|
When
a popular drug is shown to have a
potentially dangerous side effect, such as Stevens Johnson Syndrome, there are usually a host of factors
that come together in laying the blame for Stevens Johnson Sydrome. These sometimes make it very
hard to determine who exactly will be liable in a lawsuit, a situation
that causes lengthy delays in patients achieving justice, but in the
case of Bextra things are far simpler. There are only two organizations
responsible for the problematic side effects, and those organizations
are the corporate drug giants Pharmacia and Pfizer.
Two of the world’s largest drug companies, Pharmacia and Pfizer
are responsible for the marketing of Bextra as a safe drug for the
prevention of arthritis pain, and as such are compelled to not only
extensively test the drug, but also make the FDA aware of any potential
side effect problems, such as Stevens Johnson Syndrome, prior to its release.
Clearly Pharmacia and Pfizer either didn’t research hard enough
to discover the potential skin problem side effects, including Stevens Johnson Syndrome, that are now
afflicting some Bextra users, or did indeed have the information but
elected not to supply it to the FDA until well after the drug was
approved for sale.
Whatever the true situation, the problems encountered by users
before the ‘new warning’ went out leave the company wide open as a
target for lawsuits from Bextra using sufferers of Stevens Johnson
Syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis and exfoliative dermatitis, as well
as those who’ve suffered other complicated allergic reactions to the
drug.
Additionally, after the FDA refused Pharmacia’s request to
approve Bextra for use in situations of acute pain relating to impacted
molars (Bextra is only permitted for chronic pain related to arthritis,
osteoporosis and menstrual cramps), the company partially funded a
research study that suggested the drug would be useful in fighting acute
dental pain. That study duly found its way into dental journals and the
company was sued for allegedly secretive encouragement of ‘off label’
uses and attempting to circumvent the FDA’s refusal.
“Over and over again, in more and more cunning ways, the
pharmaceutical industry is putting profit ahead of consumers’ physical
and financial well-being," said an attorney linked to the case. “The FDA
regulations exist to protect consumers and Pharmacia’s efforts to
circumvent those regulations without regard for anything but its own
bottom line must stop." Clearly the fact that some people are
suffering from Stevens Johnson Syndrome because of Bextra is of less importance to these companies
than the potential to increase profits with the drug.
If you’ve experienced Stevens Johnson Syndrome problems after using Bextra, we’re here to help.
|
 |
