True Story: I saw a comment from a reader here at LawyersandSettlements.com who had gone to the doctor to get some help for his acne. While there, the doctor noticed that this guy’s hair was starting to thin. Long story short, the guy walked out of the doctor’s office with a prescription for Propecia. He now claims he suffers sexual side effects (like erectile dysfunction and impotence). Oh, and btw, he still had his acne.
It got me thinking…
I’m not a glass-half-empty type, but it’s easy to see how, with prescription drugs, one can envision a worst-case-scenario downward spiral of things—especially given the potential side effects with some drugs that are on the market.
So then I started thinking, what if…
What if a guy goes to the doctor for acne. What could happen based on which drugs he’s been prescribed and what the side effects of those drugs could be? The graphic above depicts “The Snake Pit” (classic movie if you haven’t seen it) version of taking prescription upon prescription. A modern day Dante’s “Inferno”. Only in this little vignette, no one emerges from hell in their attempt to mitigate (via new prescriptions) the snowball effect of increasingly negative side effects.
Here’s how this plays out.
(Note, yes, it’s hypothetical, assumes various doctors/specialists involved, and yes, assumes worst case and/or rare scenarios…but still, it could happen. And before you get on me for Accutane being off the market, the drug isotretinoin is still alive and kicking…)
A guy goes to the doctor for acne. He’s given Accutane (isotretinoin). A possible side effect of Accutane is Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). To treat the IBD, he’s given Cipro (antibiotic) and Prednisone (corticosteroid). Cipro has been linked to tendon rupture. Reported, though rare, side effects of Prednisone can include high blood pressure and osteoporosis. Assuming his luck is nil, he experiences these side effects and is given Lisinopril (ACE inhibitor) to combat the high blood pressure, and Fosamax to help combat the osteoporosis.
As we know, Lisinopril has been linked to liver damage (or worse, liver failure). And Fosamax has been under fire for femur fractures. Which, outside of pain meds—which have their own set of side effects—requires another form of medical intervention (surgery). So we come to a “STOP” on that path.
But between the Accutane and the Lisinopril, he begins to experience some hair loss as well—a rare side effect of both drugs, and he’s Mr. Unlucky. So next up, Propecia. Propecia side effects include sexual dyfunction. And he finds himself having some “issues” on the love-making front. Well, there’s a drug for that—Viagra! But let’s face it, between hair loss, sexual dysfunction, a broken thigh bone, a ruptured tendon, high blood pressure and some bowel problems, is it any wonder this guy’s now depressed? So, it’s time for some SSRI’s—like Prozac. And Prozac’s been linked to suicidal behavior.
And, with that, I guess it’s another “STOP”.
We’ve just closed our poll asking whether states should legalize marijuana for medical use. And the results are interesting, as they seem to indicate that public opinion may be shifting a bit in favor of legalization.
Now, admittedly, you could argue that LawyersandSettlements.com readers might somehow inherently represent a group that’s more open to the idea of legal pot. But as of the close of our poll, the results based on 301 respondents are as follows:
Yes, Legalize Medical Marijuana: 75% (N=226)
No, Do Not Legalize Medical Marijuana 25% (N=75)
The reason for saying that public opinion might be shifting a bit is that when we took a look at the same question asked over at Urtak.com a while back, the results were not as clear cut as they appear to be here. At the time, only 55% of respondents at Urtak.com felt that medical marijuana should be legalized.
For those who are keeping track, there are currently 16 states (and Washington DC) in which medical marijuana is legal: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Washington DC, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
Additionally, according to MedicalMarijuana.ProCon.org, there are 10 states that have pending medical marijuana legislation: Alabama, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Do you mind me venting?
I have just been put on a statin because my cholesterol is too high. Apparently my doctor says, at 54, I am at a high risk for heart attack and stroke.
Nice. This, in spite of the fact I have no history of heart disease in my family, I have never smoked, I have exercised semi-regularly and have always watched my weight.
Okay, maybe I haven’t been watching what I eat. I like my steaks and prime rib like everybody else. Butter on popcorn, if you please. And perhaps, on occasion, a beer or two, too many.
And okay, while never an exercise demon I was always a fairly active guy. Rode my bike to work. In the late 90’s I took up walking for health, and to lose a few pounds. Then in 2002 I took up running. I ran a half-marathon in under two hours. And I trained for a full marathon (although I never completed the actual race). I got myself down to my high school weight of 129.
But for the past five years I haven’t done a lot, due to work commitments. Is that the reason for my current troubles? Can five years of inactivity cancel out 40 years of fairly active living?
I guess…
So now I’m on low-dose Aspirin once a day, to thin the blood out. And now, as of last night, I’m on a statin to reduce my bad cholesterol.
Overall, statins are considered good things. And not all statins are created equal. Thankfully, I’m not on Zocor, or Vytorin. I’m on another one. But at 10mg, I’m on the highest dose Read the rest of this entry »
It’s a frequently asked question: Why didn’t a lawyer contact me about my drug complaint?
While, sadly, there have been many instances where someone has been badly harmed by a drug—or has even died—proving that the drug has been the direct cause of injury or harm can be tricky in a court of law. For starters, if the pharmaceutical company has provided a warning on the product, packaging, package insert or advertising about the side effect that caused the harm, chances are a lawsuit about it will be decided in favor of the defendant (i.e., the drug company).
We recently responded to a reader at LawyersandSettlements.com who asked this very question after a loved one who had been taking Enbrel sadly developed a brain tumor and died. The following is how we responded, and we thought we’d share our response as there may be other readers who are interested in it as well. This was the response:
“Let me provide you with some insight as to how these more major drug lawsuits work.
Unfortunately, when it comes to drug litigation and person injury, it is very difficult to prove that a victim was indeed harmed by a specific drug without a direct causal relationship being established between the drug and the injury involved. Typically, a court will not rule in favor of the plaintiff unless there have been major studies done that have been widely accepted by the medical and scientific communities—including such bodies as the Federal Drug Administration (FDA). Many times, the courts look to the existence of a drug recall, or a ‘black box’ warning on a drug’s label, or new warnings issued by the FDA in order to establish beyond a doubt that such a causal relationship exists between the drug in question and the specific injury of the plaintiff.
With Enbrel, the adverse events noted on the prescribing information involve the risk of lymphoma, particularly in children and adolescents, and the risk of fungal infections and tuberculosis. To date, there is not an ‘official’ warning or peer-reviewed, widely accepted study regarding Enbrel and brain tumors—though there is some anecdotal discussion online about it. In a court of law, however, stories and experiences such as those online—regardless of their real merit—are not seen as a concrete basis for finding in favor of a victim.
Having said that, a victim or their loved ones should not refrain from at least filing a complaint with an attorney for review if there has been an injury or death that may be related to a drug. The laws regarding pharmaceutical litigation are complex—and many times there may be other factors involved, such as medical malpractice or negligence, that may present a viable case. It is also in everyone’s best interest to pursue all their legal options, as one attorney may interpret the details of a complaint differently than another. We aim to mitigate that by having more than one attorney review a complaint–but it can be of benefit to explore several legal service providers.”
The bottom line is that while defective drug lawsuits can be challenging to fight in a court of law, victims have every right to pursue them and should do so–it’s often sadly the only means we as individuals have in order to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable once a drug is on the market. It’s also, sadly, often the only way a victim can afford to pay for medical costs incurred as a result of a drug injury. So should you think you might be the victim of a drug injury, have a lawyer review your complaint.
The Obama Administration has tried to beef up the FDA (US Food and Drug Administration). Give it more authority, and more autonomy.
But it’s too little, too late. And the law that the President signed in January, giving the FDA the power to mandate food recalls (it didn’t in the past???) has yet to be implemented and can’t be enforced until they figure out how.
Sorry, but I always thought the FDA was the prescription drug police, the overseer of our food chain and the watchdog over medical devices. Cross that watchdog and look out. Pushing the envelope and dissing the regulator might get you a warning if you’re lucky. Chances are, if you’re a pharmaceutical company, or a food supplier and you screw up—you WILL find yourself in the FDA slammer.
In our dreams…
It comes as no surprise that a recent government review of serious food recalls reveals that the FDA is dropping the ball on its responsibility for protecting the nation’s food supply.
And in so doing, protecting us.
According to a CNN report last week, the Department of Health and Human Safety Services (HHS) reviewed 17 Read the rest of this entry »