Archive > July 2013

Lipitor and Type 2 Diabetes in Women

admin » 25 July 2013 » In FDA, Mass Tort » No Comments

Women taking Lipitor have an increased risk of being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Lipitor (atorvastatin calcium) has been widely prescribed to regulate cholesterol and blood pressure since 1996. More than 29 million people in the United States have been prescribed the drug, according to Pfizer’s website.

In February 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a warning label change for the drug, to include an increased risk for type 2 diabetes. Their decision was prompted by a clinical trial conducted in 2011, which found that people taking Lipitor had an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

That study suggested that the increased risk was largely attributable to the fact that women with high blood sugar, high blood pressure and other known risk factors for type 2 diabetes were already predisposed to developing the disease. However, another study published in May 2013 in the British Medical Journal more clearly established a link between Lipitor and diabetes.

The study found that people treated with Lipitor, in comparison to other statins, including Zocor and Crestor, were 22 percent more likely to develop new onset diabetes. Of all the statins tested in the study, Lipitor had the highest incidence of diabetes.

Continue

Continue reading...

Tags: ,

Avaulta Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit Trial Begins Today

admin » 09 July 2013 » In Legal News, Mass Tort » No Comments

The first of four bellwether trials regarding C.R. Bard transvaginal mesh lawsuits began today in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia, with the plaintiff of the first transvaginal mesh multi-district litigation trial alleging to have suffered injuries from C.R. Bard’s Avaulta transvaginal mesh device. The woman claims that the transvaginal mesh device was made from a resin-based plastic not suitable to be implanted in the human body.

Transvaginal mesh has been commonly used to treat urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women. However, transvaginal mesh devices are currently facing scrutiny for the numerous health problems associated with the implantation of the transvaginal mesh device in the body. Shrinkage of the transvaginal mesh device due to the body’s natural foreign body response after implantation can ultimately lead to the destruction of nerves, tissue, and organs surrounding the transvaginal mesh device.

“Multi-district litigation trials are important in encouraging defendants to recognize the damage and harm that their products have caused and compensate all victims of their defective devices accordingly. If C.R. Bard should learn anything from the past, it would be the need for their company to have performed adequate testing and to convey proper warnings. In the absence of an effort to protect public safety, they should be found liable for the harm that they produce” said Robert Price, a transvaginal mesh attorney with the law firm of Levin, Papantonio, Thomas, Mitchell, Rafferty & Proctor, P.A.

Thousands of women implanted with faulty transvaginal mesh devices have filed lawsuits against C.R. Bard and other manufacturers of defective transvaginal mesh products. In June 2012, a woman was awarded a $5.5 million verdict by a California jury for injuries she suffered from an Avaulta transvaginal mesh device.

An Atlantic County, New Jersey jury ruled against Johnson & Johnson with an $11.11 million verdict, in which the plaintiff was awarded $3.35 million in compensatory and $7.76 million in punitive damages from injuries she suffered from ProLift, a recalled transvaginal mesh device manufactured by Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson.

“Often times, the manufacturers of these faulty transvaginal mesh devices are aware of the serious health risks associated with their products,” commented Daniel Nigh, a transvaginal mesh attorney also with the law firm of Levin, Papantonio. “However, companies such as C.R. Bard and Johnson and Johnson failed to warn consumers of the risks and continued to market their products as safe and effective. Now, they are being held accountable for their negligence.”

Source

Continue reading...

Tags: , , , ,