|
Posted By
|
|
March 6, 2008, 7:10 am
Flag as Inappropriate DrugInjuryWatch
|
|
Subject
|
Should Patients Be Allowed To File Drug Injury Lawsuits?
|
|
|
Patient Lawsuits Against Pharmacuetical Companies For Drug Injuries Might Be Prohibited In U.S. ---
Oral arguments in the Wyeth v. Levine case are scheduled for October 2008. Sometime thereafter the Supreme Court will decide whether FDA approval of a prescription drug prohibits the filing of personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits against drug companies.
Do you think tht this "federal preemption" of drug injury cases is a good idea or bad policy?
You can learn more about this issue at:
http://www.drug-injury.com/druginjurycom/2008/03/drug-injury-pat.html
|
Comments
|
|
|
March 6, 2008, 9:26 am
Flag as Inappropriate orchardo says...
|
|
|
It would be horrible policy, because as we all know, the FDA no longer has teeth and is basically run by the pharmaceutical industry. If you then say the pharma companies can't be sued because of FDA approval, you turn the system into a sick (pardon the pun) joke.
|
|
|
|
March 6, 2008, 11:02 am
Flag as Inappropriate Lrnngdn says...
|
|
|
There is one aspect of the argument that seemed to catch my attention - and it was"
"to prohibit drug injury lawsuits from being filed by patients who have suffered serious side effects caused by unsafe prescription drugs."
If these drugs are unsafe in the first place, and no communications are made between the physician and the patient in form of a waiver, or agreement (for example, if the drug is a trial and the patient still wishes to try it) than the physician should be held accountable.
However, in the case such as this - in where drugs are recalled, have serious side effects or have caused death, the drug company should absolutely be held accountable. Drugs should be extensively tested before being released for use in the general population. In the case that drugs are recalled from serious side effects, the patient should have the right to file suit against the company. It's bad policy and taking away our rights to prohibit suits from occurring.
Many patients do no know the difference, they believe that a prescription given to them by their doctor is going to help - not harm them. The pharmaceutical companies directly influence the market for prescription drugs, and the physicians - therefore should be held accountable.
|
|
|
|
March 6, 2008, 11:17 am
Flag as Inappropriate MSeal says...
|
|
|
Like you said in your article "federal preemption of drug injury cases may have some merit in an ideal world where the FDA was performing its drug-safety regulatory functions at 100%. But that has not been the situation in the past, nor is it the case today."
The thing that I can't get over is the former FDA chief and a professor at UC San Francisco saying the FDA "doesn't have the ability at this time to oversee in a comprehensive fashion everything it regulates." So why does the FDA even exist if they can't do there job. The drug companies must be held accountable by the public because the FDA is not and cannot do their job.
And the FDA wonders why people are losing faith in them and no longer paying attention to their warnings.
|
|
|
|
March 6, 2008, 4:43 pm
Flag as Inappropriate DrugInjuryWatch says...
|
|
|
As shown by this news reporter's story that looks behind a March 2008 New England Journal of Medicine article about the defective Sprint Fidelis lead wire, just because a medical device was approved by the FDA does not mean it is a safe product. See what I'm talking about at:
http://www.drug-injury.com/druginjurycom/2008/03/sprint-fidelis.html
|
|
|
|
March 7, 2008, 10:56 am
Flag as Inappropriate jazzycatzz says...
|
|
|
Obviously, one who has been injured by the approved use of prescription drugs should be allowed the right of seeking the proper remuneration for said injury through our court system. Oops, that was the opinion of one who tries to live in a fair and logical world. Realistically, the fact that the pharma companies are trying to use the weak FDA as a shield against responsibility is as expected as it is just plain wrong. Yes, we live in an increasingly litigious society and you might get an unreasonably hopeful suit from time to time; it's a price of doing business. Approval by the FDA is based on informed opinion, not a claim of perfection. They know that, but what does it cost to try to place the responsibility for their product elsewhere? Reputation or credibility? Please...that train left for pharmaceutical companies long ago.
|
|
|
|
March 19, 2008, 7:55 am
Flag as Inappropriate Relaxin says...
|
|
|
I think this would just give the big pharm companies more wiggle room. I think they already "fast-track" medications that may or maynot be harmful and may or maynot be beneficial. If they are not worried about a multi-million/billion dollar lawsuit if they prematurely introduce a possibly harmful medication, what is standing in their way if they can potentially generate large margins from such an introduction. If anything the FDA needs to tighten their regulations and requirements for big pharm companies. I would go as far as to say the FDA shouldn't be the ones to actually regulate the pharmaceutical companies. There needs to be a separate division who strictly regulates the medical portion of the FDA's responsibilities.
|
|
|
|
June 2, 2008, 10:34 am
Flag as Inappropriate pheinbaugh2 says...
|
|
|
Thats tough. Sometimes yes but people tend to take things WWWAAAYYY too far sometimes for money$$$
|
|
