MaggieD
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 43,244
- Reaction score
- 44,664
- Location
- Chicago Area
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
This ruling was quietly handed down by SCOTUS -- effecting all generic drug manufacturers. Here's the story:
Supreme Court rules drug companies exempt from lawsuits | Peace . Gold . Liberty
Personally, I think it's about time. The FDA is supposed to be protecting us against **** like this . . . and if a drug manufacturer is intentionally HIDING an adverse side effect? People should go to jail and huge fines exacted. But beyond that, I think people have to understand that warning labels mean, "Hey!!! If you take this drug?? All this **** could happen to you."
What do you think?
Sun, 07 Jul 2013 22:36 CDTWashington. In case readers missed it with all the coverage of the Trayvon Martin murder trial and the Supreme Court's rulings on gay marriage and the Voting Rights Act, the US Supreme Court also made a ruling on lawsuits against drug companies for fraud, mislabeling, side effects and accidental death. From now on, 80 percent of all drugs are exempt from legal liability.
In a 5-4 vote, the US Supreme Court struck down a lower court's ruling and award for the victim of a pharmaceutical drug's adverse reaction. According to the victim and the state courts, the drug caused a flesh-eating side effect that left the patient permanently disfigured over most of her body. The adverse reaction was hidden by the drug maker and later forced to be included on all warning labels. But the highest court in the land ruled that the victim had no legal grounds to sue the corporation because its drugs are exempt from lawsuits.
Karen Bartlett vs. Mutual Pharmaceutical Company
In 2004, Karen Bartlett was prescribed the generic anti-inflammatory drug Sulindac, manufactured by Mutual Pharmaceutical, for her sore shoulder. Three weeks after taking the drug, Bartlett began suffering from a disease called, 'toxic epidermal necrolysis'. The condition is extremely painful and causes the victim's skin to peel off, exposing raw flesh in the same manner as a third degree burn victim.
Supreme Court rules drug companies exempt from lawsuits | Peace . Gold . Liberty
Personally, I think it's about time. The FDA is supposed to be protecting us against **** like this . . . and if a drug manufacturer is intentionally HIDING an adverse side effect? People should go to jail and huge fines exacted. But beyond that, I think people have to understand that warning labels mean, "Hey!!! If you take this drug?? All this **** could happen to you."
What do you think?