British Expatriate Network

Is it me , or do they deliberately select stupid people as jurors? Or maybe you have no choice in Texas ...

From todays WSJ on the Merck Vioxx case

-- Merck argued that Vioxx couldn't have caused Mr. Ernst's death because, according to his death certificate, he died of an arrhythmia or irregular heartbeat, not a heart attack. While scientific evidence suggests Vioxx can promote blood clots, no data have linked the drug with arrhythmias

Jorors who voted against Merck said much of the science sailed right over their heads. "Whenever Merck was up there, it was like wah, wah, wah," said Juror John Ostrom. "We didn't know what the heck they were talking about"

Wah, wah, wah roll

Merck might wonder if they hire stupid employees, seeing as several of their e-mails were used to implicate them as knowing there were issues with the drug, several years before the deaths it allegedly caused.

The chances of this will increase in the future as people switch over to other electronic communications formats, like VOIP for instance. Systems within the next two years will be able to record all conversations and attorneys for the plaintiffs will be looking forward to that day immensely.

I used to get pissed off because I would go for jury duty but would be preemptoraly struck by one side or the other. I had my suspicians that were later confirmed by a judge, the lawyers don't want anyone trained in critical thinking on the jury. They work like salesmen, they sell the sizzle, they don't want you to ask to see the steak.

lol not being smart assed but are there not side effects to every drug taken???
thats the risk you run.

Goose3 @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

:lol: not being smart assed but are there not side effects to every drug taken???
thats the risk you run.

Well yes, but then one should be able to rely on the honesty of the manufacturers, and in this case they were anything but honest.
The one that always gets me is phen phen. Banned in Europe but still on sale here for almost 6 months. Reason being, I don't know, do Americans have that different
a body or will what kills Europeans kill Americans. According to the FDA they took several months to work that one out.

I think Americans are under the misconception that the FDA are looking out for "them".

The money invested into R&D for these drugs must be recouped somehow.

annie @ Mon Aug 22, 2005 5:59 pm Wrote:

Goose3 @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

:lol: not being smart assed but are there not side effects to every drug taken???
thats the risk you run.

Well yes, but then one should be able to rely on the honesty of the manufacturers, and in this case they were anything but honest.
.

Like cigarette manufacturers you mean, or alcohol?

Glaswegian @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

annie @ Mon Aug 22, 2005 5:59 pm Wrote:

Goose3 @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

:lol: not being smart assed but are there not side effects to every drug taken???
thats the risk you run.

Well yes, but then one should be able to rely on the honesty of the manufacturers, and in this case they were anything but honest.
.

Like cigarette manufacturers you mean, or alcohol?

Yer daft bat.
i guess if we were back post ww2 that would be aplicable. My mum was advised to smoke a cigarette after meals to allow digestion. However in general I don't think tabs and booze are considered health aids by anyone in the industry .

:wink: :wink:

Didn't Guinness used to be given to patients to help with recovery? Or is that an urban myth?

/Dr Rude recommends booze and tabs as a part of a balanced diet.

VegasRudeBoy @ Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:31 pm Wrote:

Didn't Guinness used to be given to patients to help with recovery? Or is that an urban myth?

/Dr Rude recommends booze and tabs as a part of a balanced diet.

Guiness was given, it still has a lot of food values. Small bottles were given to pregnant women in the early days of the NHS.

Horatio Underpants @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

Is it me , or do they deliberately select stupid people as jurors? Or maybe you have no choice in Texas ...

From todays WSJ on the Merck Vioxx case :

-- Merck argued that Vioxx couldn't have caused Mr. Ernst's death because, according to his death certificate, he died of an arrhythmia or irregular heartbeat, not a heart attack. While scientific evidence suggests Vioxx can promote blood clots, no data have linked the drug with arrhythmias

Jorors who voted against Merck said much of the science sailed right over their heads. "Whenever Merck was up there, it was like wah, wah, wah," said Juror John Ostrom. "We didn't know what the heck they were talking about"

Wah, wah, wah :roll:

You should post the balance of the article or the link HU. The WSJ article gives the reasons the jury gave that award.

The following are my comments:

Drug companies do not like asprin because it is too good and effective and they cannot patent it.

Vioxx was Merck's attempt, in my opinion. to get a 'Faux' asprin.They failed because Vioxx only gives some pain relief and does not help the heart or blood flow.

Asprin, on the other hand is a very cheap over the counter drug that relieves pain,helps the heart and increases blood flow.

Some say asprin causes stomach bleeding ,my doctor says that in all is career as a specialist he has only known one patient who had that problem and he was taking 16 asprins per day.I find if I take 6 asprins per day(very, very rareI do this) it Knocks me out.How a person can take 16 and still talk about it is beyond me.

In summary if people just stuck with asprin and forget this bull from the drug companies about substitutes we would all be better off.

johnr @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

Horatio Underpants @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

Is it me , or do they deliberately select stupid people as jurors? Or maybe you have no choice in Texas ...

From todays WSJ on the Merck Vioxx case :

-- Merck argued that Vioxx couldn't have caused Mr. Ernst's death because, according to his death certificate, he died of an arrhythmia or irregular heartbeat, not a heart attack. While scientific evidence suggests Vioxx can promote blood clots, no data have linked the drug with arrhythmias

Jorors who voted against Merck said much of the science sailed right over their heads. "Whenever Merck was up there, it was like wah, wah, wah," said Juror John Ostrom. "We didn't know what the heck they were talking about"

Wah, wah, wah :roll:

You should post the balance of the article or the link HU. The WSJ article gives the reasons the jury gave that award.

The following are my comments:

Drug companies do not like asprin because it is too good and effective and they cannot patent it.

Vioxx was Merck's attempt, in my opinion. to get a 'Faux' asprin.They failed because Vioxx only gives some pain relief and does not help the heart or blood flow.

Asprin, on the other hand is a very cheap over the counter drug that relieves pain,helps the heart and increases blood flow.

Some say asprin causes stomach bleeding ,my doctor says that in all is career as a specialist he has only known one patient who had that problem and he was taking 16 asprins per day.I find if I take 6 asprins per day(very, very rareI do this) it Knocks me out.How a person can take 16 and still talk about it is beyond me.

In summary if people just stuck with asprin and forget this bull from the drug companies about substitutes we would all be better off.

seconded.

johnr @ Tue 23 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

You should post the balance of the article or the link HU. The WSJ article gives the reasons the jury gave that award.

The following are my comments:

Drug companies do not like asprin because it is too good and effective and they cannot patent it.

Vioxx was Merck's attempt, in my opinion. to get a 'Faux' asprin.They failed because Vioxx only gives some pain relief and does not help the heart or blood flow.

Asprin, on the other hand is a very cheap over the counter drug that relieves pain,helps the heart and increases blood flow.

Some say asprin causes stomach bleeding ,my doctor says that in all is career as a specialist he has only known one patient who had that problem and he was taking 16 asprins per day.I find if I take 6 asprins per day(very, very rareI do this) it Knocks me out.How a person can take 16 and still talk about it is beyond me.

In summary if people just stuck with asprin and forget this bull from the drug companies about substitutes we would all be better off.

Have to disagree with your doctor, some people cannot tolerate asprin in their system at all and just taking a very small dose can cause an"abdominal bleed", even if the asprin is ecotrin coated.

Vioxx and Celebrex were both marketed for patients with pain (especially arthritis/joint pain) that needed medication on a regular basis that would not cause any type of abdominal problems. In this respect they were both successful. Obviously the other side effects should have meant the drugs were taken off the market a long time ago.

Horatio Underpants @ Mon 22 Aug, 2005 Wrote:

Is it me , or do they deliberately select stupid people as jurors? Or maybe you have no choice in Texas ...

:roll:

:mrgreen: ..well I guess when I become a citizen then that will all change. :mrgreen:

(from a resident of Brazoria County Texas, where the Vioxx trial was held :roll: )

I'm gonna have to third that one too Johnr.

British Expatriate Network

Horatio Underpants

pilgrim_007

londonsquare

Goose3

annie

pilgrim_007

Glaswegian

annie

VegasRudeBoy

londonsquare

johnr

annie

cel

cel

mrbungle2103