Why are there NuvaRing Lawsuits? Here’s NuvaRing by the Numbers…

May 25th, 2012. By AbiK

As NuvaRing lawsuits continue to wind their way through litigation, it’s interesting to look at some of the numbers on the contraceptive—as numbers tend to tell a story.

NuvaRing was also in the news recently for another reason: in a newly published study, apparently longer-term reversible contraception was found to be more effective in preventing pregnancy than shorter-term methods. Longer-term contraception would include IUDs and implants; shorter-term would be birth control pills, patches and rings. The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine (5/24/12), found longer-term contraception to be 20 times more effective in preventing pregnancy (of course, one of the reasons cited for this was human error–such as forgetting to take the pill).

So here we go…

NuvaRing by the Numbers

2001: Year in which NuvaRing received FDA approval

950+: Number of NuvaRing lawsuits pending, as reported in Merck’s 10-K earnings report, fiscal year 2011

56%: Percent by which FDA study found NuvaRing raised risk of blood clots vs. older birth control pills.

6: Types of serious NuvaRing adverse events alleged in lawsuits (blood clots, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, heart attack, stroke, sudden death)

6.5x: Times higher risk for NuvaRing blood clots compared to non-users of hormonal contraception, according to British Medical Journal study (5/10/12)

5,493: Total number of adverse events reported at the FDA AERS database for NuvaRing, 1Q’04-2Q’11*

30: Average age of women who have had a NuvaRing adverse event reported to the FDA*

1,953: Number of NuvaRing adverse events categorized under “Pulmonary Vascular”, 1Q’04-2Q’11*

1,921: Number of NuvaRing adverse events categorized under “Embolism & Thrombosis”, 1Q’04-2Q’11*

1,648: Number of NuvaRing pulmonary embolism adverse events reported, 1Q’04-2Q’11*

1,274: Number of NuvaRing deep vein thrombosis adverse events reported, 1Q’04-2Q’11

*Source: FDA NuvaRing AERS reports via drugcite.com

POM Juice Misleads Again with “Doctored” Ads

May 25th, 2012. By AbiK

Unfortunately, advertising isn’t quite held to the same ethical bar that journalism (usually) is. There’s a careful and deliberate selection of each and every word in an ad—and you’re delusional if you think otherwise. But the folks over at POM Wonderful pomegranate juice have taken their selectivity a bit far this week in rolling out an ad campaign that serves as their rebuttal of sorts to the false advertising ruling made by Judge D. Michael Chappell.

Judge Chappell’s ruling was in response to an FTC complaint regarding the alleged health claims that POM was making about the popular juice. The bottom line? POM was found to have insufficient evidence to support its claims that its pomegranate juice reduced the risk of heart disease—as well as prostate cancer (and even impotence—gee, maybe they should’ve teamed up with Merck to help Propecia victims overcome ED while they were at it). The judge also issued a cease-and-desist order that forbids POM from making such claims for 20 years.

So what does POM do? In true catfight fashion, they stoop to childlike tactics and run some ads that use pull-quotes from the judge’s ruling—out of context. For example, one ad states (from the ruling) that, “Competent and reliable scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the consumption of pomegranate juice and pomegranate extract supports prostate health, including by prolonging PSA doubling time in men with rising PSA after primary treatment for prostate cancer”

But it cuts off there without the following statement: “However, the greater weight of the persuasive expert testimony shows that the evidence relied upon by the respondents is not adequate to substantiate claims that POM products treat, prevent or reduce the risk of prostate cancer or that they are clinically proven to do so.”

It’s an interesting ‘rebuttal’ as, without clinical studies supporting the health claims—studies that would stand up in a court of law, that is—the ads POM is running could actually backfire; after all, rather than just go quietly and not draw further attention to the ruling, now the media will be all over the ads (as we are). And without the ‘scientific proof’ it certainly starts to become transparent that this may well be more about sales and revenue impact than any grand gesture to promote the curative benefits of some medicinal elixir.

Well, as they say, you be the judge—and let us know what you think.

Asbestos News Roundup: 5.24.12 – Textile Worker Asbestos Exposure

May 24th, 2012. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Textile Worker Asbestos Risk

Medical researchers at the University of Nebraska and Duke University have found an association between asbestos-related diseases and the incidence of lung cancer among people who work at asbestos textile mills.

The study, published this May in the journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine, tracked 6,100 workers employed at textile mills that used asbestos in South and North Carolina between 1954 and 1973. The employees’ health and vital status were tracked. Using historical dust samples, the researchers also estimated the size of asbestos fibers which the workers were exposed in the mills.

The study showed that the textile workers who were exposed to asbestos fibers—no matter what the size or diameter—had an increased risk of developing lung cancer. Interestingly, the data showed that the risk of lung cancer increased with the length of the asbestos fibers, so the longer the fiber, the greater the risk for lung cancer. The study supports the hypothesis that asbestos-related lung cancer is associated most strongly with exposure to long, thin asbestos fibers. (Occupational and Environmental Medicine)

Asbestos Lawsuit

BNSF is facing an asbestos lawsuit brought by two former railroad employees who allege they developed asbestos-related disease from exposure to asbestos-containing products while working for the Railway. Both men have asbestos-related lung disease.

In their lawsuit, William Schleicher and Frank Cox accuse the railroad of negligence and failing to provide them a safe place to work, as required by federal law.

According to their attorney, Cox was a boilermaker and Schleicher a blacksmith. Their main exposures were at the West O Street yards. Schleicher was in a reclamation plant that salvaged materials, and Cox was in a heating plant. Schleicher started work in 1943 at age 16, and Cox in 1968. They are seeking a jury trial and damages.

BNSF spokeswoman Suann Lundsberg said: “The claims filed are from former employees who have not worked for BNSF or one of its predecessor railroads for more than a decade. BNSF is currently reviewing the case and will respond through the legal process.” (journalstar.com)

Asbestos Settlement

Bridgeport, CT: A $2.4 million settlement has just been awarded in an asbestos lawsuit brought by the family of Hannibal “Scottie” Saldibar, a tile setter from New Haven, who died after contracting an asbestos-related cancer.

Saldibar, who was 84 when he died, worked as a tile setter for 30 years. He passed away in January 2010, just nine months after being diagnosed with asbestos mesothelioma.

According to a report by the CT Post, a Superior Court jury deliberated about three hours Tuesday before finding the Tile Council of North America liable in Saldibar’s death, and awarding his family $1.6 million. Judge Dale Radcliffe then ordered the association to pay an additional $800,000 in punitive damages.

Although it is a trade association, Kenney said Tile Council of North America developed the asbestos-containing mortar used by tile setters for many years. (Ctpost.com)

Bret Michaels Head Injury Lawsuit Settles

May 18th, 2012. By AbiK

Seems like ages ago now, but remember when Bret Michaels was all over the news after suffering that brain hemorrhage? Thankfully for him, his daughters and family, and Poison fans everywhere, he recovered—and we all got a glimpse of his ordeal when People magazine ran Michaels on its cover with the headline “I’m Lucky to be Alive”.

But while a hemorrhage can seemingly occur out of the blue, in Michaels case, there had been a head injury only the year before—in June, 2009. Michaels’ head injury occurred—rather publicly—during the 2009 Tony Awards, at which he and his band, Poison, were performing “Nothin’ But a Good Time”.

When the song was over, Michaels turned to leave the stage and that’s when a rather large piece of the set descended and appeared to hit Michaels in the head, knocking him down. He suffered a fractured nose and needed stitches in his lip.

Given the timing of the head injury, and then the brain hemorrhage less than a year later, Michaels filed a personal injury lawsuit in March, 2011 claiming the stage accident contributed to his life-threatening brain hemorrhage.

Both the Tony Awards and CBS were defendants in the lawsuit which alleged that the Tony Awards producers did not warn Michaels of a set change after his performance and CBS aired the accident thereby allowing it to be picked up by viewers who then made the accident go viral on sites like YouTube.

Needless to say, terms of the settlement—reached last week after a mediation session—are undisclosed. The head injury lawsuit did not specify the monetary damages being sought when Michaels filed it, however according to the Associated Press, Michaels did state that the injury hurt his ability to play at future shows.

Speaking of shows, now that Michaels is performing, fans can catch him on tour this summer–here’s list of Bret Michaels tour dates.

 

Asbestos News Roundup: 5.17.12 – Electrician Asbestos Risk

May 17th, 2012. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Electricians and Asbestos Exposure Risk

Electricians and electrical cable installers may not know it, but they are at risk for being exposed to asbestos through repair, demolition or installation work. This lethal, fibrous material was used in felted asbestos insulation or asbestos tape to insulate wiring. So working on old power lines, old wiring or breaker boxes would put electricians at risk for asbestos exposure. Older arc chutes also contain asbestos. It was used in circuit breakers, for example, before the mid-1980’s, when they were made of asbestos-containing plastic molding compound.

Recently, an asbestos lawsuit filed by six workers in Tennessee has made media headlines, because the workers were exposed to asbestos when dismantling outdated synchronous condensers, among other things.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Oak Ridge, TN: Six clean-up workers in Oak Ridge have filed an asbestos lawsuit against several government contractors alleging they were unknowingly exposed to asbestos and further they were unprotected when dealing with the lethal substance.

The lawsuit, filed May 5 in Roane County, seeks damages from the contractors who were involved in cleanup operations at the Department of Energy’s (DOE) K-25 plant in 2000-2001. Those contractors included BNFL Inc., now doing business as TSB FA Nuclear Services Inc., which headed a multiyear, $300 million DOE project that dismantled and decontaminated three uranium-enrichment facilities at the Oak Ridge site.

The six plaintiffs worked as independent contractors for R&R Electric Corp., a subcontractor that reportedly was involved in the demolition of “synchronous condensers” at the site. According to a report in the Knoxville News Sentinel, the plaintiffs claim they were told that the condensers did not contain asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls and other hazards, and that their requests for respirators and other protective equipment were refused by the contractor teams at the Oak Ridge. The workers said they were exposed at the site while cutting up the equipment with chop saws.

“The chop saws created thick clouds of fine dust and debris, which completely coated Plaintiffs’ bodies and clothing every day, and which they breathed continuously,” the lawsuit alleges.

The workers also allege that during their work at they were exposed to smoke from fires in 2000 when BNFL and another contractor, Coy Superior Inc., attempted to burn insulating material and wrapping off the large copper coils that had been removed from the condensers to salvage the copper.

“The coils were burned in open fires in the BNFL switchyard over a period of a week, creating huge plumes of smoke,” the lawsuit states. “On information and belief, the insulating material and wrapping contained significant quantities of ACM (asbestos-containing material).”

While contractors reportedly denied knowledge that the equipment contained asbestos, the lawsuit states that the Department of Energy had manuals confirming that the condensers did contain asbestos and that BNFL had access to these manuals.

The lawsuit is seeking unspecified compensation for pain and suffering, increased risk of cancer and other diseases. The plaintiffs are Christopher Todd Upton, Leslie Darnell Jones, Jeffery Lynn Keylon, Paul Steven Vance, James David Parten and Timothy Edward Robbins. (Knoxvillenewsentinal.com)

Lancaster County, NE: BNSF Railway is being sued by two former railroad employees who allege their asbestos-related lung disease resulted from asbestos exposure during their work with the railway.

In their lawsuit, William Schleicher of Lincoln and Frank Cox of Eagle Lake allege they were required to work around asbestos-containing materials and accuse the railroad of negligence and failing to provide them a safe place to work, as required by federal law.

Schleicher worked as a blacksmith and Cox as a boilermaker, and their main exposures were at the West O Street yards. Schleicher was in a reclamation plant that salvaged materials, and Cox was in a heating plant, according to their attorney. Schleicher started work in 1943 at age 16, and Cox in 1968, according to their attorney.(Journalstar.com)

Marshall, TX: Billy F. Wall and Sandra S. Wall have filed an asbestos lawsuit alleging that Mr. Wall’s recent diagnosis of cancer is due to his extensive asbestos exposure during his six years employment at the Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant in Harrison County.

Wall was diagnosed with colon cancer in June 2010, and with asbestos-related pleural disease and mild interstitial pulmonary fibrosis in 2011.

In his lawsuit, Wall states that he was exposed to asbestos from 1974 to 1980 while working as a pipefitter, welder and insulator at the ammunition plant. He claims that he was exposed to asbestos on a daily basis.

Wall has named 17 defendants in his lawsuit: A.W. Chesterton Co., Armstrong International Inc., Certainteed Corp., Clark-Reliance Corp., Cleaver-Brooks Co. Inc., Crane Co., Eaton Corp., Eaton Hydraulics Inc., Eaton Hydraulics, Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions Inc., Fisher Controls International, Power Controls, Spirax Sarco Inc., The J. Graves Insulation Co. Inc., The WM. Powell Co., Watts Water Technologies Inc., and Young Touchstone.

The defendants are accused of failing to warn, failing to test their products concerning the effects of exposure, failing to instruct or notify users or consumers of their products of proper safety measures and for failing to properly package their products so that proper labeling and instructions were easily visible.

Mr. Wall is asking for an award of damages for medical expenses, mental anguish, impairment, loss of enjoyment of life, physical pain and suffering, and court costs. Mrs. Wall is asking the court for an award of damages for mental anguish, loss of consortium and society and loss of household services. (setexasrecord.com)