Yasmin lawyers have already filed a number of lawsuits against the pharmaceutical giant Bayer. For women who have taken the YAZ contraceptive or its older, higher-dose counterpart Yasmin, side effects can be potentially life-threatening. YAZ birth control, despite an aggressive marketing campaign touting additional positive benefits, may actually do much more harm than good.
YAZ side effects lawsuits are based on a number of different accusations. They allege that the manufacturers failed to:
• Properly warn about the potential risks
• Adequately test and research the drugs before releasing them into the marketplace
• Remove the medication from the market once the adverse effects were apparent
Yasmin attorneys have also filed claims relating to false advertising. Though the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) chastised the drug maker, prompting a $20 million advertising campaign correcting previous misleading ads, that correction may have come too late for those who were convinced to use the product after seeing ads that promised benefits such as clearer skin and less severe premenstrual syndrome. However, the products still became the biggest-selling contraceptives worldwide, and brought in over $1.5 billion in the first quarter they were released.
The dangerous component of the Yasmin pill is most likely drospirenone, a synthetic variety of the hormone progestin. Unique to Bayer’s versions and the generic Ocella, the hormone is not included in any other contraceptive currently approved in the United States.
Drospirenone has been known to increase potassium levels, which can result in a condition known as hyperkalemia that disrupts heart rhythms and causes circulation to slow. Slower blood travelling to and from the heart increases the chance of blood clots occurring, and if these break off and find their way to the lungs or to the brain, a pulmonary embolism or stroke is likely. According to a study published in the British Medical Journal, this hormone could as much as double the risk of blood clots.
YAZ attorneys have encouraged women who have been diagnosed with certain serious health problems after taking the drug to seek legal advice. The most severe YAZ birth control pill side effects include:
• Cardiac arrhythmia
• Cardiac arrest
• Intracardiac thrombus
• Pulmonary embolism
• Stroke
These serious conditions can even end in death. Over 50 fatalities related to the pills have been reported to the FDA, including victims as young as 17 years old.
For those seeking legal advice after suffering injuries relating to YAZ birth control, lawyer experience is critical. If you or someone you know has been harmed due to false promises in the misleading advertising campaign, find help from a Yasmin birth control lawyer.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Should Avandia Be Pulled from the Market? FDA Advisers Say So
The latest in a series of troubling developments for the manufacturers of the diabetes drug Avandia comes in the form of a new report suggesting that pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) knew of the cardiac risks associated with the drug even before the public became aware.
Intended to help diabetes sufferers through better blood sugar regulation, the drug has unfortunately been at the heart of a number of reports of life-threatening complications including heart disease and pulmonary edema. The drug already contains a "black box" warning, a labeling requirement prescribed by the FDA only in cases of the most severe potential side effects, the strongest warning that can be placed on a legal drug.
Most recently, senators Max Baucus and Charles Grassley released a 2008 memo from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that stated that there was "strong evidence" that Avandia confers an increased risk of heart failure when compared to a competitor. At the time, FDA reviewer Dr. David Graham argued to an advisory panel that Avandia should be pulled from the market and sales stopped.
The senators' report speculates that GSK may have known "several years prior" of these possible cardiac risks and may even have "attempted to intimidate independent physicians ... to downplay findings." GSK has denounced the findings, saying that the report mischaracterizes their research efforts.
Though the FDA has stated that patients already on the drug should not stop taking it without consulting a doctor, they are convening a new advisory panel of outside experts to reconsider the safety issues associated with Avandia. Unfortunately, this closer scrutiny may come too late for patients who have already suffered harmful side effects. Many of these victims have already been seeking out assistance from a number of different Avandia law firms helping those harmed by the diabetic drug.
Intended to help diabetes sufferers through better blood sugar regulation, the drug has unfortunately been at the heart of a number of reports of life-threatening complications including heart disease and pulmonary edema. The drug already contains a "black box" warning, a labeling requirement prescribed by the FDA only in cases of the most severe potential side effects, the strongest warning that can be placed on a legal drug.
Most recently, senators Max Baucus and Charles Grassley released a 2008 memo from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that stated that there was "strong evidence" that Avandia confers an increased risk of heart failure when compared to a competitor. At the time, FDA reviewer Dr. David Graham argued to an advisory panel that Avandia should be pulled from the market and sales stopped.
The senators' report speculates that GSK may have known "several years prior" of these possible cardiac risks and may even have "attempted to intimidate independent physicians ... to downplay findings." GSK has denounced the findings, saying that the report mischaracterizes their research efforts.
Though the FDA has stated that patients already on the drug should not stop taking it without consulting a doctor, they are convening a new advisory panel of outside experts to reconsider the safety issues associated with Avandia. Unfortunately, this closer scrutiny may come too late for patients who have already suffered harmful side effects. Many of these victims have already been seeking out assistance from a number of different Avandia law firms helping those harmed by the diabetic drug.
Denture Cream Manufacturers Admit Health Risks and Remove Zinc From Products
Considering the over 49 million Americans with dentures, it is unsurprising that a serious health risk associated with denture adhesives would be cause for alarm. It is only recently, however, that one of the largest manufacturers has taken a major step in acknowledging this known problem. On February 18, the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline announced that it will be removing zinc from its denture creams based on evidence that excessive use of the products has caused health problems in some consumers.
GlaxoSmithKline's popular brands include Poligrip Ultra and Poligrip Total Care. Unfortunately, these products have been linked to neurological damage due to high levels of zinc entering the body. The company states that this was a precautionary decision and that the products are safe when used in normal amounts.
However, it is well established that for many denture wearers, using extra cream is a necessity due to ill-fitting dentures, which can be expensive to replace. Therefore, zinc can enter the body at dangerous levels when swallowed rather than being absorbed by the mouth. Some consumers have been using as much as a tube of denture cream per day, which would provide about 45 times the recommended daily dose of zinc.
This move by GlaxoSmithKline comes only after hundreds of lawsuits are awaiting trial in America, based on allegations of nerve damage and even paralysis. Another company affected by these lawsuits currently is Procter & Gamble, which manufactures Fixodent. Though the company currently states that they have no plans to remove zinc from their products, this new attention given to the problem could lead to closer scrutiny. More lawsuits may therefore be forthcoming.
Meanwhile, consumers should be on the lookout for signs that your denture cream may be causing zinc poisoning. Medical experts recommend that anyone using denture cream and experiencing neurological symptoms such as numbness or difficulty walking should consult with a doctor and consider switching to a zinc-free alternative product.
GlaxoSmithKline's popular brands include Poligrip Ultra and Poligrip Total Care. Unfortunately, these products have been linked to neurological damage due to high levels of zinc entering the body. The company states that this was a precautionary decision and that the products are safe when used in normal amounts.
However, it is well established that for many denture wearers, using extra cream is a necessity due to ill-fitting dentures, which can be expensive to replace. Therefore, zinc can enter the body at dangerous levels when swallowed rather than being absorbed by the mouth. Some consumers have been using as much as a tube of denture cream per day, which would provide about 45 times the recommended daily dose of zinc.
This move by GlaxoSmithKline comes only after hundreds of lawsuits are awaiting trial in America, based on allegations of nerve damage and even paralysis. Another company affected by these lawsuits currently is Procter & Gamble, which manufactures Fixodent. Though the company currently states that they have no plans to remove zinc from their products, this new attention given to the problem could lead to closer scrutiny. More lawsuits may therefore be forthcoming.
Meanwhile, consumers should be on the lookout for signs that your denture cream may be causing zinc poisoning. Medical experts recommend that anyone using denture cream and experiencing neurological symptoms such as numbness or difficulty walking should consult with a doctor and consider switching to a zinc-free alternative product.
State Laws Start Cracking Down on Texting While Driving
A current hot legal topic in state legislatures around the country is that of road safety, or specifically, how to discourage one activity that has proven to be increasingly dangerous: texting while driving. A number of states (including Colorado, Louisiana, New York, Virginia, and Washington) already have laws that prohibit sending text messages via mobile phones while behind the wheel, much in the vein of requiring "hands-free" cell phone use, or even seatbelts. This legislative session, it seems that other states are following by example.
In Alabama, the House just voted on the ban, 95 to 3. The bill would require a fine of $25 for the first conviction of someone caught writing a text message while driving, $50 for a second, and $75 for each subsequent violation. The bill also prohibits police officers from searching the car of someone pulled over for a texting violation. This proposed law will now go to the state Senate for debate.
Georgia lawmakers are considering a similar law, with two House representatives proposing a ban that would come with both a fine and driver's license penalties. And in Wisconsin, legislation has already passed in both the House and the Senate and is expected to be signed by Governor Jim Doyle. The Wisconsin ban carries hefty penalties, up to $400 for a first offense. Whichever of these states first passes a texting law will become the 20th state to impose a ban.
In states that already have similar laws, one problem that has arisen is that of enforceability. In Missouri, it is already illegal for those under the age of 21 to text while driving, and the current legislature is current discussing extending this to all drivers. However, law enforcement officials have noted that the ban is difficult to enforce.
After all, how can a police officer tell whether someone is texting or reading a text – or even dialing a phone number? Though driver distraction and inattention is a serious and dangerous problem, some feel that a texting ban is simply too difficult to enforce, and that requiring hands-off cell phones altogether would be more effective. Of course, for many laws like these, deterrent is the major goal; perhaps simply knowing that texting behind the wheel could cost them hundreds of dollars will be enough to encourage drivers to save their texts for later.
In Alabama, the House just voted on the ban, 95 to 3. The bill would require a fine of $25 for the first conviction of someone caught writing a text message while driving, $50 for a second, and $75 for each subsequent violation. The bill also prohibits police officers from searching the car of someone pulled over for a texting violation. This proposed law will now go to the state Senate for debate.
Georgia lawmakers are considering a similar law, with two House representatives proposing a ban that would come with both a fine and driver's license penalties. And in Wisconsin, legislation has already passed in both the House and the Senate and is expected to be signed by Governor Jim Doyle. The Wisconsin ban carries hefty penalties, up to $400 for a first offense. Whichever of these states first passes a texting law will become the 20th state to impose a ban.
In states that already have similar laws, one problem that has arisen is that of enforceability. In Missouri, it is already illegal for those under the age of 21 to text while driving, and the current legislature is current discussing extending this to all drivers. However, law enforcement officials have noted that the ban is difficult to enforce.
After all, how can a police officer tell whether someone is texting or reading a text – or even dialing a phone number? Though driver distraction and inattention is a serious and dangerous problem, some feel that a texting ban is simply too difficult to enforce, and that requiring hands-off cell phones altogether would be more effective. Of course, for many laws like these, deterrent is the major goal; perhaps simply knowing that texting behind the wheel could cost them hundreds of dollars will be enough to encourage drivers to save their texts for later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
