underscoring the fact that Merck failed to withdraw the drug early

enough.

 

Beginning in January 1999, Merck sponsored a study called Vigor

(Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research) to determine whether Vioxx

caused less bleeding and fewer ulcers than naproxen (better known as

Aleve or Naprosyn).

 

While the study found that Vioxx did cause fewer gastrointestinal

problems by half, it also found that Vioxx caused a four or five-fold

increase in heart attacks.

 

During the study, 101 people suffered serious side effects, including

20 heart attacks, while taking Vioxx. If people who had pre-existing

cardiac problems were excluded, the rate of heart attack was still 3

times higher for Vioxx patients than for patients on naproxen (12

versus 4). These results were published November 23, 2000, in the New

England Journal of Medicine.

 

In 2001 cardiologists at the Cleveland Clinic concluded that Vioxx

patients were at twice the normal risk of strokes and heart attacks

as people taking an older compound. The report, written by Dr. Eric

J. Topol, was published in the Journal of the American Medical

Association in 2001. Based on his results, Dr. Topol called for more

trials, but Merck declined to pursue the issue.

 

In October 2002, Dr. Wayne Ray of Vanderbilt University studied the

records of Medicaid patients taking high doses of Vioxx in Tennessee,

and found that they suffered significantly more heart attacks and

strokes than patients who were not taking high doses.

 

In 2002, Elucida Research did a laboratory study and discovered that

Vioxx damaged lipids (fatty compounds found in blood) in such a way

as to create blood clots – one of the serious side effects being

attributed to Vioxx.

 

By the way: Merck discounted most the above research, saying it was

not as strong as a clinical trial – the very sort of study Merck had

so far refused to carry out.

 

Remember this:

 

The Vioxx lawsuits are running into the millions and beyond.

 

Attorneys are advertising everywhere insisting that people who have

suffered a heart attack or stroke seek legal counsel.

 

Are You at Risk?

 

With the return of Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra, can the public be

certain they will not be one of the next group of people to suffer a

heart attack or worse die?

 

Personally, I understand the deep concern that most folks have about

the pain they are suffering with.

 

Unfortunately, the answer lies in identifying the cause(s) of the

arthritis pain in the first place.

 

Can it be done?

 

The answer is YES!!

 

However, I must admit, Madison avenue advertisements are going to do

their utmost to make sure they shine a friendly light on this group

of Cox-2 drugs (Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra).

 

Watch how the stock will increase and more people will die.

 

Matter of fact, Merck stock shot up nearly 12 percent to $32.20 per

share in the minutes following the announcement by the FDA.

 

All for a quick fix and a quick buck!

 

Oh how the Vioxx lawyers are celebrating!

 

 

Written and Reviewed on February 20, 2005