McNeil Consumer Healthcare recalls all 100 count TYLENOL® Arthritis Pain Caplet bottles

TYLENOL Arthritis Pain Caplet drug recallMcNeil Consumer Healthcare and the FDA are notifying consumers that McNeil is expanding its recent drug recall of TYLENOL Arthritis Pain Caplets to include all lots of 100 count bottles with the red EZ-OPEN CAP.

Last month, five lots of the product were recalled after consumers reported unusual moldy, musty, or mildew-like odors associated with nausea, stomach pain, vomiting and diarrhea. The odor is caused by the chemical 2,4,6-tribromoanisole, which is believed to be created through the breakdown of a chemical used to treat wooden pallets that were used for transporting and storing packaging materials.

Continue Reading...

Universal ABC Beauty Supply Recalls Weight Loss Pills After FDA Warning

New York-based company, Universal ABC Beauty Supply International Inc., recalled 34 weight loss products after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned of risks from consuming the products.

The FDA informed the company that the diet pills and supplements contain Sibutramine, a drug that can lead to a substantial increase in blood pressure and an accelerated heart rate. This could cause health risks in people with a history of cardiac problems. None of the products have been approved by the FDA, although, Sibutramine has been approved by the agency for use as a weight loss drug. Because these weight loss products have not received FDA approval, there can be no guarantees of the safety and effectiveness of the products.

The list of weight loss products, includes:

  1. ProSlim Plus
  2. 3 DAYS fit
  3. EIGHT FACTOR DIET
  4. 24hours Diet
  5. Slim 3 in1 M-18 ROYAL DIET
  6. 3X SLIMMING POWER
  7. Extrim Plus 24hours Re-BURN Formula
  8. Slim 3in1 EXTRA SLIM FORMULA
  9. Slim 3in1 SLIM WAIST FORMULA
  10. SLIM EXPRESS 360 C
  11. SLIM EXPRESS 4in1
  12. ROYAL SLIMMING FORMULA
  13. BODY CREATOR
  14. Slim Waistline
  15. BODY SHAPING
  16. PERFECT SLIM
  17. Perfect Slim 100% Natural Herbal Essence
  18. IMELDA Perfect Slim
  19. Slim Waist Formula
  20. Super Slimming
  21. 2 DAY DIET
  22. Powerful Slim
  23. BODY SHAPING
  24. SUPER FAT BURNER
  25. SLIMMING FORMULA
  26. SLIM FAST 2
  27. SLIM FAST
  28. Slim up
  29. 7 DAYS DIET
  30. Perfect Slim Up
  31. JM Fat Reducer
  32. SlimBurn
  33. 21 Double SLIM
  34. TRIM PLUS 2

Medical Recall Includes SlimfastThere have been no reports of illness or injury related to these products; the company said it will discontinue the recalled defective drugs. The company is offering refunds on unused pills. If you have any of these weight loss supplements in your home, discontinue use and contact the company.

Diet pill and supplement companies make up a billion dollar industry. However, some pills may have side effects, including nervousness, diarrhea, accelerated heart rate, tremors, increase in blood pressure, and cardiac arrest. Just because pills promise to give you a slim figure does not mean they are completely harmless and contain no side effects. Medical injury lawyers advise people who use these drugs to follow all dosage instructions carefully and consult their physician before they begin taking them.

 

Avandia and Other Glitazones Could Increase Risk of Eye Disorder

You can add yet another medical injury to the long list of risks associated with Avandia – this time it is the increased likelihood of developing an eye disorder called Diabetic Macular Edema (DME). According to studies, people who take a group of anti-diabetes drugs called glitazones, including Avandia, are at a greater risk of contracting the disorder.

Avandia and DME

The research was conducted at the Southern California Permanente Medical Group, and was published in the April issue of the American Journal of Ophthalmology. The study is not the first one suggesting a link between glitazone use and DME, but has confirmed a "modest" association between the two. DME is linked to the accumulation of fluid in the eye and swelling, and may eventually lead to loss of vision.

Medical Injury AttorneyThe study, which was conducted on a total of 996 DME patients, revealed that people who took glitazone-containing drugs, like Avandia, were up to 2.6 times more likely to develop the disorder than those who were not taking the drugs. In fact, the risk of developing DME for glitazone users was up to 68% higher than for non-glitazone users. Avandia contains rosiglitazone, which belongs to the glitazone family.

According to the authors of the study, the safety of a drug is as important is its efficacy in treating a disease. However, current safety evaluations for drugs do not take into account long-term safety because approvals are based on short term clinical drugs. This lack of intensive study could result in the release of a potentially defective pharmaceutical drug into the market. The authors have found enough of a link between DME and glitazone use to advise ophthalmologists treating DME patients to consider glitazone use during diagnosis.

Dangers of Avandia

Recently, a study by the Canadian Medical Association Journal found a link between Avandia and a higher incidence of bone fractures in women. Previous clinical studies have also linked the anti-diabetes drug to chest pain, heart failure, and other heart problems. Medical attorneys have been pursuing lawsuits against GlaxoSmithKline, the company that markets Avandia, for these injuries.

The list of risks associated with Avandia use continues to grow. Eye problems are one of the effects of uncontrolled diabetes which, ironically enough, Avandia is supposed to keep under control. If you are currently taking Avandia, you should consult your doctor about the risks of DME. Your doctor may be able to prescribe a less risky substitute.

If you or a loved one has been injured by the use of Avandia or any other pharmaceutical drug, contact a medical injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

Possible FDA Split Could Mean Safer Drugs, Fewer Medical Injuries

Critics of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have long believed that the agency should be split into two parts to ensure adequate safety processes for drug approvals and, in turn, fewer medical injuries. If President Obama’s recent actions are any indication of whats to come, these critics will soon have their wish.

Last month, President Obama appointed two health experts to top positions at the FDA. Former New York City health commissioner, Margaret Hamper, is the President's choice for the agency's commissioner; while pediatrician and child safety expert, Joshua Sharfstein, is the President's choice for deputy commissioner. Experts believe that the President's choice of two experts is an indication that he is in favor of splitting the FDA into two separate units.

Medical Injury AttorneyFDA critics have long argued that the agency is overworked and simply unable to monitor the safety of the vast amounts of pharmaceutical drugs, medical products, and medical devices that come through its doors. The agency suffers from under staffing and a shortage of resources necessary to ensure drug safety. FDA officials, themselves, admit that the agency is unable to meet the changing demands of a globalized world, where pharmaceutical drugs are frequently sourced from foreign plants. In 2005, the FDA approved close to 3,200 applications for marketing of new medical devices. Yet, the agency has only a fraction of the scientist and researchers necessary to process so many applications. Because of this the FDA often has no other option, but to rely on the device makers themselves to disclose the risks of their products.

FDA Division Supporters

The drug industry has been quietly supporting a possible division of the agency, because it could result in faster approvals of pharmaceutical drugs. The FDA experiences frequent delays in its approval and review processes for pharmaceutical drugs due to its shortage of staff. However, medical injury lawyers would welcome an FDA split due to the possibility of more stringent monitoring of review processes and, therefore, enhanced safety of drugs and devices approved for promotion.  

Medical Injury AttorneyIn recent years the FDA has battled several food safety crises. Every time there is a contaminated batch of peanut butter or pistachios, the agency is forced to turn its attention to food safety. It has become increasingly clear that we cannot continue to expect the agency, responsible for making sure tomatoes and peppers are free of pathogens, to also be responsible for monitoring the safety of bone graft products, implantable cardioverter defibrillators and drug eluting stents.

If you've been injured through use of a defective drug, medical device, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation.

Michigan Moving to Reverse Medical Injury Lawsuit Immunity for Drug Makers

Michigan has the somewhat dubious distinction of being the only state in the country to grant pharmaceutical companies immunity from medical injury lawsuits. That may soon change - on March 26th, the Michigan House of Representatives approved a set of three bills aimed at reversing that immunity.

This is the second time the Michigan House of Representatives has passed the bill granting pharmaceutical companies immunity. Of the three bills, the third aims to allow medical injury lawsuits retroactive to 1996, when then-Governor John Angler signed the law that gave the pharmaceutical industry immunity from lawsuits brought by patients harmed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved products.

The law has been criticized by medical injury lawyers and patient rights advocates, and has been detrimental for thousands of medical injury victims unable to take action against these, often, negligent pharmaceutical companies. These people are victims of a range of defective drugs, such as:

What the law has done, essentially, is give pharmaceutical companies a free pass to market and promote their drugs (in the state) without any fear of consequences in the event of the drugs causing injuries or deaths. Medical Injury AttorneyPatients injured by the drugs are currently helpless in the face of the law. At the time the bill was passed, proponents insisted that it would attract pharmaceutical investment in the state; that theory has since been disproved. Pharmaceutical investments and companies have moved out of Michigan in recent years, taking valuable jobs with them.

Georgia has since tried to emulate Michigan's example. Governor Sonny Perdue introduced a tort reform bill earlier this year that sought to prohibit medical injury lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies for products approved by the FDA. Better sense seems to have prevailed there; that bill was rejected in the Georgia Senate Economic Development Committee.

These instances of states attempting to block patients' right to file medical injury lawsuits against companies signify a dangerous trend. Michigan has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country and their drug immunity laws have done nothing to revitalize it. Other states should take note.

Medical Injury Lawsuits Hold Companies Accountable

The prospect of being held liable in a medical injury lawsuit is probably the biggest factor motivating drug companies to ensure that their products are safe for use. In the absence of such accountability, companies are encouraged to rush through drug approvals. The only people who suffer from this carelessness are unfortunate consumers.

If you've been injured by the use of a defective drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP to discuss your case.

AstraZeneca Accused of Suppressing Unfavorable Seroquel Studies, Faces Medical Injury Lawsuits

According to many, recently filed medical injury lawsuits, AstraZeneca neglected to release findings of a study that linked its anti-psychotic drug Seroquel to diabetes and sudden weight gain.

The results of the study, named Study 15, were available in 1997, but company executives conveniently chose to file away the results rather than notifying doctors. The company used other studies that painted a more favorable picture of the drug to promote it. Medical Injury LawsuitLater that year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of Seroquel. Since then, Seroquel has become one of the company's best selling drugs with billions of dollars in sales, including a whopping $12 billion in the last three years. Meanwhile, thousands of patients who were prescribed Seroquel developed diabetes and suffered extreme weight gain.

More than 9000 patients have developed hyperglycemia, diabetes, and weight gain after using the drug and have filed medical injury lawsuits against the company. Plaintiffs called for the unsealing of confidential company documents that prove the company was aware of the link between the use of Seroquel and diabetes and weight gain. As the contents of these documents are revealed, it is  apparent that, not only was the company aware of Seroquel's potential side effects, but the company also ordered its sales representatives in the U.S. to tell doctors that the drug did not cause diabetes. This order was mandated after one of AstraZeneca's own physicians told a client such a link was indeed possible.

The release of the "hidden" documents has generated a long list of questions about the extent of deceit by the company. The documents reveal that a University of Minnesota psychiatrist, Dr. S. Charles Schulz, came to "questionable" findings regarding the safety of the drug, and still announced that it was "significantly superior" to the then, industry-leading Haldol. In his research, Dr. Schulz used much of the same data that, back in 2000, revealed Seroquel was no more effective than other cheaper alternatives. After using the same data, however, he managed to come to the conclusion that the drug was more effective.

If this all sounds sickeningly familiar, you may have heard about the recent Forest Laboratories Inc. scandal, in which federal prosecutors charged Forest Laboratories Inc. with suppressing studies that showed not-too-favorable results of its Lexapro medication for use in teenagers. 

Medical Injury Lawyers

These all-too-frequent scandals raise questions about how drug companies are managing to spin research to present a favorable picture of their otherwise, questionable drugs. This is an issue the FDA has been battling a lot in recent years, as lawmakers, patients' safety advocates and medical injury lawyers around the country demand to know why companies are allowed to pass off results of company-sponsored studies as proof of their product's safety.

If you've been injured by use of a defective drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your case.

Forest Laboratories Inc. Accused of Illegal Marketing of Antidepressants

As the Justice Department charged Forest Laboratories Inc. in February with illegal marketing of its antidepressants Celexa and Lexapro, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of Lexapro for use in children.

Forest Laboratories Inc. marketed the drugs for use in children and adolescents even though it had no FDA approval for such use. The civil complaint filed against the company alleges that:

  • Executives at Forest promoted favorable results from one clinical trial to purport that the drugs were effective in children. The trial, conveniently enough, was financed by the company. Another study, that did not result in such favorable findings, was concealed and the company failed to share the results of that study.
  • The company awarded pediatricians who prescribed the drugs. There were ski vacations, gift certificates, fishing trips, and spa visits dangled before doctors to coax them into prescribing Celexa and Lexapro.
  • Forest conducted trials that were simply marketing campaigns in the guise of studies. Doctors are not prohibited from prescribing drugs for unapproved uses; drug makers, however, are not allowed to promote off label or unapproved uses of drugs. In recent weeks, Eli Lilly settled an off label use promotion suit and Medtronic had a medical injury lawsuit filed against them for off label promotion of its Infuse bone growth product.

Medical Injury AttorneysThe allegations that Forest Laboratories Inc. concealed studies showing unfavorable results for Lexapro and Celexa seem to have received no attention by the FDA. On March 20th, the agency approved the use of Lexapro for use in adolescents. Lexapro is only the second antidepressant approved for use in younger patients.

Medical Injury Attorneys

Often, pharmaceutical companies indulge in unethical and illegal marketing of products that have not been approved for certain uses. Forest Laboratories' illegal marketing of Lexapro and Celexa for use in younger patients even before they were approved for such use, could have placed children and adolescents at risk of antidepressant abuse. Antidepressant medications, when not used as they are prescribed, can cause suicidal fantasies or worsen symptoms of depression. Unfortunately, we often see pharmaceutical companies ignoring health risks posed by unapproved uses of drugs to increase profits without thought of the risks of medical injuries.

Patients injured by unapproved use of a drug can consult a medical injury lawyer to file a lawsuit against the company, if it was engaged in promoting such off label use.

If you or a loved one has been injured by the use of Celexa or Lexapro, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP to learn about your options for compensation.

Watson Recalls Propafenone HCL tablets Due to Risk of Injuries from Over Dosage

Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. announced that it is recalling one lot of Propafenone HCL 225 mg tablets because they may contain a more intense dose of the active ingredient than is needed. The recall affects a single lot of the tablets that was shipped between October 15th and November 26th of 2008.

Propafenone is used in the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, including conditions associated with accelerated heartbeat, like ventricular and atrial arrhythmias. However, it can be dangerous if not used as prescribed. The drug is believed to increase the risk of dangerous arrhythmias if taken by patients who have an underlying heart disease. Patients who suffer from liver problems, asthma, or bradycardia are also advised to avoid Propafenone. The long term effects of the drug have not been extensively researched. Even minor over-dosage of Propafenone has been found to have serious effects. Patients who take even small quantities of the drug above the prescribed limit could experience a drop in blood pressure and arrhythmias.

Propafenone RecallWatson Pharmaceuticals Inc. says they are voluntarily recalling the lot of tablets to prevent any risk to patients due to over dosage. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been informed of the recall and the company has asked patients who are in possession of the 225 mg tablets to check the container and see if the tablets belong to the lot being recalled. Consumers should return the recalled tablets by calling the company. Any adverse reactions should be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch program. Patients currently using 225 mg Propafenone HCL tablets have been asked to contact their physician if they have any questions.

Last year, Ethex Corporation announced a recall of over sized morphine Sulphate, Propafenone HCI, and other tablets because they contained twice the necessary amount of the drug. Those over sized tablets caused morphine over dosage injuries and resulted in several medical injury lawsuits filed by medical injury lawyers against Ethex. Also, medical injury lawsuits continue to be filed against Mylan Pharmaceuticals over double strength Digitek tablets that contain extra dosages of the active ingredient Digoxin. 

Injuries Caused by Defective Drugs

Over dosage due to a defective pharmaceutical drug containing a greater amount of the active ingredient than is necessary is entirety preventable by the company if it follows stringent manufacturing and quality control processes. There is no excuse for releasing batches of drugs that expose users to dangerous effects of over dosage because of careless errors made at the manufacturing plant.  

If you've been inured by the use of recalled Propafenone HCL tablets manufactured by Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc., contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

Zencore Plus Recalled; Poses Life-threatening Risk

Bodee LLC is conducting a voluntary nationwide recall of the male enhancement drug Zencore Plus. Due to a combination of ingredients, the drug can cause a sudden, life-threatening drop in blood pressure.

Zencore Plus RecallAfter being alerted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of its danger, Bodee LLC recalled Zencore Plus on March 11, 2009. The drug contains benzamidenafil, which, when mixed with organic nitrates, can cause serious health risks. According the the FDA, "The use of Zencore Plus by an unsuspecting user of organic nitrates may pose a life-threatening risk of sudden and profound drop of blood pressure". One user reported that the drug caused nausea, excessive sweating, and caused their vision to go "white". The probability of these health risks is unknown; anyone with this drug in their possession should stop use immediately.

Zencore Plus is sold in health food stores and over the internet. It comes in 2-capsule packs, five packs at a time or in a single 10-capsule pack. The drug is supplied by Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in Norcross, GA.

Dangerous Pharmaceuticals

If you have been negatively affected by this drug or experienced any of the above mentioned side effects, an experienced medical injury lawyer can help you get the compensation you deserve.

If you have this drug do not take it. If you have taken it and it caused any adverse effects please contact the FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088 or a medical injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

Psoriasis Drug Raptiva Linked to Brain Infection Injury

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a health advisory warning, about a reported link between the use of the psoriasis drug Raptiva and the occurrence of a rare brain infection injury.

FDA regulators received 3 reports of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) in patients using Raptiva, a psoriasis drug manufactured by Genentech. The agency was also informed of at least one "possible" case of infection. Two of the confirmed PML patients as well as the sole possible patient died. All 4 patients had been taking the psoriasis drug for more than 3 years. The agency is reviewing the incidence of PML in patients using Raptiva and has announced that it will take steps to ensure that patients taking the medication are not placed at excessive risk.

Progressive multifocal luekoencephalopathy (PML), which usually occurs in people with weakened immune systems, can result in a decline in nerve function and is usually fatal. The infection is marked by an inflammation of the white matter of the brain. It is seen very often in patients suffering from AIDS or other immune deficiency disorders. Symptoms may include:

  • muscle weakness
  • loss of coordination
  • speaking difficulties
  • vision problems
  • personality changes

Individuals often become progressively clumsy and are, ultimately, left with serious disability. People who suffer from PML have a grim prognosis. Approximately 80% of PML patients can die within 6 months of contracting the infection. Defective Pharmaceutical DrugThose who do survive may find themselves with severe neurological difficulties. People with AIDS who suffer from PML may find that the anti-HIV drugs they take can help alleviate the symptoms of PML. People taking medications that suppress immunity are especially at risk for PML. Of the 4 Raptiva users who contracted PML, no one was taking any other immune-suppressive medications.  The FDA has confirmed that it will take steps to make sure that patients taking Raptiva are informed of PML symptoms and that these patients are monitored by healthcare professionals for any sign of the infection.

Almost all pharmaceutical drugs come with a set of side effects or adverse reactions. Therefore, testing pharmaceuticals is very important – the benefits of the drug should be weighed against its risks and it should be prescribed accordingly. If a drug is proved to cause a risk of a potentially fatal and debilitating disease, its generally safe to say that the benefits of the drug are not worth the risk of serious illness. Unfortunately, very often, inadequate testing and rushed approval processes cause adverse reactions to come to light only after illnesses and injuries have resulted from the use of the drug.  

Medical Injury Lawyers

People injured by the use of a defective pharmaceutical drug often need the help of a medical injury lawyer to recover damages for their injuries.

If you have been injured by a dangerous drug, contact a medical injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your case.

Digitek Medical Injury Lawsuits Filed in Orange County, Texas

Four medical injury lawsuits have been filed in Orange County, Texas against Mylan Pharmaceuticals over the cardiac drug, Digitek. The lawsuits relate to injuries caused by Digitek tablets that contained a double strength dose of the active ingredient, Digoxin.

The double strength Digitek tablets were the subject of a massive recall in April 2008. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a Class I nationwide recall of all lots of Digitek, manufactured by Mylan Bertek Pharmaceutical Inc. and UDL Laboratories that year. Earlier, the FDA issued warnings to Mylan and UDL for failure to file regular safety reports at their New Jersey manufacturing facility. In February 2007, the FDA issued a second warning claiming that there were faulty manufacturing practices at the company. The medical injury lawsuit claims damages for “physical pain” the plaintiffs suffered after taking the double dose tablets.

Digitek Lawsuits

Digoxin, which is the main active ingredient in Digitek tablets, improves the heart's ability to pump blood, in case of heart failure. It is used to treat a range of cardiac problems, including accelerated or irregular heartbeat, heart failure, dizziness or palpitations. Pharmaceutical LawyerWhile it is very effective in the treatment of atrial flutter and other heart conditions, an overdose of Digoxin can have serious consequences on a person's health. Digoxin overdose can quickly lead to digitalis toxicity, whose symptoms include dizziness, blurred vision and other medical issues. In extreme cases, the victim can suffer from a decreased heart rate, pulse irregularities and palpitations. Digitalis toxicity can also impact the functioning of the kidneys. It is therefore an especially dangerous condition in patients who already suffer from kidney and renal disorders. Patients who took the double dose Digitek tablets were at risk of an overdose. The companies involved in producing the double dose tablets including Mylan Bertek Pharmaceuticals Inc, UDL Laboratories Inc., and Actavis Totowa have yet to provide solid explanations for why so many lots of these tablets contained twice the recommended dosage.

Medical Injury Lawyers

Pharmaceutical negligence can leave patients at risk for adverse reactions, side effects, and as in the Digitek case, over-dosage. Pursuing claims against these big name companies requires access to financial and medico-legal resources. Often, only specialized medical injury attorneys have access to these resources.

If you have been by the use of a defective pharmaceutical drug, contact a Texas medical injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation. 

Georgia Set to Limit Liability for Pharmaceutical Drug and Medical Device Companies

Georgia has introduced legislation aimed at protecting manufacturers of pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices from injury liability in a misplaced effort to attract these companies to the state.  If it becomes a law, the bill may have dangerous implications for Georgia residents who could have their options for liability claims severely limited.

Senate Bill 101 was introduced last week by Senator Bill Cowsert (R- Athens). The bill, which has the approval of Governor Sonny Perdue, aims to amend existing liability codes. Promoters are hoping Defective Medical Products to pass it before Atlanta becomes the venue for the world's largest biotechnology conference in May. Earlier this year, Governor Perdue unveiled the legislation at a meeting of the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, outlining his intention of making it harder for victims to pursue civil liability claims against pharmaceutical companies. Basically, the bill grants immunity to drug and medical device manufacturers from any medical injury lawsuits if the drug or device has already been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It is no secret that the legislation is aimed at making the state's investment climate attractive to pharmaceutical companies who may consider setting up business there. As a spokesman for the governor confirms, the state wishes to pursue these companies aggressively to set up base in Georgia, and so, has dangled the civil liability immunity carrot in front of them.

Not surprisingly, civil justice proponents, patients' rights advocates and medical injury lawyers have been vocal in opposing any bill that grants immunity to pharmaceutical companies and medical device makers based purely on FDA approval of drugs or devices. As we have seen in recent years, many drugs and devices have been hastily pulled off the market after the dangers of using them came to light. All of these products had FDA approval. There are critics both within the FDA and outside the organization who claim its inspection standards and oversight procedures are far from adequate. In a scenario like this, passing legislation that relies purely on FDA approval to decide the validity of medical injury lawsuits is extremely harsh and unfair to patients. Beside, dangling the immunity carrot in front of pharmaceutical companies may actually prove counterproductive. The only other state that grants immunity to these companies is Michigan, which, contrary to being flooded with investment after the immunity law was passed, has actually found thousands of pharmaceutical jobs leaving the state.

Medical Injury Lawyers

Any time a state attempts to interfere with patients' rights to hold companies responsible for their injuries is a bad sign for civil justice in the country. Granting these companies immunity at the cost of patients' rights to protect themselves is a serious mistake, and one we hope Georgia won't make.

If you have been injured by the use of a defective pharmaceutical drug or medical device, contact a medical injury attorney at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your claim.

FDA Guidelines on Off-Label Drug Use May Lead to Injuries

As the Bush administration prepared to vacate office, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued new guidelines that ease restrictions on promotion of off-label drug use by pharmaceutical companies. The rule has been severely criticized because it may lead to more dangers when pharmaceutical drugs are used in ways not approved by the FDA.

It is illegal for pharmaceutical companies to promote off-label use of their drugs, although physicians are allowed to prescribe drugs for purposes not approved by the FDA. Doctors are allowed and often do rely on published medical research to prescribe drugs for unapproved uses to their patients. In its new rule, the FDA allows pharmaceutical companies to cite medical journal research supporting off-label uses of a drug. The biggest problem with relying on medical journal articles is that such research does not go through a strict screening process. It is hardly meant to be used as a substitute for the rigorous approval procedures conducted by the FDA.  Plus, there is also the risk that pharmaceutical companies may pay medical researchers and scientists for articles that recommend promotion of the drug for off-label use, which clearly would not be genuine, in-depth research articles.Pharmaceutical Drugs

The new guideline has been criticized from both within and outside the Bush administration. The Department of Veterans Affairs, patient advocacy groups, state prosecutors and medical injury lawyers around the country stand adamant that the new guidelines will weaken an already unstable FDA and expose patients to the omnipresent dangers of off-label drug use.

Off-label drug use continues to be a major danger to patients at risk of side effects from such drugs. Recently, Eli Lilly and Company agreed to a mammoth settlement over civil and criminal lawsuits arising from off-label drug use promotion. Also, Medtronic currently faces a lawsuit arising from the same unethical practices related to its Infuse Bone Graft. The threat of massive civil and criminal liability is the only thing preventing mass off-label promotion by drug manufacturers.  In the absence of rules completely prohibiting such promotion, drug manufacturers will have the freedom to place patients at risk in order to multiply their profits.

Promotion of off-label drug use by pharmaceutical companies can expose patients to unknown side effects simply because off-label uses are not researched as extensively as approved uses and, therefore, have little research to provide help in the case of adverse effects. In such cases, patients who have been injured can file a medical injury lawsuit against the company with the help of a medical injury lawyer.

If you have been injured by the use of a defective pharmaceutical drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

 
 
 
Continue Reading...

Defective Pharmaceuticals Could cause Terrorism Risk

If the prospect of contaminated Heparin and injuries from Avandia were not disturbing enough, an eminent cardiologist has now warned of the danger of a biological threat if the FDA does not get its act together, and fast.

Dr. Steven Nissen, a prominent Cleveland Clinic cardiologist and medical researcher, was one of the first to bring the risk of Avandia injuries caused by Glaxo's anti-diabetes drug into the spotlight. This man has a reputation for being straight forward and honest and has never shied away from calling out pharmaceutical companies and the FDA for their negligence.  He has also been named a possible contender for FDA chief.  Big pharmaceutical companies have always been wary of his announcements and the FDA has frequently been the target of Dr. Nissen's criticism. 

So, when Dr. Nissen raises concerns that terrorist organizations, like Al-Qaeda, could use the FDA's scant oversight of foreign pharmaceutical plants to mount a biological attack on the U.S., we are inclined to pay attention. Dr. Nissen insists that he is not trying to stir up paranoia. Recent instances of the FDA’s somnambular conduct of its drug safety processes, especially at foreign plants, do raise concerns that the facilities could be used by those who seek to harm Americans. China, for instance, is growing to be a significant source of drugs manufactured for Americans. Last year's heparin scandal was traced to batches of contaminated Heparin injections manufactured in China. The Heparin contamination, it is believed, came from adding a synthetic, cheaper compound in place of the original ingredient in a possible effort to cut costs. Since then, we have found that the FDA has not conducted a single inspection of the Chinese plant since it received approval several years ago. The FDA now has an inspection office in China to handle inspections of food and drug plants supplying the U.S. It seems like a reassuring first step, until you realize that the total staff strength at the Chinese FDA office is 8.

The FDA admitted that it has been unable to adapt to growing changes brought about by globalization. In a scenario where a growing number of drugs are sourced from Chinese plants, there may be reason to worry about whether a lack of FDA inspections, combined with poor regulatory standards in China could lead to the first major biological terrorist attack on the U.S. Of course, the chances of terrorists infiltrating a Chinese pharmaceutical plant and contaminating drugs meant for American consumers may seem far fetched now, but we never imagined that a group of zealots would drive aircrafts into the heart of New York City either. 

Medical Injury Lawyers

The FDA's poor oversight of drug makers and poor regulatory practices, combined with pharmaceutical companies' negligence, have time and again placed American consumers at risk of tainted or defective pharmaceutical drugs. If you have been injured as a result of using a dangerous drug or defective medical device, you will need the help of a medical injury lawyer to recover the compensation you deserve.

To get the help you need contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

Ethex Corporation Issues Large Scale Recall of Defective Drugs

Generic drug manufacturer, Ethex Corporation, has suspended the manufacturing and sales of dozens of defective pharmaceutical drugs from its line, including several brands of isosorbide mononitrate, amlodipine and nitroglycerin, among others.

The company, which is a subsidiary of St. Louis-based KV Pharmaceuticals, took the step after inspections of the company's facilities by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This second massive recall comes just a few months after the company announced a recall of some of its products in 2008. The earlier recalls were the result of several anomalies in the manufacturing of drugs, including oversized tablets that contained twice the required amount of the drug. The extra sized tablets included Morphine Sulphate Extended Release, Morphine Sulphate Immediate Release, Propafenone HCI, Isosorbide Mononitrate Extended Release, Hydromorphone HCI tablets, and Dextroamphetamine Sulphate. There have been several medical injury lawsuits already filed against the company related to morphine over-dosage, due to the oversized morphine tablets. Morphine over-dosage can lead to decelerated heart beat, disorientation, confusion, lightheadedness, fainting and convulsions.

The new recall by Ethex includes almost the entire line of drugs manufactured by the company. The products recalled include generic versions of the pain killer OxyContin, anti-depressant medication Toprol XL and cough medicines.  Most of the drugs have been recalled from wholesale agencies, while some have also been recalled from retailers.  A press release issued by the company asks patients who are using the medications to continue using them due to the health risks of suddenly stopping the medication. The company has also asked patients to consult with their doctors and be observant for any side effects; any side effects noticed should be reported through the FDA's MedWatch program.

Hiring a Medical Injury Lawyer

When it comes to injuries caused by unsafe pharmaceutical drugs, it is important to save the bottles or containers of the medication. We advise you to discontinue use of the medication after consulting with your doctor and talk to a medical injury lawyer. It's important to hire an attorney who has an established record of pursuing and winning claims against major pharmaceutical companies. The medical injury lawyers at Arnold & Itkin LLP have successfully represented dozens of victims of unsafe pharmaceutical drugs. 

If you have been injured by the use of a defective drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your claim.

Congress Report Slams Shoddy FDA Approval of Medical Drugs and Devices

Under scrutiny for its failure to prevent unsafe pharmaceutical and medical devices from entering the American market, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been criticized by a government body in a report filed this week.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) expressed doubts that Americans can expect adequate protection “from unsafe and ineffective medical products” from the FDA.  The GAO submitted its list of federal government agencies that are in need of improvement and the FDA made the list, which also includes the Treasury Department and Medicare. According to the report, FDA efforts to ensure the safety of the American consumer have been deterred not only by increasing globalization that has led to a large number of drugs and devices being made in overseas plants, but also because newer and more complex devices are being developed. Already bogged down by a lack of resources to handle such complex and technologically advanced products, the FDA also lacks access to databases that allow thorough and regular inspections of all plants, including the many overseas.  Other groups have also criticized the FDA's record in keeping dangerous drugs and devices out of the American market. The FDA acknowledges that there are holes in the system that need to be plugged if the agency is to be able to carry on its task of protecting American consumers.

Meanwhile, with a new administration in power there are signs that a beefing up of FDA may be in the works. According to another report, House Energy and Commerce Democrats are planning to introduce new laws that give the country's premier drug safety agency greater powers to oversee pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices. Disapproval for the FDA's conduct has spilled over into criticism for just about anything the beleaguered agency does. Earlier in January, a slideshow that attempted to boost morale by comparing the FDA chief Janet Woodcock to Gandhi had lawmakers furious about the $1.5 million contract awarded to the consultant responsible for the creation of the slide show. Another point of criticism was that the slideshow contract was handed to a firm known for its contact with pharmaceutical companies. The FDA has, in recent years, also come under fire for its links to the pharmaceutical industry.

The agency's failure to guarantee the quality of pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices introduced into the market has left dozens of people dead and hundreds injured in recent pharmaceutical scandals. Some of these include Avandia heart injuries, contaminated Heparin and Paxil side effects.  

Medical Injury Lawyer

If you have been injured by the use of a defective pharmaceutical drug or medical device, you will need the representation of an expert medical injury lawyer to recover compensation. 

Contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free consultation.

 

 

Emails Confirm GlaxoSmithKline Concealed Avandia Injury Concerns

A series of e-mails confirm what medical injury lawyers have suspected for months now - that GlaxoSmithKline has been long aware of the side effects associated with the use of its diabetes medication, Avandia.

In 2007, a study by pioneering Cleveland Clinic cardiologist Dr. Steven Nissen, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, revealed that patients who took Avandia are at a higher risk of developing cardiac disease. Doctor Nissen studied the effects of Avandia use in more than 15,000 patients, monitoring 12,283 subjects in a control group. He found 86 cases of myocardial infarction in the group that was given Avandia, compared to 72 cases in the control group, and 39 deaths among Avandia users as opposed to 22 deaths in the control group. At the time, Dr. Nissen acknowledged that a few deaths in more than 15 thousand subjects may seem like an inconsequential number, but because the studies were conducted over a short period of time and because of the increased risk of heart disease in diabetic patients, the enhanced incidence of heart attacks in Avandia users was cause for worry. Glaxo was quick to refute the findings of the study. The company released a statement questioning the methods used by Dr. Nissen, but the FDA quickly issued a safety alert on Avandia.

Since then, the link between Avandia and heart disease has become stronger with more numbers of people killed and hundred of cases of heart failure. Now, reports indicate that the company was aware of the increased risk all along. According to reports, senior GlaxoSmithKline scientists wrote e-mails just before the publication of Doctor Nissan's study admitting that his findings were "very similar" to the conclusions reached by GlaxoSmithKline. The company, at the time, was under scrutiny because of the Vioxx scandal which associated Merck's painkiller with an increased risk of heart disease. The Vioxx concerns ended with the company withdrawing the drug and hundreds of medical injury lawsuits filed by patients who suffered heart attacks after taking Vioxx.  Desperate to avoid Merck's fate, Glaxo went all out to criticize Dr. Nissen's findings almost immediately after publication of the study. Avandia use has decreased dramatically since then, but it remains on the market and thousands of patients continue to take the drug.

Pursuing Medical Injury Claims

Pharmaceutical companies may often hide important safety information about their drugs in order to remove obstacles in their marketing plan. Such suppression of information may be grounds for a medical injury lawsuit against the drug maker in the event of injuries caused by the drug.

If you or a loved one have suffered heart problems after taking Avandia, you may have grounds for compensation. Contact the medical injury lawyers at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your case.

 

Eli Lilly Agrees to Settlement in Zyprexa Case

Pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly & Company has agreed to a $1.42 billion settlement in a civil and criminal suit involving injuries resulting from the company's promotion of off-label use of its anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa. This settlement includes a $30 million award to Texas.

The U.S. Department of Justice has been investigating the manner in which Eli Lilly & Company engaged in improper marketing of Zyprexa for uses not approved by the FDA. Zyprexa is an anti-psychotic drug approved for treatment of patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, the company, beginning in 1999, commenced promotion of Zyprexa use for patients suffering from dementia, depression and other conditions. Eli Lilly representatives were sent to nursing homes to market the drug for elderly residents. The FDA does not prohibit doctors from prescribing medicines for purposes other than those approved, but pharmaceutical companies are not allowed to promote such off-label use of a drug. Eli Lilly was, therefore, acting in blatant violation of FDA regulations by promoting the off-label use of Zyprexa.

Reports of injury, including infections and heart attacks, began to surface, but the company chose to overlook them and continue to promote Zyprexa for use in elderly dementia patients. In 2006, the FDA asked Eli Lilly to include strong warning labels on Zyprexa cautioning patients of the increased risk when used by the elderly. The company has since had close to 32,000 medical injury lawsuits failed against them and has been forced to pay approximately $1.2 billion in settlements.

Eli Lilly’s violation of FDA rules and complete disregard for patient safety has shocked patients' safety advocates, concerned citizens and medical injury lawyers since the scandal first made headlines. Unfortunately, greed often takes precedence over ethical promotion practices at many of the country's most reputed pharmaceutical companies. When the FDA gives approval to a particular drug, it does so to reassure patients that they can feel safe using the drug for a specified condition. When companies like Eli Lilly greedily promote their products for unapproved purposes, they place consumers at risk for serious injury and even death.

Pursuing Pharmaceutical Drug Injury Cases

Pursuing claims against a major pharmaceutical company can be a long, complex procedure, involving expert witnesses and medical researchers, who can help build a winning case. At Arnold & Itkin LLP, we have pursued injury lawsuits against some of the country's biggest companies to recover compensation for our clients. 

If you have been harmed by a defective drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your case.

 

Study Links Avandia to Bone Fractures

A study published by the Canadian Medical Association Journal reveals that female patients who take Glaxo SmithKline's type 2 diabetes drug Avandia have an incidence of bone fractures that's twice the rate of men with diabetes who are on the medication. 

The study was based on the findings of 10 clinical trials conducted on nearly 14,000 patients. Researchers at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine found that out of every 20 women in their seventies with type 2 diabetes who took Avandia for a minimum of one year, there was at least one incidence of bone fracture. The risk for women in their fifties was one bone fracture per 55 women. In both these cases, the figure is almost twice the acceptable risk for those age groups.

Avandia is part of the thiazolidinedione group of drugs or glitizones that are used to lower blood sugar levels in people who suffer from type 2 diabetes.  This group of drugs has already been linked to cardiovascular problems including accelerated heart rate, heart failure and cardiac arrest. The FDA requires that Glaxo SmithKline post strong warning labels on Avandia containers warning about these risks. These additional findings that point to an increased risk of bone injuries in patients who take Avandia are bound to disturb female patients. As women age, they are more predisposed to bone fractures, regardless of whether they suffer from diabetes or not, and Avandia's increased bone fracture risk has medical experts wondering if the drug's blood sugar level lowering benefits are really worth the multiple risks that the medication comes with.

Avandia and Heart Problems

Clinical studies have shown an increased risk of heart-related problems including heart failure and chest pain with patients who take Avandia. Patients are encouraged to speak with their doctor regarding the risks and side effects of Avandia, and weigh the risks with the benefits before making a decision to take the medication.

Patients who have suffered health problems as a result of taking Avandia have filed lawsuits against Glaxo SmithKline for its failure to report the cardiac risks associated with use of the drug. The company has a poor record of safety reporting, and has been embroiled in legal battles regarding its failure to make public safety test results of its anti depressant Paxil, and its dangerous side effects on unborn fetuses. Paxil has been linked to serious birth defects including atrial septal heart defects, PPHN, and congenital defects Omphalocele and Craniosynostosis.

Avandia Injury Lawsuits

If you or a loved one has suffered cardiovascular problems or bone fracture injuries after taking Avandia, you may be able to obtain compensation for your injuries with the help of a medical injury lawyer. The lawyers at Arnold & Itkin LLP have years of experience in drug injury litigation, and have the expertise and resources to pursue claims against big pharmaceutical companies like Glaxo SmithKline.

Contact an experienced medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your claim.

 

CDC Report Confirms Heparin Injuries Caused by Synthetic Chemical Contamination

A report titled Outbreak of Adverse Reactions Associated with Contaminated Heparin issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed the worst fears of the public – that Heparin injuries and deaths were caused by a synthetic chemical that was added to the drug at a Chinese plant.

According to a followup article published in the Washington Post, the CDC has found strong evidence linking the chemical oversulfated chondroitin sulphate and the symptoms that patients who had been given Heparin, Baxter's blood thinner began to suffer in November last year. Allergic reactions to the product included nausea, breathing difficulties and a rapid drop in blood reassure. In the United States alone, 81 people are confirmed to have died from the contaminated Heparin, and there have been hundreds of reactions to the medical product.  There are fears that more side effects could lie potentially hidden in a patient's system, to erupt later in unrecognizable forms. 

Oversulfated chondroitin sulphate is a processed form of chondroitin sulphate, an animal sourced product that is used in arthritis medications. Chondroitin sulphate is much cheaper to produce, and it's believed that this is why the Chinese producers added it to the drug to replicate the blood thinning properties of the original ingredient.  The recalled contaminated heparin continued to sit on shelves in hospitals in many states even after a recall was announced in early 2008, and it's entirely possible that there may be more injuries resulting from the contamination that are still under the radar. It's not easy to connect a contaminated drug to symptoms, and for months the FDA was unaware that the allergic reactions that patients were suffering were due to any contaminant in the Heparin.

Baxter's failure to maintain quality control at its Chinese supply plant, combined with the FDA's inadequate inspection procedures ensured that hundreds of people suffered violent reactions to the drug before experts were able to point to the source. An increasing dependence on foreign drug suppliers whose facilities are rarely put through FDA inspections has meant that Americans can hardly use a medication without worrying if it's going to cause extreme reactions or in worst case scenarios, even death. The FDA has had a particularly worrisome couple of years with numerous tainted drugs entering the market, many of them manufactured at overseas plants. It doesn't help that the agency barely has enough resources to inspect facilities at home, let alone plants that are located thousands of miles away.

Heparin Injury Numbers Continue to Rise

Contaminated Heparin has caused serious injuries in patients that may have long term implications, including organ damage, low blood pressure, and even death. There may be other little known effects that manifest themselves weeks and months after the administration of the drug. Across the country, dozens of patients have filed medical injury lawsuits against Baxter to protect their rights and obtain compensation for their suffering.

Pursuing claims for damages against large pharmaceutical companies like Baxter can be a complex and expensive process. Victims benefit from the expertise of a specialized pharmaceutical liability lawyer who has both the experience and the resources to pursue the claim.

If you've suffered adverse reactions to Heparin or another dangerous pharmaceutical drug, contact a medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a free evaluation of your case. Our lawyers handle most cases on a contingency basis so there is no fee unless we prevail on your behalf.

 

Court Hands Down $12.9 Million Verdict For Accutane Related Medical Injuries

Three persons who suffered serious forms of Irritable Bowel Syndrome after taking the anti acne medication Accutane, have been awarded a total of $12.89 million by a New Jersey court. The court found that Accutane's makers, Hoffman La Roche failed to disclose the risks arising from this defective pharmaceutical drug, exposing the plaintiffs to severe illness.

The three plaintiffs, Kelly Mace, Lance Sager and Jordan Speisman are all Florida residents, and were prescribed Accutane for acne 10 years ago when they were in their teens. They soon developed various forms of Irritable Bowel Syndrome, including Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease, and were forced to undergo extensive treatment as a result. Speisman is expected to soon undergo a surgical removal of his colon, while Sager and Mace will have to be on medication for the rest of their lives to control their symptoms. All three face a highly increased risk of colon cancer.    

At the trial, the jury was shown evidence that Roche was aware of the side effects of their bestselling anti acne drug, but chose not to share it with the public. For instance, the company performed numerous studies on lab rats with exposure levels to Accutane that were significantly lower than the exposure of humans to the drug, and found that use of the drug led to an erosion of the intestinal lining. Roche also had hundreds of medical injury reports by patients who reported suffering IBD symptoms when they took the drug, that abruptly ended when they stopped taking the medication. When they resumed the medication, the symptoms reappeared. All of this was on file at Roche, but was never released to the public. The company was aware as far back as 1984 about the links between Accutane and IBD, but labels were not changed to warn consumers of these effects.  The New Jersey judgment is just one in a series of verdicts that have ruled against the company for its defective drug.

Defective Pharmaceutical Drugs

We don't expect the medications we take to send us to the hospital with serious, and possibly long term injuries. But it can happen when drugs have side effects that are not disclosed on their labels, or when there are erros in dosages and warnings.  Pharmaceutical companies are required to inform consumers of any reactions that have been associated with the drug that could place users at risk, but too often, the companies choose to remain silent while hoping that dangerous side effects will remain under the radar. Accutane is just another in a line of defective and potentially dangerous pharmaceutical drugs that include the anti smoking drug Chantix, and Baxter's recalled blood thinner Heparin.

Pharmaceutical Liability Lawsuit

When injuries caused by defective drugs become apparent, the FDA works to recall them so that more people are not exposed to their dangerous effects.  But recalls may be too late to protect patients who have already suffered the serious side effects of a drug. Victims injured by defective drugs can seek the help of a medical injury lawyer to file a lawsuit against the company and claim damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of wages and other expenses. If you've suffered injuries as a result of taking Hoffman La Roche's Accutane anti acne drug or any other defective pharmaceutical product, you may be eligible for compensation.

Contact an experienced medical injury lawyer at Arnold & Itkin LLP for a FREE evaluation of your case.

 

Contaminated Heparin distributed earlier than originally thought

New information is emerging in the ongoing saga of Heparin contamination. Baxter, the largest distributor of contaminated Heparin, represented on several occasions that the earliest date of distribution of its contaminated products is September of 2007.  Scientific Protein Laboratories (SPL), the manufacture of Heparin API that was contaminated with Over Sulfated Chondroitin Sulfate (OSCS), for the most part has not issued a statement concerning when Heparin which contained OSCS was introduced into the market.  Baxter had about 50% of the market, and AAP had most of the rest of the market.

New information has emerged that manufacturers other than Baxter received contaminated crude Heparin from SPL as far back as 2006, much earlier than when Baxter reports it received Heparin containing OSCS. Specifically B. Braun Medical and Tyco Healthcare (now Covidien) received contaminated Heparin from SPL as early as 2006.

Both companies have issued recalls of the contaminated product. Details of both recalls, including the products affected can be found in the Heparin Contamination article published on our Medical Injury Lawyer website.

Ethex Corp recalls five generic products that pose life-threatening overdose risk

Ethex Corp and FDA notified healthcare professionals of a voluntary recall of five generic products:

  • Propafenone HCl Tablets
  • Isosorbide Mononitrate Extended Release Tablets
  • Morphine Sulfate Extended Release Tablets
  • Morphine Sulfate Immediate Release Tablets
  • Dextroamphetamine Sulfate Tablets

The products were recalled because they may contain oversized tablets. Oversized tablets may contain more than the intended levels of the active drug ingredient that could result in patients receiving as much as twice the expected dosage of these drugs, which could cause serious or life-threatening consequences.

Overdoses can include arrhythmias and low blood pressure with Propafenone HCl; fainting and low blood pressure with Isosorbide Mononitrate; respiratory depression and low blood pressure with Morphine Sulfate; and rapid heart rate and high blood pressure with Dextroamphetamine Sulfate. Patients who experience any adverse reactions to these drugs should contact their healthcare professional immediately. See the manufacturer's drug recall notice for specific lot numbers of the products affected by this recall.

The side effects associated with these dangerous drugs are serious and life threatening. Consumers who experience any adverse reactions to these drugs should contact their physician and/or healthcare provider immediately. If you are a loved one have been serious injured by one of these defective pharmaceutical drugs, you should contact a medical injury lawyer to learn more about your options for claiming compensation you may be due.

Diabetes drug Byetta linked to injuries and death

Deaths have been reported in connection with the widely used diabetes drug, Byetta (exenatide), marketed by Amylin Pharmaceuticals and Eli Lilly & Co.  An alert from the FDA said they have received reports of 6 cases of hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis in patients taking Byetta.  Byetta is a medicine given by subcutaneous injection to help treat adults with type 2 diabetes. Of the 6 cases of hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis, all patients required hospitalization, two patients died and four patients were recovering at the time of reporting.  Byetta was discontinued in all 6 cases. Federal regulators are working on a stronger label fo the drug.

If you or a loved one have been seriously injured by a defective pharmaceutical drug like Byetta, you may be entitled to compensation from those responsible for your injury. Contact the medical injury lawyers at the Arnold & Itkin LLP law firm in Houston, Texas to learn more about your options.

Heparin death toll increases to 81

The FDA confirmed today in a media briefing on the recall of contaminated Heparin that a total of 81 deaths are now known to have occurred as a result of adverse reactions to the contaminated product. The new total is an increase over the previously reported number of 62 deaths.

The FDA has also announced that Heparin's active ingredient was contaminated at Chinese manufacturing facilities where it was made, with a chemically altered form of chondroitin sulfate, a dietary supplement made from animal cartilage that is widely used to treat joint pain.

Laws in most states provide for several personal injury claims for persons who have been seriously injured due to defective prescription drugs and treatments.  If you are a loved one have been seriously injured by a defective product like contaminated Heparin, you can learn more about options for claiming compensation from those responsible for your Heparin injury.

Contact a medical injury lawyer from the Arnold & Itkin LLP law firm in Houston, Texas. We can answer questions and help you understand your options.

Contaminated Heparin connected with potentially fatal side effects

The FDA announced that Baxter International's popular blood thinning drug Heparin was contaminated with oversulfated chondroitin sulfate.  Hundreds of adverse reactions have been reported in connection with the contaminated Heparin products. At least 19 people have died as a result.

Adverse reactions include refractory hypotension leading to organ damage, organ failure, shock, and death. Baxter began recalling Heparin products in January 2008 and by February 2008 had expanded the recall to include most Heparin products.

More information on the Heparin recall, including options for persons injured by the contaminated drug can be found on our Medical Injury Lawyer website.