Posted on 21 August 2012. Tags: dangerous drugs
The justification for Merck's marketing of vioxx was that it caused less gi side effects than other traditional NSAIDS. Merck claimed that if people used vioxx there would be less Gi side effects ending up in hospitlaizations and deaths than when using traditional pain relievers. Privately Merck consultant Loren Laine advised these claims were “bogus.” […]
Read the full story
Posted in Cases that Change America
Posted on 13 August 2012. Tags: dangerous drugs, FDA
Posted in Consumer Protection
Posted on 20 July 2012. Tags: dangerous drugs, vioxx
The following is excerpt from the article by Dr. Jerry Avorn published today in the New England Journal The Journal played a centralrole in two prominent drug-safe-ty developments of the 21st cen-tury, involving the cyclooxygen-ase-2 inhibitor rofecoxib (Vioxx)and the oral hypoglycemic agentrosiglitazone (Avandia). Accord- stroke (2005a). Accumulating evi-dence clarified that the VIGORfindings on myocardial infarctionwere […]
Read the full story
Posted in Consumer Protection