|
Warning: Homeopathic remedies can be hazardous to your health
|
Hundreds of homeopathic remedies — highly diluted
drugs made from natural ingredients — are legally sold in the U.S. as
medical treatments with explicit claims of medical benefits. Yet they
don’t require any federal checks for safety or effectiveness, or even
whether they contain the right ingredients.
A recent Associated Press analysis of the Food and
Drug Administration’s side-effect reports found more than 800
homeopathic ingredients were potentially implicated in health problems
in just the last year alone. Complaints ranged from vomiting to
attempted suicide.
The maker of one homeopathic medication, Zicam,
withdrew its products from the market after the FDA issued a warning
that Zicam nasal gels and swabs can cause people to lose their sense of
smell.
More than 100 consumers are suing the manufacturer
of the cold medicine, complaining that they suffered burning,
discomfort and ultimately the loss of the ability to smell.
The FDA says it has received more than 130 reports
of loss of smell associated with Zicam nasal products. Many people
reported that the lost the sense after just one use of the drug.
A chef in Las Vegas, for example, said he didn’t know the pilot light on one of his restaurant’s stoves had gone out until an
|
|
employee who smelled the leaking gas alerted him.
“Loss of sense of smell is a serious risk for people
who use these products for relief from cold symptoms,” said Dr. Janet
Woodcock, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research. “We are concerned that consumers may unknowingly use a
product that could cause serious harm, and therefore we are advising
them not to use these products for any reason.”
Other homeopathic medications can also be risky. At
least 20 ingredients used in conventional prescription drugs, like
digitalis for heart trouble and morphine for pain, are used in
homeopathic remedies. Other homeopathic medicines are derived from
cancerous or other diseased tissues.
Some medications are formulated from powerful poisons such as strychnine, arsenic and snake venom.
|
|
Are GM and Chrysler still liable for their lemons?
|
What if you or someone you know is injured as a
result of a defect in a GM or Chrysler car? Are these companies still
responsible for problems with their products now that they’ve been
through bankruptcy?
The answer to this is somewhat complicated.
The good news is that people who are injured in cars
that were manufactured by GM or Chrysler after the companies emerged
from bankruptcy will have the right to recover from the company for
their harm.
The bad news is that people who were injured before
the bankruptcy, but haven’t been paid yet, will have their claims
mostly wiped out. In the case of GM, this means that hundreds of people
who had filed more than $1 billion of personal-injury claims due to
defective manufacturing will recover little or nothing from the
company, no matter how valid their claims are.
The next question is: What will happen to people who are injured after the
|
|
bankruptcy as a result of defective cars that were manufactured before the bankruptcy?
In the case of GM, these people will be able to sue
the “new” GM for their injuries. But in the case of Chrysler, the
victims will be out of luck.
In any event, if you or someone you know is injured
in an auto accident, it’s critical to speak to an attorney right away.
There may be other ways to recover for your injuries, and you can’t be
sure unless an attorney thoroughly analyzes your particular situation.
|
|
Bill would allow G.I.s to sue for medical negligence
|
A bill has been introduced in the House and Senate
that would give service members on active duty the right to sue the
federal government for medical malpractice.
Back in 1950, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in a
case called Feres that members of the armed services on active duty
can’t bring negligence lawsuits against the government, even if the
lawsuit has nothing to do with combat – such as an ordinary
slip-and-fall claim, or a medical malpractice suit against a military
hospital.
The “Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical
Accountability Act” would overturn part of this decision, and would
allow lawsuits against the government for medical mistakes.
The bill is named after a marine sergeant who served for nearly a
|
|
decade, including a tour of duty in Iraq, but
later died as a result of a non-combat medical injury. His family
claims a blotch on his skin went untreated and was misdiagnosed
multiple times by military doctors. Years later, when Rodriguez learned
that the blotch was cancerous, it was too late for it to be treated. He
died from skin cancer, leaving behind a seven-year-old son.
The bill is premised on the idea that it’s unfair
for our military heroes, who risk their lives every day to serve our
country, to be denied the same right to pursue justice in the courts
that people who aren’t in the military take for granted.
If you have strong feelings about this issue, we
urge you to contact your Senator and Representative and tell them what
you think.
|
|
Dental malpractice can lead to serious injuries
|
When most people think of medical malpractice, they
usually don’t think of dentists, but dental mistakes happen and
sometimes they can be extremely serious. Problems can run the gamut
from root canal injuries to nerve damage and deformity or worse.
A jury in New Jersey recently awarded $11 million to
the family of a 21-year-old man who died the morning after he had his
wisdom teeth removed.
Francis Keller had a hereditary condition that
caused his immune system to react to any trauma to his face or hands by
swelling. He died from suffocation after the oral surgery caused
excessive swelling in his mouth.
The jury found that the oral surgeon was negligent
because he should have known that Keller had an immunity disorder that
should have precluded this particular dental work.
In the state of Washington, a woman received a
substantial jury award after a series of dental surgeries left her
disabled and disfigured with her jaw fused shut.
The jury in that case decided that an oral surgeon was negligent in performing
|
|
the operations on Kimberly Kallestad, a 29-year-old former cheerleader and varsity tennis player.
Kallestad went to the surgeon after injuring her jaw
while sledding, and said he claimed he had a near-perfect success rate
with a surgery technique he had developed.
Other patients who later developed severe pain after
their operations testified at the trial that the surgeon gave them
similar reassurances.
Other examples of dental malpractice include failure
to diagnose oral cancer; permanent numbness; radiation injuries; nerve
damage to the jaw, lips or tongue; and unnecessary dental treatments.
|
|
Acne drug Accutane is withdrawn from U.S. market
|
The drug Accutane, which is used to treat severe
acne, has been withdrawn from the market by its manufacturer amid
claims that it can cause serious bowel disease.
The decision to withdraw Accutane may help fuel
settlements of about 700 lawsuits filed by patients who developed bowel
problems.
The drug maker, Roche Holdings, has lost all six of
the personal injury lawsuits involving Accutane that have gone to
trial, with damages totaling more than $33 million.
About 13 million people have taken Accutane since it
was introduced in 1982. The company’s patent expired in 2002, and a
competing generic version
|
|
has since pushed the company’s U.S. market share below 5 percent.
Lawyers for the patients claim that Roche knew of
the connection between Accutane and inflammatory bowel disease as far
back as 1994, but failed to report the link to the FDA or to change the
drug’s labeling.
Many of the patients bringing lawsuits have required
surgery ranging from partial removal of the intestines to complete
removal of the colon.
The company says that it provided adequate warnings,
and that its removal of the drug from the market was not for safety
reasons.
|
|
Escalator injuries going up, up, up
|
It might seem hard to believe, but more than 10,000
people a year sustain escalator injuries serious enough to require
hospital emergency-room care.
A typical example is Rebecca Beall, a Vermont high
school student who was injured in a 2006 escalator accident at a
convention center in Ocean City, Maryland, where she was attending a
youth music competition. Rebecca was hurt when the escalator she was
riding stopped abruptly and began moving in the opposite direction.
There were about 25 people on the escalator at the
time it malfunctioned, and about 10 students – including Beall – were
injured. Beall fell face-forward on the escalator and then was pinned
down by several students who fell on top of her. The continued movement
of the escalator lacerated her face, scalp and shoulder while she was
pinned and unable to move.
|
|
Beall’s family sued the city, the convention center,
and a private company. In the lawsuit, Beall says she still suffers
from severe headaches, migraines, nausea, chills, shaking, blackouts
and light and sound sensitivity. She also claims that she has been
diagnosed with post-traumatic migraine disorder and anxiety and phobias
as a result of the incident.
|
|
Maker of anti-psychotic drug sued for promoting it for other uses
|
Seroquel is a drug that has been approved by the
Food and Drug Administration to treat schizophrenia and bipolar
disorders. But the manufacturer illegally marketed it for other,
non-approved uses, and failed to warn people about the risk of serious
side effects.
That’s the allegation in more than 19,000 lawsuits
brought by patients who say they were prescribed the drug for sleep
disorders and other conditions – and weren’t told about the risks of
severe weight gain, diabetes, and other medical problems.
Doctors are allowed to prescribe any approved medication for non-approved
|
|
uses, but it’s illegal for pharmaceutical
companies to market or promote such uses. Some estimates suggest that
up to 70 percent of all Seroquel prescriptions were for unapproved
uses.
The manufacturer, AstraZeneca, denies that it ever
promoted the drug inappropriately. But documents in the lawsuits
suggest that unapproved uses were part of the company’s marketing plan
for Seroquel. Other documents suggest that AstraZeneca knew as early as
1997 that Seroquel increased the risk of weight gain and diabetes, but
the company downplayed the risks to doctors.
|
|
|
This newsletter is designed to keep you up-to-date with changes in the
law. For help with these or any other legal issues, please call our
firm today.
The information in this newsletter is intended solely for your
information. It does not constitute legal advice, and it should not be
relied on without a discussion of your specific situation with an
attorney.
|
|
