corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 14410

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Johnson LA.
Florida sues Merck to recover money spent on Vioxx
The Associated Press 2008 Oct 1
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ig5nCgYcYFMpkykoMkw1qtFGXQyQD93HU58G1


Full text:

Florida has joined eight other states in suing drugmaker Merck & Co. over what the state alleges was deceptive marketing of its former prescription painkiller Vioxx.
In a lawsuit brought by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, the state is seeking restitution for all money spent by state health programs on Vioxx, plus interest.
Florida’s Medicaid program alone spent more than $80 million on Vioxx, once a blockbuster arthritis treatment, between 1999 and 2004. Merck pulled Vioxx from the market four years ago after its own research showed the pill doubled risk of heart attack and stroke.
The lawsuit alleges that “Merck’s costly promotional campaign was intended to convince purchasers that the drug was not only safe, but that they should demand it from their healthcare professionals for pain treatment,” according to a statement from the attorney general.
The suit also seeks civil penalties of up to $10,000 for each time that Merck’s advertising caused a Vioxx purchase to be made, an amount that a court would have to determine, according to a spokeswoman for McCollum.
“The company also allegedly tried to intimidate physicians and researchers who questioned the safety of Vioxx,” the statement adds.
Merck spokesman Ron Rogers said Tuesday that Merck acted responsibly.
The Whitehouse Station, N.J.-based company said in a statement that Vioxx was an effective pain reliever and that the company carefully studied the drug and consistently made results of its studies available to U.S. regulators and the medical community.
“We intend to defend ourselves against the complaint,” Rogers said.
Alaska, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, New York, Texas and Utah have previously brought similar suits, as has New York City.
Except for the Texas case, all those suits currently are pending in New Orleans under U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon, who is overseeing the bulk of the massive Vioxx litigation, according to Rogers.
The litigation includes a $4.85 billion settlement that will end about 50,000 lawsuits by people alleging Vioxx caused heart attacks or strokes. Several thousand other lawsuits filed by people claiming other types of injuries from Vioxx also are pending, and Merck faces two personal injury class-action suits in Canada and a class action suit by shareholders seeking to recover losses on Merck stock.
Merck has already paid out $58 million under a settlement reached in May to end allegations its ads for Vioxx deceptively downplayed health risks. That settlement ended investigations by 29 states and the District of Columbia and also required Merck to submit all new TV commercials for its drugs to the Food and Drug Administration for review.
Merck shares rose 53 cents, or 1.7 percent, at $32.09.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909