The Dilemma for Drugmakers

• Report this Comment On March 05, 2009, at 2:03 PM, bamsus wrote:

  The SJC ruling was correct. Allowing negligent conduct merely because the FDA approved something is rediculous. The FDA doesn't have the resources to determine if drug companies are hiding information when it rules on drugs.

  The solution is simple. Make drug companies ceo's & other officers criminally liable for hiding relevant information from the FDA.

  Furthermore, the notion that the FDA won't allow drug companies to amend warning labels is incomprehensible.

  This must be changed.

  Bamsus

• Report this Comment On March 06, 2009, at 10:42 AM, chali2na wrote:

  Criminally liable? I'd say that's a little harsh. If a drug is going to cause one or two people harm, that is pretty much impossible to know unless you performed clinical trials on every single person in the world. It's medicine and there is no right or wrong way, like math. It's a shame that this happened to this woman, but unfortunately stuff like this happens. Because I got a splinter building a workbench that got infected should I sue the lumber yard for not sanding the wood down and rounding the edges? Maybe a fine should be levied against these companies when these one off events occur....and then a 3 fines and then you're criminally liable policy. But this sue happy society we live in a one of the big problems we face today. Innovation and entrepreneurialship (is that a word?) are fading away and imposing more and more liablilty make the cost much greater than the benefit, resulting in less innovation & entrepreneurialship and more government mind-control.

• Report this Comment On March 07, 2009, at 3:50 PM, quiact wrote:

  I cannot believe you had the audacity to end your article with, "Thanks alot, Supreme Court". You suggested investors are of greater importance than the health of others by saying this. You should apologize for taking such a pathological stance regarding others who attempt to ensure the products we consume to restore our health are in fact safe, instead of being a whore for shareholders,

  Dan Abshear

• Report this Comment On March 08, 2009, at 11:10 PM, wth2009 wrote:

  A win for a legal system controlled and manipulated by tort bar – (WSJ 9/16/08 As voters mull the stakes in this year's election, here's an issue that ought to ring alarms in the ears of serious people: tort reform. After 20 years of state and federal efforts to reform a runaway legal system, the trial bar is reviving the monster. ….). Who really gains from the action taken…..the lawyers. Who made this baseless finding against the drug company representing manufacturers of “anything” ..... the lawyers.

  The gold standard is to provide services and products within the scope of “causing no harm" or "malicious intent"? If there is harm, each case should be handled on it’s merit.

  As for foundation for the suit, there is none. The drug has been safe effective and available for 50+ years with an excellent patient response and treatment history as long as it was used as directed by the package insert (gold standard). What about the nurse/hospital causing the harm?

  The lawyers went after Wyeth not because they deserved punitive action for causing harm and/or malicious intent but they have deep pockets.

Add your comment.