Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Nuvaring Lawsuits

  1. #1
    Senior Member nat007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,903

    Default Nuvaring Lawsuits

    This is off topic too, so moderators please feel free to remove it if you deem fit, but there is controversy at the moment about the Nuvaring, a hormonal contraception device, which is linked to 56% increase of blood clots and caused deaths of young women. There are 3500 law suits running against its manufacturer Merck, and one of the points of lawyers is, according to Hairpin (http://thehairpin.com/2013/12/a-thin...e-the-nuvaring)

    "NuvaRing actually contains a lower hormone dose than most oral contraceptives, a fact its ads emphasize. But while birth control pills lose up to half their hormones in the digestive tract, the ring's dose is absorbed directly into the blood. Its package insert says there are no data on whether this route makes NuvaRing any riskier than taking pills. But that, say lawyers suing the company, is because Organon never studied the question before it marketed the ring. Nor did the FDA demand it—the agency based its approval largely on studies involving pills."

    Seems the FDA is quick in approving all sorts of meds without proper background testing and long term risk assessment..
    And seems that there are more pharmaceutical companies who get approval of new products (or relatively new in the case of Nuvaring) while they only did small scale and relatively short term research
    Last edited by nat007; 12th December 2013 at 06:56 PM.
    Uses: 22,5 mg mirtazapine, clonidine and propranolol, Xyzal at times.
    Diet: trying low sugar, no gluten and dairy, high protein diet.
    Link to my rosacea blog:http://scarletnat.blogspot.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member Starlite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,348
    Country: United States

    Default

    *Some trials are drug out for so long it no longer becomes feasible to keep trying to get their medication approved. Others that should never have been approved fly through the approval process with out any problem. What could be the deciding factor? Oh I don't know.. perhaps money and connections? Maybe what wheels are greased and by who? There is a profoundly disturbing "revolving door" between governmental bodies that are tasked with overseeing the safety and effectiveness of a medication and pharmaceutical companies, Medical Universities, and governmental bodies that award funds and grants.

    I can see why you put this in the Mirvosa thread. As we watch the process of this drug being studied and then released, then watch reports trickle in of how badly it is hurting people, the pharmaceutical approval process its self comes into question.

  3. #3
    Moderator man_from_mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    4th rock from the Sun
    Posts
    1,370
    Country: United States

    Default

    Tough call on moving it out from the Mirvaso thread - but it sounded important enough to deserve it's own thread
    especially after Nat007 suggested it
    -mfm

  4. #4
    Senior Member Starlite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,348
    Country: United States

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by man_from_mars View Post
    Tough call on moving it out from the Mirvaso thread - but it sounded important enough to deserve it's own thread
    especially after Nat007 suggested it
    -mfm
    The topic of pharmaceutical companies and their creditability is a very important one, especially sense so many members here report having experienced a worsening of their health as a result of one medication or another. It is worth it's own thread/s.

    I vote, but Nat and you should make the call on this, that the thread title be more general and we collect solid data on any drug that may be collecting law suites. I know Isotretinoin under it's many names is an on going monster to be dealt with.

  5. #5
    Senior Member nat007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,903

    Default

    Yeh, I read the article mostly with Mirvaso in the back of my mind, but its all assumptions in the end. Below that linked article is also this reader comment:

    "Roxanne Rholes
    So, a friend of mine does this kind of research for the FDA, and when I saw this I emailed him and said, basically, "what the hell are you people doing over there?" and his reply was, also basically, "this piece exemplifies that most medical writers have no idea what they’re talking about and neither do many of the researchers conducting the studies." Apparently the studies are incredibly biased and complicated - he said he gets contacted by a news source about articles like this at least once a month, and when he gives them balanced quotes, they never print them. I will continue using condoms and tracking my cycle on a lunar calendar and drinking nettle tea. Because drugs are terrifying, and so is the industry around them." Posted on December 12, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    Not sure how correct it is, it's surely a very vague and predictable defense. When a pack of lawyers is sinking its teeth in it (3500 different cases the article mentions), there might be more than just smoke. I don't know how the FDA works to be honest. But when one suspects the FDA to approve drugs before the long term risks are fully examined, then this case seems a relevant current affair. I'm sure it happened more often in the past?
    Uses: 22,5 mg mirtazapine, clonidine and propranolol, Xyzal at times.
    Diet: trying low sugar, no gluten and dairy, high protein diet.
    Link to my rosacea blog:http://scarletnat.blogspot.com

  6. #6
    Senior Member Starlite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,348
    Country: United States

    Default

    Ahhh Lawyers... yes.. There's another group whose "ethics" are in question. Pit one money hungry group against anther and the real people and their pain gets lost in the shuffle.

    I don't know if you are old enough to have watched the tobacco industry fight? The tobacco companies with out a doubt pulled out all the stops in market manipulation and set a new standard in getting people to buy their product and it is proven with out a daunt they kept adding new chemicals in the tobacco to make it more and more addicting (and more and more deadly BTW.) After enough proof of harm was out.. and it took a LOT for that to happen, then the legal industry swooped in like buzzards and drug the people harmed through the dirt on the other end. The lawyers made the most money over the deal.

    You can pretty much over lay that template for every medication or regulated product that is found to be harmful. Very few people, after becoming ill or after having lost a loved one due to malpractice, wants to then mount a legal battle. The few that do, do so on behalf of the people they hope to protect from further callous disregard of their welfare.

  7. #7
    Senior Member nat007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,903

    Default

    Yeh I watch Mad Men and the tabacco scandal passed by there, read it up

    Dunno, I know of those cases but still hope to believe that apart from such extremes (and I'm sure there are plenty of other cases out there -think for instance of the thalidomide scandall in the early 60's), there are also good meds and regulation systems out there. I use 4 types of medication daily for the rosacea and they all seem properly tested back in the days and their side effect list was correct. But there are also less well examined drugs, COX 2 inhibitors and the many heart failure casualties also comes to mind. Anyone who doesn't really need them surely should be happy not to have to take medication..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide


    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16354394
    "COX-2 inhibitors: a story of greed, deception and death.
    Halpern GM.
    Department of Applied Biology and Chemical Technology, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, P.R. China. drgeorges@drgeorges.net
    Abstract
    In 1999, drug manufacturers introduced a class of NSAIDs called COX-2 inhibitors or coxibs. The drugs were avidly promoted directly to the consumers and became bestsellers from the start. Arthritis sufferers were eager to take medications that eased joint pain with less risk of causing gastrointestinal pain, bleeding and other side-effects. In the year after their introduction, doctors wrote over 100 million prescriptions for celecoxib (Celebrex) and rofecoxib (Vioxx). Celebrex is the sixth best-selling drug, with sales of more than US$ 4 billion since its debut in 1999. Vioxx had sales of US$ 2.6 billion in 2001. However, the coxibs increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes, and their price, in the USA, is obscene. The manufacturers faced a possibly complicit, toothless and bloodless FDA, and used every maneuvering to fleece the patients. We must now reflect on attitudes that we thought only belong to the tobacco industry. Fortunately, safe and active alternatives exist."
    Last edited by nat007; 13th December 2013 at 03:19 PM.
    Uses: 22,5 mg mirtazapine, clonidine and propranolol, Xyzal at times.
    Diet: trying low sugar, no gluten and dairy, high protein diet.
    Link to my rosacea blog:http://scarletnat.blogspot.com

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18th October 2013, 04:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •