Dallas Fort Worth Injury Lawyer Blog

The litigants in the federal NuvaRing litigation are scheduled to meet with the Court to discuss a plan to settle the lawsuits filed by women who allege that they suffered serious blood clot injuries from side effects of NuvaRing birth control.

All NuvaRing lawsuits filed in federal district courts are consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which is centralized before U.S. District Judge Rodney W. Sippel in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

NuvaRing is a ring birth control device that releases a combination of etonogestrel and ethinyl estradiol and is inserted into the vagina once a month.

The complaints all involve similar allegations that Merck and their Organon Pharmaceuticals subsidiary failed to properly research the birth control ring or adequately warn about the risk of blood clots from NuvaRing.

Plaintiffs claim that they have suffered injuries after taking NuvaRing birth control, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, heart attacks and strokes.

Following a status conference last week, the Court issued an Order that directed the parties to be prepared to discuss a preliminary plan for alternative dispute resolution at hearing set for February 28.

In January the Court ordered the attorneys to submit proposed plans for alternative dispute resolution, which would be designed to assist the parties in negotiating a potential NuvaRing settlement agreement.

While attorneys for the plaintiffs submitted a plan that calls for the appointment of a special master to oversee the negotiations, attorneys for Merck and Organon have suggested that it is premature to consider such efforts.

The parties are currently preparing a handful of lawsuits, known as “bellwether” cases, for early trial dates. The cases are designed to help the parties gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence that will be introduced throughout other cases in the litigation. In complex pharmaceutical litigation, the results of such trials often factor heavily into settlement negotiations.

Read more here and visit my website for further information.

A Texas plaintiff has filed a toxic tort lawsuit against Chevron, DuPont, Exxon and other chemical companies, alleging that he developed leukemia from benzene exposure.

The benzene lawsuit was filed by Norvel Dorsey in January, in Jefferson County District Court in Texas. Dorsey named DuPont De Nemours, Chevron U.S.A., Exxon Mobil Corp. and some of its subsidiaries, Foster Wheeler Energy Corp., Gulf Oil Corp., Texaco, U.S. Steel and 4520 Corp. as defendants.

According to Dorsey, who worked as a pipefitter for various companies from 1960 until 1986, he was exposed to benzene in the workplace and through products made by the defendants. The lawsuit claims that benzene exposure led to the development of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

The lawsuit accuses the companies of negligence, and claims that they knew their products and workplaces were hazardous to workers’ health. Dorsey claims that he suffered physical impairment, disability, and will require medical monitoring for the rest of his life.

Benzene is an industrial chemical that is used as a solvent in the production of drugs, synthetics and dyes. It has also been used as a gasoline additive, although limits have been placed on its use in fuel due to benzene’s dangerous health effects.

Exposure to benzene has been associated with the development of several fatal forms of cancer, leukemia and other conditions, such as Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML), Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (CML), Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL), Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), Hairy Cell Leukemia (HCL), Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, Multiple Myeloma, Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDL), Myelofibrosis and Myeloid Metaplasia, Aplastic Anemia and Thrombocytopenic Purpura.

Read more here and visit my website for further information.

The FDA is alarmed about the risk of complications with vaginal mesh used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. The Federal regulators are ordering manufacturers to conduct new medical studies on the surgical products’ safety.

FDA Notice Letter Sent

The FDA sent a letter to several medical device makers recently calling for the new postmarketing studies on transvaginal mesh. Many experts believe that this is the beginning of tighter regulations designed to protect women from bladder sling problems.

The letter was sent to 33 manufacturers of vaginal mesh products, including Johnson & Johnson, American Medical Systems (AMS), C.R. Bard and Boston Scientific.

Controversial 510(k) Fast-Track Approval Process

The vaginal mesh products have been approved through the FDA’s controversial 510(k) fast-track approval process, which only requires that they be substantially equivalent to a device that has already been approved for sale.

510(k) fast-track approval process means that there were no requirements for clinical studies or tests of safety or effectiveness before the medical devices were implanted in American women.

FDA Mandates New Studies

The FDA will now require 99 new postmarket studies, with 88 of those focused on surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and 11 targeting single-incision mini-slings used to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Manufacturers will have to submit study plans to the FDA showing how the studies will address the agency’s safety concerns.

Scope of the Problem

An estimated 300,000 synthetic transvaginal meshes were implanted in women in the U.S. in 2010.

In summer 2011, the FDA issued a warning about the risks of problems when vaginal mesh products are used. The regulatory agency indicated that it could find no benefit in using transvaginal mesh to treat POP when compared to older, safer alternatives.

Between 2008 and 2010, the FDA received more than 1,500 reports of transvaginal mesh complications, including erosion of the mesh into the vagina, contraction or shrinkage of the mesh, infections, pelvic pain and other complications.

A growing number of transvaginal mesh lawsuits have been filed in courts across the country by women who say that vaginal sling manufacturers created defective products and failed to warn doctors or patients adequately about the risk of complications.

Read more here and visit our website for more information

A New Jersey state court jury was unable to render a verdict in the most recent Accutane product liability trial. The plaintiffs had alleged that the acne medication Accutane caused a teenager to suffer inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as a result of Accutane side effects.

The Accutane product liability claim, was brought by the parents of Priya Tanna, who was 15 when she started taking the Roche medication to treat her acne.

Roche claimed that there was a 7-step warning process in place before Tanna began taking Accutane, and therefore, they are not liable for the injuries.

As deliberations was drawn out, the jury failed to come to an agreement on the claims, resulting in a hung jury.

This case was one of about 6,000 Accutane lawsuits that are currently pending in New Jersey state court before Judge Carol E. Higbee. All of the complaints involve similar allegations that plaintiffs developed inflammatory bowel disease, Ulcerative Colitis, Crohn’s disease and other severe and chronic debilitating bowel injuries.

Accutane, known generically as isotretinoin, has been used by more than 16 million people worldwide since it was first introduced in the early 1980s as a treatment for severe acne.

Roche stopped the manufacturing of Accutane in June 2009, but a number of generic versions remain available under names such as Claravis, Sotret, Amnesteem and generic isotretinoin.

To date, plaintiffs have been successful in seven out of the first 10 Accutane bowel disease lawsuits that have been presented to a jury.

Read more on Accutane Side Effects and Inflammatory Bowel Disease and visit my website for further information.

The Medtronic Infuse saga, is a case of the fox guarding the hen house. And guess who are the chickens?

Prior to its entry into the market in 2002, orthopedic doctors were excited about how the back surgery product known as bone morphogenetic protein-2 would revolutionize orthopedic medicine.

But instead of success in fusing degenerated spines with no complications, BMP-2 became a tainted biotech breakthrough associated with sordid corporate scandal involving many bit players.

The full saga of bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) is yet to be told. At the heart of the scandal has been a circle of prominent surgeons whose research papers failed to report adverse events including cancer, infections, the painful growth of unwanted bone, and sterility in men among patients treated with BMP-2.

An investigation found that as a group those doctors received tens of millions of dollars in royalties from Medtronic, the company that markets BMP-2. Rarely were those payments disclosed in the published papers.

According to Bradley Weiner, MD, chief of spine surgery at Methodist Hospital in Houston and a deputy editor with the Spine Journal, over the years spine surgeons have become increasingly aggressive in their treatment of common back problems, often without adequate evidence these treatments actually benefit patients. And financial profits may also have a role in promoting aggressive strategies.

Vernon Tolo, MD, editor-in-chief of the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, said in an editorial that concern among doctors and the public about conflicts of interest "continues unabated." Some of the questionable BMP-2 research appeared in that journal, including a 2009 paper that failed to link the product to an increased cancer risk.

In June, editors at the Spine Journal published a scathing rebuke of BMP-2 research. An entire edition of the journal was devoted to a scientific and financial expose of the product and the financially conflicted doctors who tested and promoted it.

Amid the cries for reform are calls for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to do more.

According to Spengler, a Vanderbilt surgeon, someone at the FDA must have been aware that BMP-2 data it held didn't always match up with what was being put in the medical journal articles.

But the agency, "didn't throw a flag," he said. "They have to be more aggressive."

According to FDA spokeswoman Karen Riley, many of complications associated with BMP-2 occur mainly in off-label uses, those for which it was not initially approved. And some of those complications are listed on the product label.

"The FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine," she said.

Monitoring what is being said in the medical literature would mean the FDA would have to play "journal cop," she said. "That's the job of the peer-review process, not the FDA," said Riley. "Shouldn't the journals be checking the label and asking the hard questions?"

Investigations by two U.S. Senate committees and the Department of Justice also are under way.

In August, Medtronic said it would spend $2.5 million for Yale University researchers to oversee an independent review of the controversial spine product.

Under the arrangement, Medtronic will provide the Yale reviewers with patient data from all BMP-2 clinical trials as well as all adverse events reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration since Infuse came on the market in 2002.

Last month, Yale selected two independent academic groups to perform the Infuse review. Medtronic will have no control over the process and will have to turn over all data, said Harlan Krumholz, MD, a professor of internal medicine at Yale.

Dillon Yeaman was awarded nearly $1 million in damages by a federal jury, which found baseball bat makers Hillerich & Bradsby liable for the design of the Exogrid Model CB71X, and for failing to warn of the bat's dangers.

More than five years after a Norman High School pitcher was struck in the face by a line drive, he won a product liability claim against the maker of the aluminum bat used in the incident.

Dillon Yeaman was pitching against Westmoore High in 2006, when he was struck in the face by a batted ball. The impact fractured his nose and his orbital bones.

The Yeamans sued the 100-year-old bat company, whose signature model is the Louisville Slugger, claiming in court documents that the bat's design was “defective and unreasonably dangerous … posing a “known risk of grave harm” to those using it.

Hillerich & Bradsby, the plaintiffs maintained, marketed the bat based upon “profit-driven motivations, and was consciously indifferent to the dangers which the bat posed.”

The bat maker, according to court documents, argued that the Exogrid was in compliance with “rules, requirements and specifications which had been created by the NCAA and adopted by the National Federation of High Schools, the Oklahoma Secondary Schools Activities Association and Pure Prairie League."

According to a recent study, more than a dozen players have been killed by batted balls nationwide. The bat in question in the Yeaman case is banned by Major League Baseball and recently was prohibited for use by the NCAA, which has adopted a new testing standard that requires metal bats to perform more like wood in order to protect pitchers and other players.

A 2002 Brown University study found balls hit by metal bats have a higher velocity, an average of 93.3 miles per hour compared to 86.1 mph by wood bats.

The steady drum beat of adverse medical reports and deadly side effects about the popular Yaz birth control pill and its variations continue to surface. Again another medical study has found that side effects of Yaz and Yasmin birth control increase the risk of a pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis or stroke blood clot injury, when compared to older birth control pills.

Israeli researchers, in a report out this week, say they found that drospirenone-based birth control pills increased the risk of venous thromboembolism by as much as 65 percent. This is the latest new study published on-line this week by the Canadian Medical Association Journal. There has been a flood of new studies in recent weeks to confirm the risk of blood clots from Yaz birth control.

The study on more than 300,000 Israeli women, found that women taking Yaz and Yasmin, which contain the fourth-generation progestin drospirenone, were 65% more likely to suffer blood clots than women taking levonorgestrel and other so-called second generation oral contraceptives.

The newer birth control pills were only slightly better against third-generation birth control with a 43% increased blood clot risk. The study failed to find any evidence of increased risk of heart attacks or strokes.

Venous thromboembolisms most commonly form in the leg veins, but can travel to the lungs, where they cause a pulmonary embolism.

It has long been known that women on the Pill have a small, although higher-than-average risk of blood clots. But recent studies have suggested the risk may be relatively higher with pills containing drospirenone—which include Yaz, Yasmin, Beyaz and Safyral, along with their generic equivalents.

This study is only the latest evidence that the Bayer birth control Yaz and Yasmin pills are likely more dangerous than older birth control pills. Other medical studies in Europe and including one by the FDA, have come to similar conclusions.

Less than two weeks ago the FDA released a new drug safety report that found Yaz, Yasmin birth control side effects increased the blood clot risk by as much as 75% when compared to older oral contraceptives. That report was based on records for more than 800,000 U.S. women who used the Pill between 2001 and 2007.

A third study, published last month in the British Medical Journal, found that women taking newer birth control pills, including Yaz and Yasmin, may face twice the risk of developing blood clots when compared to women taking levonorgestrel birth control pills.

An FDA advisory committee is scheduled to examine the data surrounding the risk of health problems from Yaz and Yasmin at a meeting in December 8.

Drospirenone is a newer type of synthetic version of progesterone, that is used in combination oral contraceptives that also include estrogen. It was originally introduced by Berlex Laboratories in Yasmin. Once Berlex was acquired by Bayer Healthcare an updated version of Yasmin was introduced called Yaz. More recently, Bayer introduced a third version, marketed as Beyaz, which includes a folate supplement. Generic versions of Yaz and Yasmin are also now available from other manufacturers. Generic versions of Yaz and Yasmin include Ocella, Gianvi, Loryna, Safyral, Syeda and Zarah.

The findings of these recent studies appear to confirm the allegations brought in thousands of Yaz lawsuits and Yasmin lawsuits filed on behalf of women who experienced serious and sometimes deadly blood clots after using the birth control pills. The plaintiffs complaint alleges that Bayer failed to adequately warn about the increased risk of blood clots from Yaz and Yasmin. Furthermore the plaintiffs complain that Bayer placed their desire for profits ahead of patient safety by minimizing the known risk in aggressive direct-to-consumer advertisements for the birth control pills.

Bayer is aggressively defending itself, denying any liability and points to its own post-marketing studies that have failed to turn up a heightened clot risk with drospirenone contraceptives versus older ones.

According to the findings of a new medical study, presented at the North American Spine Society, Medtronic’s Infuse bone graft product maybe linked to an increased risk of cancer.

There is growing concerns over a potential risk of cancer from Medtronic Infuse, which contains rhBMP-2, a bioengineered bone growth protein. Research indicates that a higher-dose formulation of Infuse, known as Amplify, has been linked to a significantly higher number of cancers than were found among those who received a traditional bone graft.

The data had been given to the Food and Drug Administration by Medtronic when it sought approval to market a high-strength version of an existing bone growth product Infuse. Based on those study findings, the F.D.A. rejected that higher-dose formulation, known as Amplify, citing concern about cancer risks.

Patients implanted with rhBMP-2 were 2.5 times more likely to develop cancer within the next year than those who were not implanted with the Amplify product. That risk increased fivefold after three years. Types of cancer linked to Medtronic Infuse bone growth could include breast cancer, pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer.

While researchers indicate that Infuse is probably not a carcinogen itself, if it is linked to a higher cancer risk, it is probably as a cancer promoter.

The study, was headed by Dr. Eugene Carragee, editor-in-chief of the Spine Journal and a professor at Stanford University School of Medicine. Carragee authored a report in June that found that 10% to 50% of Infuse recipients experienced complications during the clinical trials, including cancer, pain, infections and sterility. Those problems were not mentioned in studies published by researchers with financial ties to Medtronic.

According to Dr. Carragee, doctors often administered Infuse off-label at levels significantly above the recommended dosages, ones that approach or exceed the amount of rhBMP-2 found in a dose of Amplify. “This information requires careful consideration because of the large number of patients receiving high doses” of Infuse, adding that he was particularly concerned about its use in certain patients like smokers or those with genetic factors that put them at higher risk for cancer.

Medtronic Infuse is used to encourage bone growth and replace spinal disks by filling the gaps between vertebrae. It was approved by the FDA in 2002.

Besides fears of sterility and cancer, Medtronic Infuse side effects are also suspected of including serious and life-threatening complications caused by airway compression when used “off-label” in the cervical spine.

A number of patients have had to receive respiratory support tracheotomies, insertion of feeding tubes, and additional surgery after experiencing problems with Medtronic Infuse after a cervical spine surgery.

This has often been caused by swelling of the neck and led to an FDA warning to healthcare providers in July 2008 that highlighted at least 38 reports of cervical spine fusion problems with Infuse. Most of these Medtronic Infuse problems occurred within 2 to 14 days after surgery.

To read more information, please click here.

Medical data from a new FDA funded study indicates that the NuvaRing birth control may cause women to face a 56% higher risk of blood clots than those who take older birth control pills.

NuvaRing is a female birth control device consisting of a medicated flexible ring. NuvaRing releases a combination of etonogestrel and ethinyl estradiol through a ring that is inserted into the vagina once a month. The drugs are a combination of ethinyl estradiol and etonogestrel, which is known as a “third generation” progestin.

NuvaRing is a form of birth control that releases a combination of etonogestrel and ethinyl estradiol through a ring that is inserted into the vagina once a month.

Recently, the FDA released data from a birth control study that reviewed a range of female birth control products and compared them to older drugs to determine the risk of blood clots. Newer progestin-based birth control were found to carry a much higher risk of blood clots, or venous thromboembolic events (VTE), than older drugs like levonorgestrel.

Medical researchers looked at medical data on about 800,000 women from 2001 to 2007, and found that women who used NuvaRing were 56% more likely to suffer a VTE than their levonorgestrel-using counterparts. VTE includes deep vein thrombosis (blood clots in the legs) and pulmonary embolisms (blood clots in the lungs). Women were also at higher risk of arterial thrombotic events (ATE), which can include heart attacks and strokes.

FDA researchers suggested that use of the NuvaRing led to higher sustained exposure to estrogen, which could be the reason the VTE risk is higher. The same study found that drospirenone-based drugs like Yaz and Yasmin increased blood clot risk by 75%.

This data provides further scientific support for claims brought by hundreds of women throughout the United States, who have filed a NuvaRing lawsuit against the manufacturer, Organon and Merck, after suffering serious and fatal injuries from a blood clot. The complaints allege that the manufacturers failed to properly research the birth control ring or warn about the risk of health problems from NuvaRing.

Organon, a subsidiary of Merck, failed to conduct adequate studies that would have revealed the risk of blood clots from Nuvaring before it was introduced into the U.S. market, according to allegations by the plaintiffs. They claim that physicians would have never prescribed the Nuvaring had the true risks of blood clots and pulmonary embolism been properly communicated by the manufacturers.

MANUFACTURERS: Organon Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., Organon USA Inc., Organon International Inc., Schering Plough Corp., and Akzo Nobel NV.

All NuvaRing federal lawsuits have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, before Judge Rodney Sippel in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The first NuvaRing bellwether trials are expected to begin in 2012. The complaints all involve similar allegations that women suffered blood clots as a result of NuvaRing side effects, leading to injuries like a stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or sudden death. The claims argue that the drug makers failed to adequately research the birth control ring or warn about the potential increased risk of these serious problems.

The bellwether process is common in complex litigation involving a number of claims that raise similar allegations. By selecting a small group of cases for an early trial, the parties are able to get an idea how a jury is likely to respond to evidence and testimony that may be similar to what would be presented in other cases. The outcome of these trials often shapes the litigation and may ultimately lead to an agreement to settle NuvaRing birth control lawsuits by the drug maker.

To read more and visit my website, please click here.

A group of medical researchers and scientists have determined that the potential risks from metal-on-metal hip implants may outweigh any health benefits provided by these devices.

This is because of higher revision rates are linked to the newer hip replacement designs and the mounting and growing concerns about metal ion blood poisoning, known as metallosis.

The California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF) has released an assessment of the benefits and effectiveness of using metal on metal hip replacements as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty, and they concluded that the relatively new metal hip implants may not be worth the risk.

The assessment (PDF) is the third time the group has reviewed metal-on-metal hip implants, and the group says that questions and concerns about the technology that were present years ago are still important today.

Because of high revision rates and the risk of metallosis, caused by cobalt and chromium particles shed by metal-on-metal implants, the group concluded that “there is clearly no evidence that the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks.”

After they were introduced, metal-on-metal hip implants accounted for about 1/3 of the 250,000 hip replacements performed each year in the United States. Over the past two years, concerns have increased about metal hip replacement complications, resulting in use of the implants dropping to just 5% of the artificial hip market.

Research suggests that as the metal hip replacement ball and socket grind against each other, microscopic particles of cobalt and chromium are shed into the body, which results in metal poisoning. This metallosis may result in soft tissue damage, inflammatory reactions, bone loss, aseptic and local necrosis that may lead to the need for a hip revision surgery.

In May 2011, the FDA requested artificial hip manufacturers to provide more data on problems with metal poisoning and metal implants.

Attention on the metal-on-metal hip implant risks increased after the DePuy ASR hip recall in August 2010. The DePuy metal-on-metal artificial hip system is no longer available after more than 90,000 components were sold throughout the world.

More than 1,000 people have already filed a DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuit due to complications caused by the recalled system. These lawsuits have been centralized in the Northern District of Ohio for pre-trial consolidation. To make matters worse, DePuy Orthopaedics additionally faces a growing number of DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuits filed as a result of problems associated with their other metal-on-metal artificial hip implant. These lawsuits have been centralized in the Northern District of Texas, for pre-trial consolidation. To date a DePuy Pinnacle hip recall has not been issued, and these lawsuits also allege that these older system features similar design defects that increase the risk of early loosening or failure.

As a Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Pulmonary Embolism attorney and Texas Medical doctor, I am providing this blood clot side effect update.

Women taking pills containing the hormone drospirenone were 74 percent more likely to experience clots than those on low- estrogen pills, according to the latest Food and Drug Administration report.

There is an FDA conference in December that is going to examine and address the health risks associated with birth control pills Yaz and Yasmin. Thousands of patients have already filed a Yaz or Yasmin lawsuits against pharmaceutical manufacturer Bayer Corporation. The injured plaintiffs claim that the drugmaker aggressively highlighted the birth control pills benefits while minimizing the serious side effects such as Yaz deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, stroke and death.

FDA Investigates Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Increased Blood Clots Side Effects
The FDA has been investigating the health risks associated with Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella. In 2011, the FDA has issue two warnings about the birth control pills, indicating that the national health agency “remains concerned” about the increased risk of blood clots and other potentially life-threatening side effects associated with the birth control pills.

Yaz and its predecessor, Yasmin and the generic version, Ocella, all contain a synthetic female sex hormone known as drospirenone. Medical studies show that all birth control pills have an increased risk of blood clots, but the risk is even greater with drospirenone-containing pills such as Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella.

The FDA is set to hold a meeting with the Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee on December 8 to comb through the mass of “conflicting” data concerning Yasmin, Yaz and Ocella blood clots.

The recommendations of that FDA meeting could have profound implications and affect the outcome of the Yaz lawsuits. The FDA may revise the drug labels again (revised in 2010 and 2011), or issue stricter warnings regarding the birth control bills or may even ban the pills from the market altogether due to the dangers of Yaz blood clots. The last scenario is highly unlikely.

As a Transvaginal Mesh recall attorney and Texas medical doctor, our law firm is fielding many calls from concerned women regarding the complications they are suffering as a result of a defective mesh medical device that has been implanted.

watch the abc news video here

One of the most frustrating things our potential clients tells us is that they do not know what type of device has been implanted. To complicate matters even more, there are about 11 manufacturers of these Vaginal Mesh devices in the United States and also each company has several models and types of vaginal mesh product.

Invariably these women have had redo surgeries with more hardware implanted but they are still symptomatic and experiencing side effects. To make things easier for these potential Trans Vaginal Mesh victims, I have listed here a list of the 5 largest manufacturers and the commonly used mesh devices and the types of product that may have been implicated as being defective or those that have been recalled.

Hopefully this blog will provide a "one stop shop" that folks can review and refer to in their search for vital information and to see if they may have a claim.

In the United States, data from mesh manufacturers reveal that in 2010 approximately 300,000 women underwent surgical procedures to repair Pelvic Organ Prolapse, POP and approximately 260,000 underwent surgical procedures to repair Stress Urinary Incontinence, SUI.

According to mesh manufacturers, approximately one out of three POP surgeries used mesh and three out of four of the mesh POP procedures were done transvaginally. Over 80 percent were done transvaginally with mesh.

Transvaginal Mesh Brands – Johnson & Johnson Ethicon Women’s Health
Several hundred lawsuits are pending in New Jersey state court against Ethicon for injuries allegedly caused by several transvaginal mesh products. Lawsuits claim that Johnson & Johnson knew that Ethicon TVT products were unreasonably dangerous but continued to manufacture and sell them regardless.

Brand names of Johnson & Johnson/Ethicon’s transvaginal mesh patches include:

Ethicon TVT
Gynecare TVT Sling
Gynecare Gynemesh
Gynecare Prolift Mesh
Gynecare Prolene Mesh
Prolene Polypropylene Mesh Patch
Secur

TVT = tension-free vaginal tape

Transvaginal Mesh Brands – C.R. Bard
These cases are consolidated as part of the federal Bard Avaulta litigation, which was centralized last year in West Virginia for coordinated pretrial proceedings.

In October 2010, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict litigation ordered that all federal Bard Avaulta pelvic mesh lawsuits be consolidated before U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

Brand names of Bard’s transvaginal mesh patches:

Avaulta Plus™
BioSynthetic Support System
Avaulta Solo™
Synthetic Support System,
Faslata® Allograft
Align
Pelvicol ® Tissue
PelviSoft® Biomesh
Pelvitex™ Polypropylene Mesh
Pelvilace
Uretex
Ugytex

Transvaginal Mesh Brands – American Medical Systems, Boston Scientific
SPARC® is a type of transvaginal mesh patch produced by American Medical Systems (AMS) designed to treat stress incontinence.

In recent months, a growing number women throughout the United States have filed a transvaginal pelvic mesh lawsuit against Boston Scientific and other manufacturers raising similar allegations. The products, which are commonly used for repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) have been found to erode through the vagina, shrink, cause infection, pain and other complications.

Boston Scientific transvaginal mesh patch brands include:

Advantage™ Sling System
Lynx™ Suprapubic Mid-Urethral Sling System
Obtryx® Curved Single
Obtryx® Mesh Sling
Prefyx Mid U™ Mesh Sling System
Prefyx PPS™ System

All these systems use Advantage® Mesh - The Advantage Mesh is designed to reduce the risks of mesh deformation during tensioning and irritation to the anterior vaginal wall.

American Medical Systems SPARC Transvaginal Mesh Implants
Several different companies, including Minnesota based American Medical Systems, manufacture transvaginal mesh product to treat urinary incontinence and other conditions such as pelvic organ prolapse.

The American Medical Systems SPARC Transvaginal Mesh Approach

The SPARC system is a mesh sling that is put under the urethra to support it during normal daily activities. According to American Medical Systems, most patients regain continence almost immediately after surgery. It is marketed as an outpatient, minimally invasive treatment that can have significant and long term benefits for the patient.

American Medical Systems manufactures numerous products, known as pelvic mesh, vaginal mesh, and bladder slings, designed to treat pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence. These products include: Apogee, Perigee, Elevate, SPARC, MiniArc, MinArc Precise and Monarc.

Please search this blog for other Vaginal Mesh articles, frequent updates and important information.

As a Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Deep Vein Thrombosis, Pulmonary Embolism and Stroke Attorney, we are providing this timely update. Watch the old Yasmin advertisement here.

According to a recent population-based study, newer forms of progesterone in contraceptives result in higher venous thromboembolic (VTE) risk than older drugs.

According to Ojvind Lidegaard, MD, of Rigshospitalet at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, an international expert, women on the pill with the older, levonorgestrel version were at three times the risk of VTE as those not on any hormonal contraception.

But oral contraceptives containing desogestrel, gestodene, drospirenone, or cyproterone boosted the risk six to seven times over that of non-users, the group reported in BMJ.
The researchers explain that newer forms of progesterone in combination hormonal contraceptives carry higher venous thromboembolic (VTE) risk than older forms.

Furthermore, they point out that this study found that women on the pill with the older, levonorgestrel version were still at threefold elevated risk of VTE compared with those not on any hormonal contraception, whereas those on the newer versions were at six and sevenfold risk.

The Food and Drug Administration is already studying the possible increased risk of blood clots with pills containing the drospirenone. The F.D.A. says its preliminary results suggest a 1.5-fold increased risk compared with other hormonal contraceptives, to about 10 women in 10,000 from 6 women in 10,000.

These findings were based on the national registry data in Denmark from 2001 through 2009, after the launch of the newest synthetic progesterone, drospirenone.

Other studies over the decades also have found almost universally elevated VTE risk with hormonal contraception, with the estrogen and progestogen (synthetic progesterone) components both appearing to play a role.

The risks appear real and may lead many clinicians to prescribe a combined oral contraceptive with levonorgestrel whenever possible.

The updated analysis included more than 1.2 million non-pregnant 15- to 49-year-old women in Denmark without a history of thrombotic disease. Data came from national vital status, inpatient, cause of death, and pharmacy registries.

From 2001 to 2009, 4,307 first-ever VTEs occurred in this cohort. Most were deep vein thrombosis only (63.6%) or pulmonary embolism with or without deep vein thrombosis (26.2%).

Compared with women not taking hormonal contraception, confirmed venous thromboembolism was elevated for users of oral contraceptives containing 30 to 40 μg ethinylestradiol plus the following:

Levonorgestrel, with a relative risk of 2.9
Desogestrel, with a relative risk of 6.6
Gestodene, with a relative risk of 6.2
Drospirenone, with a relative risk of 6.4

With levonorgestrel-containing pills as the comparator, rate ratios of confirmed venous thromboembolism adjusted for length of use were:

2.2 with desogestrel
2.1 with gestodene
2.1 with drospirenone

Lower estrogen doses were associated with modestly lower VTE risk for oral contraceptives with norethisterone, levonorgestrel, desogestrel, or gestodene but not with drospirenone, the investigators reported.

More information
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has more about birth control pills.

Primary source: BMJ
Source reference:
Lidegaard Ø, et al "Risk of venous thromboembolism from use of oral contraceptives containing different progestogens and oestrogen doses: Danish cohort study, 2001-9" BMJ 2011; 343: d6423.

Additional source: BMJ
Source reference:
Hannaford PC "The progestogen content of combined oral contraceptives and venous thromboembolic risk" BMJ 2011; 343: d6423.

Jick S, Hernandez R "Risk of non-fatal venous thromboembolism in women using oral contraceptives containing drospirenone compared with women using oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel: case-control study using United States claims data" BMJ 2011; DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d2151.
[Get full-text PDF from Pubget]

Vaginal Mesh / Bladder Sling attorneys are currently evaluating and investigating the latest medical device tragedy to be afflicting women of a certain age.

Countless women who had a vaginal mesh or bladder sling medical device implanted to treat pelvic organ prolapse have experienced life altering internal injuries, urinary problems and other significant medical complications as a result of problems with the mesh, which may actually provide no real benefit over other surgical methods of treating pelvic organ prolapse.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Update
Many personal injury cases have been filed throughout the United States by women who experienced complications as a result of the defective and negligent design of a vaginal mesh pelvic support system.

Vaginal mesh, which is also referred to as a pelvic mesh, is a surgical product that is implanted into the vaginal area to prevent pelvic organ prolapse (POP), which can occur in women after childbirth or surgery. Pelvic organ prolapse causes the uterus or womb to fall into the vaginal area, which can also lead to the bladder and bowels slipping out of place and putting pressure on the vagina, causing considerable pain and discomfort, as well as urinary incontinence.

Complaints over vaginal mesh implants claim that negligent designs increase the risk that women may suffer severe complications, physical pain and suffering, deformity and the need for additional corrective surgery. Furthermore, the FDA acknowledged in July 2011 that there is no evidence that vaginal mesh bladder sling surgery provides any greater clinical benefit than non-mesh surgeries.

Vaginal Mesh Injuries
The FDA issued a statement about all vaginal mesh implants in July 2011, indicating that the agency has received thousands of reports of complications after the bladder sling mesh has been implanted, and also warn of an increased risk of organs being punctured during the surgery to implant the devices.

Complications with vaginal sling implants reported by women include:

Infection
Erosion of the mesh into the vagina
Recurrences of prolapse
Urinary problems
Bowel, bladder and blood-vessel perforations
Injury to nearby organs
Pain during sexual intercourse

In many cases, transvaginal sling problems have required multiple surgeries to remove the mesh. Even after surgery, women may be left with permanent and disfiguring injuries.

As an Actos Blader Cancer attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this latest update regarding the diabetic drug, Actos.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued an update on the safety concerns for Actos on October 21, indicating that the drug is still a valid diabetes treatment. But, due to the Actos bladder cancer risk, it should only be used when other treatments have failed. This update is similar to the latest one issued by United States regulators.

Watch the ABC News report here.

European drug regulators indicate that they are not recommending an Actos recall, even though the diabetes drug has been linked to an increased risk of bladder cancer. Instead, doctors have been recommended to only use Actos as a second or third line treatment options for diabetics.

The statement is meant to add information to the July opinion by the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), which confirmed that the side effects of Actos include a risk of bladder cancer.

CHMP determined that while there was a risk of bladder cancer, there are still some diabetes patients for whom the risk was manageable because other drugs fail to bring their diabetes under control. The committee recommended careful screening of patients being prescribed the drug and close monitoring while they are on Actos to watch for signs of bladder cancer. The European Commission still has to agree to adopt the opinion as a decision.

Actos (pioglitazone) was introduced as a treatment option for type 2 diabetes in July, 1999. Until recently, it was Takeda Pharmaceuticals’ best-selling drug, with sales of $3.4 billion last year.

In June, France required a recall of Actos after a review of public insurance data identified an increased incidence of bladder cancer with Actos use.

FDA officials began reviewing the potential risk of Actos bladder cancer problems in September 2010, after interim data from an on-going 10 year study found that users may face an increased risk the longer they take the drug.

In the United States, new Actos cancer warnings were approved by the FDA in August 2011, indicating that patients who use the drug for more than a year may face an increased risk of bladder cancer.

A growing number of individuals throughout the U.S. are filing an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit against Takeda, alleging that the drug maker failed to provide adequate warnings for consumers or the medical community. Many of the complaints indicate that Takeda should have removed Actos from the market, arguing that the risk of bladder cancer outweighs the minimal benefits.

Some expert estimates suggest that more than 1,000 cases may ultimately be included as part of the Actos litigation. A panel of judges is scheduled to meet on December 1 to decide whether all federal Actos lawsuits should be consolidated as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

As a Johnson & Johnson Gynecare TVT Trans Vaginal Mesh injury attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this timely update.

Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), the world’s second-biggest health-care products maker, is facing many lawsuits over its Gynecare TVT vaginal implant. The Gynecare TVT implant is based on a similar device pulled from the medical device market more than a decade ago for safety reasons.

The lawsuits are the latest to implicate the shoddy and perfunctory approval process for medical devices at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which has cleared faulty hip implants and malfunctioning defibrillators.

In the case of vaginal mesh implants, the FDA continued approving the mesh devices made by J&J and other companies based on their similarity to Boston Scientific Corp’s ProteGen even after it was pulled amid safety complaints. Today, the makers of the entire category of implants face more than 600 lawsuits from women who claim the devices caused serious injury.

The devices treat urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse, in which internal organs slump into the vagina. They were allowed on the market as result of the agency’s approval process, known as 510(k), which relies on the premise that if one device has been cleared by the FDA then similar devices need little if any testing in patients.

In July, the FDA issued a statement saying it is unclear whether prolapse implants provide any benefit over traditional surgery. The statement came three years after the agency first acknowledged a problem in a 2008 report that said mesh complications were serious. An advisory panel of physicians said last month that the FDA should demand more clinical testing of the devices.

According to J&J, its vaginal mesh products are safe and the J&J's Gynecare TVT was based on the Boston Scientific product.

But according to 510(k) critics, the chain of approvals that began with Boston Scientific’s device highlight a major flaw in the 510(k) process. The system lets manufacturers get clearance for a product by citing its similarity to an already approved device, known as a “predicate.” That second device can be cited as the basis for a third, the third to clear a fourth and so on. And if a first device is recalled, they don’t necessarily look at the second, third or fourth device that are based on that.

The unfortunate Vaginal Mesh story began in 1996, when Boston Scientific gained clearance for ProteGen, the first vaginally implanted mesh designed specifically to treat incontinence. Two years later, J&J won approval for a similar device, called Gynecare TVT. Under the 510(k) system, J&J was not required to conduct human testing because the company claimed its device was “substantially equivalent” to the Boston Scientific device.

A year later, Boston Scientific voluntarily pulled about 20,000 ProteGen meshes, saying it had received 123 reports of problems, including discomfort, pain during sex, and erosion of vaginal tissue. But J&J and at least two other manufacturers, American Medical Systems and Covidien Plc (COV), soon came out with products that traced their design back to ProteGen.

The FDA has said it does not know the number of women who have received the implants since 1998, though it estimates almost 300,000 were used in 2010. All of the devices were approved through the 35-year-old 510(k) system, used by the FDA to review some 90 percent of device applications each year. The same process was used to clear the 93,000 artificial hips pulled by J&J last year due to high failure rates, as well as hundreds of external heart defibrillators recalled since 2005 by Minneapolis-based Medtronic Inc. (MDT)

J&J named ProteGen as a basis for the Gynecare TVT, noting in its application that “technologically, both the new device and predicate device are the same.” By that time, complaints about Boston Scientific’s device were already reaching the FDA. A year after J&J’s TVT won clearance, Boston Scientific voluntarily recalled about 20,000 of its meshes.

J&J’s Gynecare TVT later became a predicate for the IVS Tunneller I, made by Dublin-based Covidien, and the Sparc Sling, made by the American Medical Systems unit of Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc. (ENDP), based in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania. Those, in turn, were cited to clear future versions, each said to be “substantially equivalent” to its predecessors, according to FDA records. In 2003, Boston Scientific settled 738 suits over its mesh for an undisclosed sum.

The safety debate has presented a dilemma for manufacturers, who have avoided clinical tests for the devices by calling them similar to one another and now say the products have advanced far beyond the earlier versions.

The FDA advisory panel disagreed. The 17-member group, comprised mostly of pelvic surgeons, recommended at last month’s hearing that some vaginal meshes be reclassified as high-risk devices requiring new studies to stay on the market.

The FDA appears to be inching toward a decision. At the September hearing, Colin Pollard, director of the FDA’s obstetrics and gynecology devices branch, said it may take as long as three years to issue new rules. Until then, current models can stay on the market, he said.

As a Plavix Dangerous Drug attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this Plavix litigation update.

Plavix manufacturers Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis are calling for the centralization and consolidation of all Plavix lawsuits filed in federal courts throughout the United States on behalf of users of their blockbuster blood thinner who allege that side effects of Plavix resulted in serious personal injuries and even death.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation will hold a hearing On December 1, to determine whether at least 13 lawsuits over Plavix filed in New Jersey, New York and Arizona should be centralized before one judge for coordinated handling during pretrial proceedings.

Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis are arguing that centralizing the cases before Judge Freda Wolfson in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey would serve the convenience of the parties, prevent duplicative discovery and conflicting pretrial rulings from different judges.

The Plavix suits allege that the drug makers failed to adequately research their medication or warn about the risk of Plavix side effects, which could increase the risk of serious and potentially life-threatening bleeding, as well as a rare blood disorder known as thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP).

In filed opposition statements, plaintiffs gave a number of reasons they feel consolidation would further slow their cases. The plaintiffs argue that the New Jersey cases are advanced in their depositions, and combining them with the cases from New York and Arizona would slow things down considerably. They also claim that the non-New Jersey cases are much newer and will involve recent events, like the FDA’s 2010 black box warning that some genetic traits prevent Plavix from being effective, that are irrelevant to the New Jersey cases.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on March 2010, added a boxed warning to the anti-blood clotting drug Plavix (clopidogrel), alerting patients and health care professionals that the drug can be less effective in people who cannot metabolize the drug to convert it to its active form.

Plavix reduces the risk of heart attack, unstable angina, stroke, and cardiovascular death in patients with cardiovascular disease by making platelets less likely to form blood clots. Plavix does not have its anti-platelet effects until it is metabolized into its active form by the liver enzyme, CYP2C19.

People who have reduced functioning of their CYP2C19 liver enzyme cannot effectively convert Plavix to its active form. As a result, Plavix may be less effective in altering platelet activity in those people. These “poor metabolizers” may not receive the full benefit of Plavix treatment and may remain at risk for heart attack, stroke, and cardiovascular death.

Defendants argue that the cases all involve common fact issues surrounding the drug makers’ research and development of Plavix. They also argue that the timing for consolidation is appropriate, as no single case has reached the phase of depositions of “common” fact and expert witnesses who may have knowledge relevant to all Plavix suits.

Plavix (clopidogrel) is prescribed to prevent blood platelets from sticking together to form clots. It is often prescribed to reduce the risk of heart attacks, strokes and blood clotting when drug coated stents are used in patients with arteriosclerosis and in other at-risk patients.

Plaintiffs allege that they suffered injuries as a result of their unnecessary use of Plavix, such as gastrointestinal bleeding, severe ulcers and a rare blood disorder known as TTP. Some complaints also allege that Plavix did not provide the promoted benefit of reducing the risk of a heart attack or stroke, raising questions about the effectiveness of Plavix among some users.

In November 2009, the FDA issued a public health advisory warning that side effects of Prilosec may interfere with Plavix effectiveness, increasing the risk of heart attack, death or other injuries for patients.

In March 2010, a Plavix “black box” warning was added to alert patients and healthcare professionals that the anti-clotting drug may not work in some patients due to genetics. The FDA indicated that a genetic test is available to determine whether patients are able to metabolize Plavix efficiently and suggested that doctors should consider another medication for at-risk patients who are confirmed to have the gene variant.

As a Medical Device Product Liability attorney and board certified medical doctor, I am providing this important update regarding Cochlear Implants. Cochlear Ltd., the world's biggest maker of hearing implants, an Australian company, recalled its latest range of devices after a recent, unexplained increase in failures.

The voluntary recall of the Nucleus CI500 implants, which Cochlear says are the slimmest titanium hearing implants available, will affect many patients.

The company said it identified an increase in the number of Nucleus CI512 implants failing in recent weeks. Chief Executive Chris Roberts said the company has stopped manufacturing the Nucleus CI500 line, which made up 70% of the company's sales of implant units for fiscal 2011. Cochlear has about 65% of the global hearing-implant market.

People fitted with CI500 units but who have not experienced any problems are being advised to continue using the devices. The voluntary recall of the Nucleus CI500 range includes the CI512 model as well as the CI513, CI551 double array implant and ABI 541 auditory brainstem implant.

It does not affect its earlier Nucleus Freedom range or its Nucleus 5 external hearing devices. Production of the CI500 devices has stopped and patients needing bionic ear implants are being offered the Nucleus Freedom model, which has been on the market for seven years.

Roberts said Cochlear was halting manufacture until the cause of the faults was uncovered. According to Roberts, he was unable to say how long it would take before the devices were back on sale but said if any changes had to be made, the company would need to get regulatory approval from the countries where the units are sold.

Cochlear sold more than 17,000 of its Nucleus 5 range of devices in the 2010/11 financial year, representing 70 percent of its total bionic ear sales in 100 different countries. The Nucleus 5 range includes the thinnest hearing implants on the market at just 3.9 millimeters (0.15 of an inch) thick. Cochlear had promoted them as "a new design that is built to last a lifetime."

The National Institutes of Health in the U.S. puts the total cost including device, surgery and follow-up care of an implant at US$60,000. Mr. Roberts said there are about 25,000 registered users of the CI500 range and the company isn't recalling those products that have already been implanted. Cochlear said less than 1% of CI512 implants have failed since they were launched in 2009.

If failure occurs, the implant safely shuts down without injuring the recipient, the company said in a statement, adding that if the device does fail, the patient could be re-implanted with an earlier model from Cochlear's Nucleus Freedom implant range.

Cochlear's Nucleus CI500 is designed to correct hearing loss resulting from damage to the cochlea, a pea-sized structure deep within the ear with hair cells that communicate sound signals to the brain. The implanted device coverts sounds to electrical energy, which it transmits directly to hearing nerves.

Cochlear implants don't restore normal hearing but can give people who are deaf or severely hard of hearing a representation of sounds and help them understand speech, according to the National Institute on Deafness and other Communicative Disorders' website. About 219,000 children and adults world-wide had received such implants as of December, according to the institute.

Industry Problems with Cochlear Implants
Cochlear Americas, a Colorado-based cochlear implant manufacturer, agreed to pay $880,000 to resolve allegations that it paid illegal remuneration to health care providers to induce purchases of cochlear implant systems, according to the Justice Department. Cochlear Americas is a subsidiary of an Australian company, Cochlear Limited.

The settlement resolved a lawsuit brought by a whistleblower, Brenda March, in 2004. The lawsuit, filed in the District of Colorado, alleged that Cochlear Americas violated the Anti-kickback Act and the False Claims Act by paying various forms of illegal remuneration to physicians who prescribed the use of the Cochlear-manufactured devices for Medicare and Medicaid patients.

Advanced Bionics (California) has had several recalls and is awaiting approval from the Food and Drug Administration to resume sales in the U.S. after its latest recall due to a leakage that could lead to neural tissue damage. Advanced Bionics was fined the maximum fee of $1.1 million by the Food and Drug Administration for switching their supplier without notifying the FDA nor having the FDA approval. The cochlear implant was recalled “because of excessive moisture that could leak into the devices and cause device failure and possible surgery.” The CEO, Jeffery Greiner, was also fined $75,000.

Advanced Bionics also produced a cochlear implant with a positioner that had an increased number of people coming down with meningitis post surgery of which some people died from. Other Cochlear Implant manufacturers also have cases of meningitis post surgery.

According to the FDA, silicone oil is the cause of problems with Aviara contact lenses sold by CooperVision, which were removed from the market in August after a number of consumers suffered torn corneas, hazy vision and other potentially serious complications. Nearly two months after problems were first announced, contact lens giant CooperVision Inc. and federal health regulators have amped up public warnings about nearly 780,000 recalled contact lenses, urging users to return the potentially defective products and to seek medical care if they show symptoms of harm.

The FDA announced on Friday that it was classifying the CooperVision Aviara contact lens recall as a Class 1 medical device recall, which is the most serious category the agency can use to label a recall. The class 1 designation means that the FDA believes that use of a device carries a reasonable probability of serious adverse health consequences or death.

More than 778,000 CooperVision Aviara contact lenses were impacted by the recall, which was not widely publicized until the FDA criticized the company last week for failing to take sufficient steps to make sure consumers were aware of the contact lens problems.

The FDA also complained that CooperVision only reported that some users had experienced hazy vision and did not identify the cause of the problems, which involved silicone oil on the lenses. The recalled Aviara contact lenses were were manufactured between November 1, 2010 and August 3, 2011, and were sold at Costco, LensCrafters and Wal-Mart, among other retailers.

The FDA recommends that any consumers who have the lenses return them and contact their eye care specialist immediately if they experience any problems after wearing the recalled lenses.

Production of the CooperVision contact lenses has been stopped so that the company can fix the problem. The manufacturer estimates that Avaira Toric contact lenses will be shipping in normal amounts again by December.

CooperVision has not released a complete list of lot numbers affected by the recall. Consumers who suspect they have lenses affected by the recall can visit the CooperVision web page at www.coopervision.com/recall and enter the package lot number to see if their lenses are included.

As a Yaz Birth Control Coma and Blindness Injury attorney and Texas medical doctor I am providing this YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella update.

ABC’s chief law and justice correspondent, Chris Cuomo, interviews Carissa Ubersox, a former pediatric nurse who started taking Bayer’s Yaz birth control pills when she wanted to look her best for her wedding and “saw commercials suggesting help with bloating and acne.” Two months after Ubersox started to take Yaz birth control pills, she developed massive blood clots in both lungs and fell into a coma that lasted for two weeks. When she woke up, she was blind.

All birth control pills come with some risk of developing blood clots, and Bayer “cites its own studies as proof that Yaz is just as safe as other birth control pills.” However, Dr. Susan Jick of the Boston University School of Medicine has authored an independent study involving a million women that finds Yaz’s risk to be two to three times higher than other birth control pills. ABC reports that two Bayer-sponsored studies find no difference in risk, while four independent studies all find increased risk.

Ubersox believes that Yaz birth control pills, which once seemed like a “miracle drug,” are the reason that she developed blood clots in both her lungs and is now blind. She and thousands of other women are now suing Bayer for Yaz’s negative side effects. Bayer denies any wrongdoing and would not answer ABC’s questions about Yaz birth control pills.

We having been blogging and providing much needed information on the side effects of YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella for the past 2 years and have filed many lawsuits in the Southern District of Illinois federal court. This is where the Bayer oral contraceptive lawsuits have been federally consolidated. Click here to read our 113 articles on YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella.

The first case we filed in this Bayer oral contraceptive litigation had similar fact pattern as the above ABC video. In our lawsuit, our client was a woman in her mid forties who was on Yaz for a short time period. She, one night, was noted to be making gurgling sounds while she was asleep. This was noticed by her husband who immediately recognized that something was not quite right. He immediately called 911 and started CPR.

She was taken emergently to the local ER, she was shocked multiple times on route to the ER, by the paramedics and again in the ER had to be resuscitated for several hours. She practically died several times that night, but she had an immense will to live and survived the tragic ordeal. Like the victim in the video, she also suffered from a massive pulmonary embolism. She was also placed in a medically induced coma and when she recovered she noticed she had developed cortical blindness and severe neuro-muscular weakness.

Currently she is being looked after at home by her husband and family. Bayer has refused to accept any liability in these lawsuits to date.

As a Dallas Medtronic Infuse Lawsuit and side effect attorney and medical doctor I am providing this update regarding the problems associated withe Medtronic Infuse medical product.

Medtronic, a medical device company is in the news regarding reports about its synthetic bone growth product Infuse. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice began investigating whether Medtronic had been illegally promoting "off-label" use of Infuse.

The Spine Journal reported in its June 2011 edition concerns about Infuse and Medtronic's research. In 2004, a small group of doctors wrote some research papers stating that Infuse did not cause any harm to patients. The doctors who wrote the article would eventually receive millions of dollars from Medtronic.

According to researchers, in contrast to published reports from manufacturer-sponsored studies of the Infuse spinal fusion device that incorporates a biologic bone-building drug, a new analysis of FDA documents and other data sources suggests that up to half of patients receiving the device may experience adverse events related to the drug.

The Infuse device, which delivers recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) to speed vertebral fusion in patients with chronic back pain, has adverse event rates of 10% to 50% depending on the approach, according to Eugene Carragee, MD, of Stanford University's outpatient clinic in Redwood City, Calif., and colleagues.

"This risk of adverse events associated with rhBMP-2 is 10 to 50 times the original estimates reported in the industry-sponsored peer-reviewed publications," Carragee and colleagues wrote online in The Spine Journal, which Carragee serves as editor-in-chief.

The investigators in each of 13 reports of studies funded by product manufacturer Medtronic and published from 2000 to 2009 claimed to find no adverse events attributable to rhBMP-2.

The Spine Journal reports that those doctors did not disclose their financial ties to Medtronic and that the papers repeatedly failed to report complications with Infuse. Infuse may cause unwanted, and sometimes out-of-control, bone growth. The Spine Journal found that the complication rate for Infuse was anywhere from 10 to 50 times higher than reported in the Medtronic studies.

The United States Food & Drug Administration only approved Infuse for fusions in the lower back. But, doctors have been using it "off-label" for cervical (neck) spinal fusions, too often with poor results.

Unwanted bone growth in the neck can result in:

difficulty with breathing and swallowing
tracheotomies
emergency surgery
the placement of feeding tubes
revision surgery (additional surgery needed too fix the problem)

Other reported problems with Infuse include:

male sterility
infection
cancer
bone loss
unwanted bone growth
nerve damage
incontinence

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As a DePuy ASR and DePuy Pinnacle litigation attorney, I am providing this timely update.

More than 500 lawsuits have been filed in Northern District of Texas federal court over DePuy Pinnacle hip replacements problems. The plaintiffs have alleged that DePuy hips, caused individuals to experience severe pain and early failure of their artificial hip implant.

In May 2011, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, JPML, ordered that every DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuit filed in any U.S. District Court throughout the country be transferred to the Northern District of Texas as part of a multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

According to court documents released October 6, there are now at least 538 complaints consolidated before U.S. District Judge James E. Kinkeade in the DePuy Pinnacle MDL. As DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement lawyers continue to evaluate, investigate and file new cases in federal court, the number of lawsuits is expected to continue to grow. Many medical experts anticipate that thousands of people who are impacted by the alleged defective medical product, will ultimately file a complaint.

This scenario is currently being played out in the Northern District of Ohio federal court system, where another metal on metal DePuy hip product has been consolidated for litigation purposes. In August 2010, DePuy recalled its flagship artificial metal on metal hip product, the DePuy ASR.

watch this abc news video

All of the suits involve similar allegations that the DePuy Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System was defectively designed or manufactured, and that inadequate warnings were provided about the risk of early complications or problems, which have been developing within a few years of the surgery. In many cases, the DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement complications result in the need for additional surgery to replace or revise the hip replacement.

Many of the complaints allege that DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, has been aware of the problems with their metal-on-metal hip implants for some time and that a DePuy Pinnacle hip recall should have been issued several years ago.

As described above, Johnson & Johnson and DePuy also face thousands of lawsuits over the recalled DePuy ASR hip replacement. The DePuy ASR hip was approved as a substantial equivalent design to the DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip, and the allegations raised regarding design problems with the two devices are similar.

Over the past year, concerns about all metal-on-metal hip replacements have been growing. Last October, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) issued a warning about potential problems with metal on-metal hip replacements, indicating that patients and the medical community should be aware that pain months after hip replacement surgery may be a sign of metal-on-metal hip cobalt toxicity.

Earlier this year, the FDA launched a new website to provide information about the risks associated with metal-on-metal hip replacements.

As a DePuy ASR Hip Recall attorney I am providing this update. There is a problem with metal on metal artificial hip implant devices, as highlighted on the NBC Nightly News on October 4th 2011.

According to medical experts and bio-engineers, the DePuy ASR, and DePuy Pinnacle hip implants are failing, or have failed at an unacceptably high rate. In August of 2010, there was a recall on DePuy ASR hip implant device. The ASR DePuy hip implants were surgically implanted on tens of thousands of US citizens between 2005 and early 2010.

Symptoms of a recalled ASR DePuy hip implant failure include pain in the hip region, problems walking, swelling of the hip, or lack of flexibility in the area of the hip. NBC Nightly News with anchor Brian Williams, called attention to the DePuy hip implant recall, and the issues with metal on metal hip implants on Tuesday October 4th 2011 news segment.

Unfortunately the fact is that the DePuy ASR hip implant was sold as the right hip implant for younger, or older adults, who wanted to maintain an active, or athletic lifestyle. According to medical experts there could be thousands of DePuy hip implant replacements in the US.

The medical experts indicate symptoms of the recalled ASR DePuy hip implant failure include:

Pain in the Hip Region
Problems While Walking or The Inability to Walk
Swelling of the Hip
General Discomfort
Lack of Flexibility

To view the NBC Nightly News story about problems with metal on metal hip implants, or Depuy hip implant please go to http://NBCNightlyNews.Com & click on the Health Tab

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

According to a British orthopedists’ group a hip replacement made by Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy unit fails in the U.K. as often as 49 percent of the time, or four times what the company cited in recalling the device last year.

The British Orthopaedic Association and the British Hip Society said in a statement in March 2011 that data on the ASR XL Acetabular System from four surgeons show the rate of second operations, or revisions, ranges from 21 percent after four years to 49 percent after six years.

DePuy recalled both the ASR XL and an ASR hip resurfacing system in August 2010. At the time, the company cited unpublished data from the National Joint Registry of England and Wales saying 13 percent of ASR XL patients required second surgeries in five years, and 12 percent of patients with the resurfaced hips needed such operations within five years. Both devices use metal balls and sockets to replace ailing hips.

Only the ASR XL was approved for sale in the U.S., where 37,000 were implanted. New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&J, the world’s largest health-care company, faces over a 1,000 lawsuits in the U.S. so far over the devices.

U.K. Implants
About 10,000 of the hips were implanted in the U.K., including 5,000 or so resurfacing devices and 5,000 of the ASR XL prostheses, also known as total-hip replacements.

Lawsuits Filed
Plaintiffs have brought product-liability, negligence and failure-to-warn claims against DePuy over the devices, and are seeking medical costs, lost wages and compensation for their pain and suffering. More than 350 lawsuits have been consolidated in federal court in Ohio, and more than 220 are pending in California state court. Another group of cases is pending in New Jersey state court.

Merck said today that a federal court jury in New York found in its favor in the Secrest v. Merck case, rejecting the claim of a Florida woman who blamed her dental and jaw-related problems on her FOSAMAX use.

Chilton Varner of King & Spalding LLP, outside counsel for Merck said, "Unfortunately, the plaintiff had medical problems that cause people to develop the jaw and dental problems that the plaintiff has, regardless of whether they were taking FOSAMAX. She has a long history of invasive dental procedures and suffers from medical conditions that inhibit the body's ability to heal."

Today's verdict marks the fourth time a jury has found in Merck's favor on a plaintiff's product liability claim in the litigation regarding FOSAMAX. The plaintiff in this case alleged she used FOSAMAX and suffered various jaw problems and complications following multiple tooth extractions and failed dental implants.

At trial, Merck presented evidence that FOSAMAX is a safe and effective medication as described in the product labeling that was properly designed and did not cause the plaintiff's dental and jaw problems.

Status of Litigation
This is the fifth case regarding FOSAMAX(R) (alendronate sodium) to go to trial. Merck won three of the first four. The first three trials were conducted as part of the federal multidistrict litigation proceedings before Judge Keenan. The first case to be tried to a verdict, Maley v. Merck, resulted in a defense verdict for Merck in May 2010. The second case to be tried to a verdict, Boles v. Merck, initially resulted in a mistrial in September 2009 after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. A retrial of that case in June 2010 resulted in a plaintiff verdict, which was later reduced by Judge Keenan. The third case to be tried to a verdict, Graves v. Merck, resulted in a defense verdict for Merck in November 2010. The fourth case to go to trial, Rosenberg v. Merck, which was tried in the Superior Court for Atlantic County, New Jersey, resulted in a defense verdict for Merck in February 2011.

As of June 30, 2011, approximately 1,650 cases, which include approximately 2,050 plaintiff groups, had been filed and were pending against Merck in either federal or state court.

As an Actos Bladder Cancer Product Liability attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this update regarding the status of a MDL consolidation request.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals the manufacturer of Actos and their defense attorneys have indicated that the drug maker supports a request to have all federal Actos bladder cancer lawsuits consolidated for pretrial litigation. But Takeda disagrees about where the defective product liability claims should be centralized.

On September 29, Takeda Actos lawyers filed a response with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, indicating that they agree with plaintiffs that an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, should be formed, but requested that the cases be transferred to either Northern District of Illinois or Western District of Louisiana.

A motion to consolidate the Actos bladder cancer litigation was first filed on August 31, by plaintiff Glen Weant, who requested that all federal Actos lawsuits be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois before Judge G. Patrick Murphy. Since then, additional plaintiffs have filed responses proposing other U.S. District Judges to preside over the litigation.

The first Actos lawsuit was filed on July 29, 2011. According to documents filed by Takeda last week, the drug maker is now aware of at least 54 cases that have been filed in federal district courts throughout the United States. In addition, as Actos plaintiffs attorneys continue to evaluate and file new complaints on behalf of people diagnosed with bladder cancer after taking the type 2 diabetes drug, the number of claims is expected to continue to grow.

All of the complaints involve similar allegations that side effects of Actos caused users to develop bladder cancer. Plaintiffs argue that Takeda failed to properly research the medication or warn about the risk.

Takeda’s attorneys indicated that they agreed that the cases fit the requirements for an MDL and that consolidation would help prevent contradictory rulings and duplicative discovery. It would also serve the convenience of counsel, witnesses, plaintiffs and defendants, according to the drug maker’s response.

Takeda has requested that the Actos litigation be consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois, where the drug maker is headquartered and where the company’s records are located. As an alternative, the drug maker proposed the Western District of Louisiana for the Actos MDL to be centralized, as there are at least 16 cases already pending in that district.

Actos (pioglitazone) was approved by FDA to treat Type 2 Diabetes in July, 1999. It is a once-a-day pill that increases the body’s sensitivity to insulin. The medication has grown in popularity in recent years, after studies linked its primary competitor, Avandia, to an increased risk of heart attacks and death.

FDA officials began reviewing the potential risk of Actos bladder cancer problems in September 2010, after interim data from an on-going 10 year study found that users may face an increased risk the longer they take the drug. Data from the study conducted by Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the makers of Actos, indicated that after 24 months, the rate of exposure and the increased risk of bladder cancer reached statistical significance.

In June, an Actos recall was issued in France after a review of public insurance data identified an increased incidence of bladder cancer with Actos use.

The European Union’s European Medicines Agency (EMA) also conducted a review and confirmed the bladder cancer risk, calling for new warnings and a six-month review of every patient on Actos. The EMA suggested that Actos bladder cancer risk could be reduced by appropriate patient selection and exclusion.

Since then, the number of lawsuits over Actos has been steadily increasing in federal district courts throughout the United States. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation is expected to schedule oral arguments on the motion to consolidate the cases at the next hearing, which will be held on December 1 in Savannah, Georgia.

FDA Drug Safety Communication: Ongoing Safety Review of Actos (pioglitazone) and Potential Increased Risk of Bladder Cancer After Two Years Exposure

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is informing the public that use of the diabetes medication Actos (pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. Information about this risk will be added to the Warnings and Precautions section of the label for pioglitazone-containing medicines. The patient Medication Guide for these medicines will also be revised to include information on the risk of bladder cancer.

As a DePuy ASR and Pinnacle Replacement and Recall attorney I am providing this blog update.

As readers to my blog will note, I am a licensed Texas medical doctor as well as a product liability attorney. We are currently fielding many phone calls from concerned hip replacement patients and the biggest concern for them is residual hip pain post procedure."Is that normal?" they ask. "How do we know if we are suffering from metallosis?" "My doctor is not concerned but I still feel that something is wrong?"

The answers to these questions remain elusive for several reasons. Firstly and foremost is the lack of research, disclosure and transparency from the hip manufacturers who knew or should have known about these problems and concerns.

Secondary, the orthopedic doctors, many of whom are implanting technicians, they do not have a firm grounding in internal medicine and because of their surgical training do not have the ability to diagnose and treat these types of conditions, short of re-do surgery. They drank the manufacturers kool-aid.

Diagnosis and treatment of metal on metal hip problem requires a multidisciplinary approach including the orthopedic, internal medicine and radiological specialties. Many orthopedic surgeons have reported that tissue surrounding a failed artificial hip looks like a biological dead zone. There are matted strands of tissue stained gray and black and large strips of muscle near the hip no longer contracted. Some patients with all-metal hips, ones in which the cup and ball of a joint are made of metal, said they had trouble finding a doctor to help them.

More than 10 years ago, some researchers had warned that the hips released metallic debris that caused potential health threats to patients. But those warnings were ignored, and now doctors and patients face a mounting public health problem as one of the biggest medical device failures surfaces.

All orthopedic implants, irrespective of their composition, shed debris as they wear, from the grinding action of joints. But researchers say they believe that the metallic particles released by some all-metal hips poses a special threat. This is because scavenger cells released by the body to neutralize the foreign debris convert it into biologically active metallic ions. In some patients, this sets off a chain reaction that can destroy tissue and muscle.

So far, only a small fraction of the estimated 500,000 people in this country who received an all-metal hip over the last decade have suffered injuries. But studies suggest that those numbers will grow and that tissue destruction is occurring silently in some patients who have no obvious symptoms like pain. And that is the crux of the problem, heavy metal blood tests can be normal and yet the hip joint is breaking down silently.

A recent study in England found that all-metal hips were failing early at three times the rate of hips made from metal-and-plastic components. This artificial hips are supposed to last 15 years or more. Most people recover well from a device replacement procedure, but specialists are also seeing growing numbers of patients with complications.

In the first six months of this year, the Food and Drug Administration received more than 5,000 reports about problems with the all-metal hips, according to a recent analysis by The New York Times.

In May, the Food and Drug Administration ordered makers of all-metal hips to develop studies to determine how frequently the devices were failing and the implications for patients. But those studies are not likely to be completed for years.

The final chapter has not yet been written on these metal on metal hips and so far DePuy has only recalled the ASR model. Johnson and Johnson, the parent of DePuy, continues to sell and market their Pinnacle metal on metal hip model.

A lawsuit has been filed against AstraZeneca by two Texans who allege that Nexium caused them to suffer bone fracture side effects. The complaint was filed by Mary Mai Nguyen and Tuoc Duong on September 15 in Harris County, Texas against AstraZeneca.

According to the Nexium lawsuit, the defendants failed to adequately research the heart burn medication or warn about the potential risk of Nexium bone problems. Nexium (esomeprazole) is a member of a class of drugs known as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).

A number of similar bone fracture lawsuits involving Nexium and other proton pump inhibitors have been filed in recent months. Other drugs in the class include Prilosec, Aciphex, Prevacid, Protonix, Vimovo and Zegerid.

In 2010 and in 2011, the FDA warned that there may be an increased risk of bone fractures from Nexium and the other PPI medications. The risk of broken bones from Nexium appears to be linked to high doses of the medication used over long periods of time.

The Texan plaintiffs allege in their Nexium suit that studies as early as 2006 found the PPIs interfere with the body’s ability to absorb calcium, speeding up bone loss and leading to an increased number of bone fractures. According to the complaint, AstraZeneca was aware of the Nexium bone fracture risk, and their “marketing efforts obscured, misrepresented and obfuscated this information.”

The FDA announced in March 2011 that they are requiring new warnings about the risk of bone fractures from Nexium, Prilosec, Protonix, Prevacid, Zegerid, Aciphex and Vimovo, as the heartburn drugs have been associated with a number of hip fractures, wrist fractures, spine fractures and other injuries.

FDA Update: 3/23/2011
FDA has determined an osteoporosis and fracture warning on the over-the-counter (OTC) proton pump inhibitor (PPI) medication “Drug Facts” label is not indicated at this time. Following a thorough review of available safety data, FDA has concluded that fracture risk with short-term, low dose PPI use is unlikely.

The available data show that patients at highest risk for fractures received high doses of prescription PPIs (higher than OTC PPI doses) and/or used a PPI for one year or more.

In contrast to prescription PPIs, OTC PPIs are marketed at low doses and are only intended for a 14 day course of treatment up to 3 times per year. FDA acknowledges that consumers, either on their own, or based on a healthcare professional’s recommendation, may take these products for periods of time that exceed the directions on the OTC label. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the risk for fracture if they are recommending use of OTC PPIs at higher doses or for longer periods of time than in the OTC PPI label.

The label changes for the proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), come after the agency looked at a number of studies that linked the drugs to increased bone fracture risks. PPIs are designed to fight the symptoms of a number of gastrointestinal ailments by reducing the body’s production of stomach acid.

The new bone fracture warnings affect both other-the-counter and prescription heartburn drugs, including:

Nexium
Prilosec and Prilosec OTC
Prevacid and Prevacid 24HR
Protonix
Zegerid and Zegerid OTC
Aciphex
Vimovo

The types of bone fractures associated with the drugs include

Hip fractures
Wrist fractures
Spine fractures

The new warnings come just days after the results of a study were published in the Archives of Internal Medicine that linked the use of Nexium, Prilosec and other PPIs to a 25% increase in the risk of bone fractures in women. The risks appear to be connected to long-term use of the drugs of a year or more, but FDA has decided to place the bone fracture risk warning even on those drugs which are not recommended for use longer than two weeks at a time.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning Monday about an increased risk of blood clots in women taking newer forms of birth control pills, such as Yaz or Yasmin.

The FDA did say it "remains concerned" about a potentially higher risk of blood clots in women taking the "fourth generation" pills containing drospirenone, a new type of synthetic progestin. These new pills, marketed as Yaz, Ocella or Yasmin, among other brand names, are very popular.

Venous thrombosis embolism (VTE) are clots that originate in the legs and can travel to the lungs, causing a medical condition known as pulmonary embolism. Symptoms include leg pain, chest pain or sudden shortness of breath.

Preliminary results of an FDA-funded study show a 50 percent increased risk of VTEs in women taking drospirenone-containing pills versus other hormonal contraceptives.
According to the FDA, the risk to any one woman remains small: the risk of a VTE is about six women per 10,000 users for the older contraceptives versus 10 per 10,000 using the newer versions.

The agency also reviewed six other studies on the subject, the results of which were conflicting. Two studies found no difference in risk, while another two found a 1.5-fold to 2-fold increased risk. And two more studies, appearing earlier this year in the BMJ, found double to triple the risk. The FDA issued a similar safety communication at the end of May, after the two BMJ studies came out.

Risk factors for VTE include smoking, being overweight or a family history of blood clots. The FDA statement released Monday noted that studies to date have only looked at pills containing drospirenone and a higher dose of estrogen, not those containing drospirenone and a lower dose of estrogen. FDA advisory committees are scheduled to investigate further into the matter at a December meeting, at which time the full findings of the agency-funded study will be released.

Data Summary
FDA has reviewed six published epidemiologic studies that evaluated the risk of blood clots (venous thromboembolism, VTE) in women using birth control pills containing drospirenone. These studies have conflicting findings. Two were postmarketing studies required by the FDA or European regulatory agencies.1,2 These studies did not report any difference in VTE risk between drospirenone-containing products and products containing levonorgestrel or other progestins. Two publications from 2009, however, reported a 1.5- to 2-fold higher VTE risk in women who use drospirenone-containing contraceptives as compared to the risk in women who use levonorgestrel-containing contraceptives.3,4 More recently, two articles published in 2011 in the British Medical Journal reported a 2- to 3-fold greater risk of blood clots in women using oral contraceptives containing drospirenone rather than levonorgestrel.5,6 As with all epidemiologic studies, there are methodological issues that make interpretation of these conflicting results complex. FDA has not reached a conclusion on the risk for blood clots in women using drospirenone-containing birth control pills, but remains concerned about the potential increased risk.

Initial data from an FDA-funded epidemiologic study exploring the association of blood clots with several different hormonal contraceptive products, including levonorgestrel-containing contraceptives, appear consistent with results from the 2009 and 2011 published studies. Although FDA's review is ongoing, the preliminary data from the FDA-funded study are consistent with an approximately 1.5-fold increase in the risk of blood clots for users of drospirenone-containing contraceptives compared to users of other hormonal contraceptives. To put this risk into perspective, if the risk of developing a blood clot among women using other hormonal contraceptives is about 6 women in 10 thousand, then the risk of developing a blood clot among women using drospirenone-containing oral contraceptives would be about 10 women in 10 thousand. The full study report of this study, along with the completed FDA review of the results of the study, will be presented and discussed at the joint meeting of the Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee in December 2011.

FDA notes that the available studies have only examined the risk of VTE in users of contraceptive pills that contain drospirenone and 0.03 mg of ethinyl estradiol (an estrogen) and not other pills that contain drospirenone combined with a lower dose of estrogen (e.g., 0.02 mg ethinyl estradiol). It is unknown at this time whether the reported VTE risk applies to all drospirenone-containing products.

Table 1. Approved Oral Contraceptives containing Drospirenone

Brand name
Generic name
Drospirenone and ethinyl estradiol
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg
Ocella
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg
Safyral
Drospirenone 3 mg, ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg, and levomefolate calcium 0.451 mg
Syeda
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg
Yasmin
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg
Zarah
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg
Beyaz
Drospirenone 3 mg, ethinyl estradiol 0.02 mg and levomefolate calcium 0.451 mg
Drospirenone and ethinyl estradiol
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.02 mg
Gianvi
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.02 mg
Loryna
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.02 mg
Yaz
Drospirenone 3 mg and ethinyl estradiol 0.02 mg

As a Texas Medical Doctor and DePuy ASR Failure Attorney, I am providing this update and commentary on a recent British database study.

According to a British database, the National Joint Registry for England and Wales, which tracks hip replacement problems, a number of recalled DePuy ASR metal hip implants are failing within six years. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales indicates that 29% of patients who received the DePuy metal-on-metal hip replacement have reported that they failed after only six years of use.

DePuy Orthopaedics, a division of Johnson & Johnson, issued a DePuy ASR hip recall last year, indicating that about 12% to 13% of these hips mail fail within five years. More than 90,000 DePuy ASR XL Acetabular Systems and DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems were sold worldwide before the metal-on-metal hip implants were recalled in August 2010. About 40,000 of those were sold in the United States.

Johnson & Johnson currently faces more than 1,000 DePuy metal-on-metal hip lawsuits that have been filed by patients whose devices failed or who have suffered metallosis. According to experts, Johnson & Johnson may have to pay out more than $1 billion in liability over the defective hip devices. Earlier this summer, it was reported that Johnson & Johnson has increased its liability fund by $570 million to cover the cost of DePuy ASR settlements.

All hip implants that use metal-on-metal designs appear to have a higher failure rate than other types of artificial hips. A hip implant is supposed to last an average of about 15 years. But, many all-metal hip replacement systems are failing much faster, causing crippling injuries, metal blood poisoning and often requiring revision surgery to have the devices replaced.

Metal-on-metal hip replacements, which use cobalt and chromium, accounted for about one-third of the 250,000 hip replacements performed in the United States in recent years. But, concerns over metal-on-metal hip replacement and metallosis have caused many orthopedic doctors to move away from the devices in recent months. According to the registry, all types of hip implants, including combinations of ceramic, plastic and metal, have only a 4.7 percent failure rate after seven years. Metal-on-metal hip implants have a failure rate of 14 percent.

As the metal hip replacement ball and socket grind against each other, cobalt and chromium metallic particles may be shed into the body, which can result in metallosis. This may result in soft tissue damage, inflammatory reactions, bone loss, and local necrosis that may lead to the need for a risky hip revision surgery.

The FDA has requested metal hip manufacturers to provide more data on metallosis and metal on metal hip implants.

30 plaintiffs who have filed a vaginal mesh lawsuit against C.R. Bard, are asking the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), to include these cases as part of the consolidated federal Bard Avaulta litigation.

In October 2010, the JPML ordered that all federal Bard Avaulta pelvic mesh lawsuits be consolidated before U.S. District Judge Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation for coordinated pretrial proceedings.

This MDL included cases filed by women who received three different types of Bard surgical mesh used for repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or female stress urinary incontinence (SUI): the Bard Avaulta Biosynthetic, Bard Avaulta Plus and Bard Avaulta Solo mesh. These products were sold by C.R. Bard and manufactured by either Bard or subsidiaries of Covidien plc.

These complaints were filed by women who received other Bard pelvic repair products, such as Pelvicol, PelviLace, PelviSoft, Pelvitex, Uretex or Align mesh. All of these products were also sold by C.R. Bard and manufactured by either Bard or Covidien subsidiaries.

All of the pelvic repair mesh lawsuits involve similar allegations that the defendants designed and sold defective and dangerous products without providing appropriate warnings or instructions. All of the Bard pelvic mesh products, which are also known as transvaginal mesh, are used to support the bladder and/or uterus organs. The mesh is often used as a sling or support to prevent the organs from prolapsing into the vagina or rectum.

The Bard pelvic slings have been associated with reports of serious and debilitating complications, including erosion of the mesh into the vagina or rectum, infection, movement of the mesh, pelvic pain and injury to nearby organs.

In recent months, a growing number of pelvic mesh lawsuits have been filed against Bard, Covidien and manufacturers of other similar products. Public awareness about the risk of transvaginal mesh problems increased after the FDA issued a warning this summer. The FDA also held an advisory panel meeting earlier this month to determine whether a pelvic mesh recall should be issued.

In July 2011, the FDA issued a statement directed at consumers and the medical community indicating that they have been unable to find any evidence that Bard pelvic mesh or other transvaginal mesh products used for repair of pelvic organ prolapse provide any benefit over other available means of treatment.

Plaintiffs argue that all of the Bard pelvic repair products should be included in the same multidistrict litigation (MDL), as they will involve common questions of fact relating to Bard’s and/or Covidien subsidiaries’ research, development, design, testing, manufacturing, selling, marketing and labeling of these products.

According to the motion, attorneys for the various defendants involved in the cases have indicated they support the expansion of the Bard Avaulta litigation to include all Bard pelvic mesh lawsuits.

Consolidation of complex product liability lawsuits into an MDL help reduce duplicative discovery for all parties, eliminate inconsistent pretrial rulings and avoid potentially conflicting deadlines in different courts.

The 29 Bard mesh lawsuits that are not currently included in the MDL are now pending before at least 12 different judges in 3 different federal district courts.

According to the concerned women who are calling our offices; they believe that the FDA and other U.S. regulators have failed them by not requiring extensive testing before allowing Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) and other manufacturers to sell the type of surgical mesh implanted in them, to hold their pelvic organs in place. Now many these callers say that they cannot work, sleep through the night, or have sex with their partners due to endless pain.

There are about 270 lawsuits pending against J&J. In all, about 600 suits have been filed against it and other mesh makers, including C.R. Bard, Boston Scientific, and American Medical Systems, acquired in June by Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned on July 13 of a fivefold increase in women suffering pain and injuries after surgeons inserted mesh through vaginal incisions. Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) occurs when the internal structures that support the pelvic organs such as the bladder, uterus and bowel, become so weak or stretched that the organs drop from their normal position and bulge or prolapse into the vagina. While not a life-threatening condition, women with POP often experience pelvic discomfort, disruption of their sexual, urinary, and defecatory functions, and an overall reduction in their quality of life.

Surgery to repair POP can be performed through the abdomen or transvaginally, through the vagina, using stitches, or with the addition of surgical mesh to reinforce the repair and correct the anatomy.

”There are clear risks associated with the transvaginal placement of mesh to treat POP,” said William Maisel, M.D., M.P.H., deputy director and chief scientist of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. “The FDA is asking surgeons to carefully consider all other treatment options and to make sure that their patients are fully informed of potential complications from surgical mesh. Mesh is a permanent implant -- complete removal may not be possible and may not result in complete resolution of complications.”

In 2010, there were at least 100,000 POP repairs that used surgical mesh. About 75,000 of these were transvaginal procedures.

The FDA issued a safety communication in 2008 due to increasing concerns about adverse events associated with the transvaginal placement of mesh. Since then, the number of adverse events has continued to climb. From 2008 to 2010, the FDA received 1503 adverse event reports associated with mesh used for POP repair, five times as many as the agency received from 2005 to 2007. The reports don’t always differentiate between transvaginal and abdominal procedures.

The most frequently reported complications from surgical mesh used to repair POP include mesh becoming exposed or protruding out of the vaginal tissue (erosion), pain, infection, bleeding, pain during sexual intercourse, organ perforation from surgical tools used in the mesh placement procedure, and urinary problems. Some reports cited the need for additional surgeries or hospitalization to treat complications or to remove the mesh.

The FDA also conducted a review of scientific literature published between 1996 and 2010 comparing mesh surgeries to non-mesh surgeries. The agency review suggests that many patients who undergo transvaginal POP repair with mesh are exposed to additional risks, compared to patients who undergo POP repair with stitches alone. While mesh often corrected anatomy, there was no evidence that mesh provided any greater clinical benefit than non-mesh surgeries.

FDA recommends that health care providers:
• Recognize that in most cases, POP can be treated successfully without mesh;
• Know that surgical mesh is a permanent implant that can make any future surgical repairs more challenging and can put the patient at risk for additional complications and surgeries;
• Consider that mesh placed abdominally for POP repair may result in lower rates of mesh complications compared to transvaginal POP surgery with mesh; and
• Be sure that patients are aware of the risks and benefits of transvaginal POP repair with mesh, and inform patients if mesh is being used.

The FDA recommends that patients:
• Ask the surgeon before surgery about all POP treatment options, including those that do not involve mesh, and understand why the surgeon may be recommending treatment of POP with mesh;
• Continue with routine check-ups and follow-up care after surgery. Notify the surgeon if complications develop (persistent vaginal bleeding or discharge, pelvic or groin pain during sex); and
• Those who have had POP surgery but don’t know if the surgeon used mesh should find out if mesh was used during their next scheduled visit with their health care provider.

Last week an advisory panel agreed with FDA staff that the agency should reclassify mesh from moderate risk to high risk of harming patients if it fails, and require more studies to determine if they are safe and effective.

Personal injury lawyers say they expect a surge in lawsuits by women because of the dangers of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse, POP. POP refers to a condition in which the uterus or bladder bulge, or prolapse, into the vagina.

None of the cases have been tried, and women must prove their claims that mesh makers knew of safety risks and failed to disclose them and that the products were defective. JNJ, Boston Scientific, Bard, and American Medical Systems told the FDA advisory panel that using mesh in transvaginal procedures is safe and effective and serious injuries are rare.

About 300,000 women in the U.S. had pelvic organ prolapse surgeries last year, including more than 70,000 who received vaginal meshes. Between 2008 and 2010, the FDA received 1,503 reports of injuries or malfunction, a fivefold increase from 2005 to 2007.

Bard, which estimated the global prolapse mesh market at $175 million, saw its own pelvic prolapse business fall about 30 percent in 2010 due to what it called “regulatory delays” on product approvals. J&J is the global leader in prolapse mesh, followed by American Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, and Bard. According to experts, the law suits are another high-profile controversy pushing the FDA toward toughening its approval process for devices. As moderate-risk devices, vaginal meshes currently need only show that they are “substantially equivalent” to existing products. A change to a high-risk status would require tests to show efficacy and safety.

As a Texas medical doctor and Actos Bladder Cancer Attorney I am providing this information and commentary. The maker of the world's best-selling diabetes drug is facing many lawsuits as adverse medical research shows that taking the pill for more than a year raises the risk of bladder cancer.

A motion was filed asking for all federal Actos bladder cancer lawsuits to be centralized before one judge for coordinated handling during pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

There are about 12 lawsuits over Actos that have been filed in federal district courts. Experts believe that hundreds of complaints that will likely be filed on behalf of individuals who claim they developed bladder cancer from side effects of Actos.

The motion was filed on August 31 by plaintiffs Glen and Nina Weant, who have petitioned the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate all federal Actos lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois before Judge Murphy. According to the filing, there are at least 12 lawsuits pending in 8 different federal district courts throughout the United States involving individuals who developed bladder cancer after Actos use.

All of the lawsuits involve similar allegations that Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the makers of Actos, failed to adequately research their medication or warn about the increased risk of bladder cancer when Actos is used for long periods of time.

Actos (pioglitazone) was approved by FDA to treat Type 2 Diabetes in July, 1999. It is a once-a-day pill that increases the body’s sensitivity to insulin. FDA officials began reviewing the potential risk of Actos bladder cancer problems in September 2010, after interim data from an on-going 10 year study found that users may face an increased risk the longer they take the drug. Data from the study conducted by Takeda Pharmaceuticals, indicated that after 24 months, the rate of exposure and the increased risk of bladder cancer reached statistical significance.

In June, an Actos recall was issued in France after a review of public insurance data identified an increased incidence of bladder cancer with Actos use. The European Union’s European Medicines Agency (EMA) also conducted a review and confirmed the bladder cancer risk, calling for new warnings and a six-month review of every patient on Actos.

Consolidation of the Actos litigation before one judge as part of an MDL is designed to reduce duplicative discovery, avoid contradictory rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the court, witnesses and parties. While the pretrial management of the cases in an MDL is often managed similar to how an Actos class action lawsuit would be handled, each claim will still remain an individual lawsuit.

During pretrial proceedings the Court will coordinate discovery and help facilitate a possible Actos settlement agreement. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation is not likely to schedule a hearing on the petition until at least December 1, when they are scheduled to hold a hearing session in Savannah, Georgia.

As a Texas medical doctor and Fosamax femur fracture injury Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their side effects from using Fosamax and similar drugs. We are providing the following update and commentary.

A FDA advisory committee wants the agency to limit the duration of bisphosphonate therapy for treatment of osteoporosis. This year, the FDA required that all bisphosphonates used to prevent or treat osteoporosis warn on their labels that optimal duration of use hasn't been determined. The issue has become concerning to the FDA as reports have emerged linking long-time bisphosphonate therapy with increased risk of atypical fractures.

The Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs and the Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee met to discuss whether emerging reports of adverse events should cause the FDA to change the label to indicate that the drug not be used long term. The medical advisers did not press the issue as strongly as the F.D.A. staff itself did in a 45-page report issued on Wednesday. The staff report said studies “suggest no significant advantage of continuing drug therapy beyond five years.”

According to the FDA panel placebo-controlled trials provide data for only five years of therapy, but there is no clinical evidence that bisphosphonates work better after they are used for a long period of time.

Bisphosphonates are prescribed to some 5 million patients annually to prevent or treat osteoporosis and are highly effective at reducing the risk of osteoporotic fractures. The drugs, which include brand-names Actonel, Atelvia, Boniva, and Reclast, have been shown to reduce the risk of breaking a hip by 40% to 50% and fracturing a vertebra by between 40% and 70% by inhibiting bone resorption to prevent loss of bone mass.

In 2010, the FDA required makers of bisphosphonate drugs to add a warning to their labels about an increased risk of atypical femur fractures after an American Society for Bone and Mineral Research task force concluded that the risk is real.

The panel heard from women who were taking bisphosphonates to prevent osteoporosis when suddenly and painfully, they broke their femurs. One woman was on a subway train that screeched to a halt, and as her weight was thrust onto one leg, her femur snapped and she collapsed. Other women had similar stories -- a teacher reaching something in front of her students, a grandmother taking a large step to walk toward her grandchild, a woman walking down a front stoop to pick up the morning newspaper -- and in each case the women collapsed to the ground as their femurs snapped.

The panel was also concerned with the drug's link to deterioration of the jawbone. In 2005, the FDA added a warning on bisphosphonates about osteonecrosis of the jaw, a rare disease in which the bone in the jaw dies. In data presented Friday, an FDA reviewer said the risk for osteonecrosis of the jaw appears more prevalent after four years or more of use.

There are also some data suggesting a link to long-term use of bisphosphonates and esophageal cancer. In 2009, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine used data from FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System to identify and describe 23 patients taking alendronate who were diagnosed with esophageal cancer.

As a Texas Transvaginal Mesh Injury Lawyer and medical doctor, I am providing this update and commentary involving TV Mesh failures.

An FDA advisory panel is currently examining recent complications and failure reports associated with transvaginal mesh systems that are used to repair pelvic organ prolapse, POP.

The FDA’s Obstetrics and Gynecological Devices panel will offer recommendations to protect women from the serious debilitating problems associated with transvaginal use of surgical mesh, which medical evidence suggests may provide no actual benefit over more traditional means of treating pelvic organ prolapse.

The transvaginal mesh products, known as bladder sling or vaginal surgical mesh, are designed to support the bladder and vagina in older women. The products are sold by a number of different companies, including Ethicon, C.R. Bard, American Medical Systems (AMS), Boston Scientific among others. They are made of non-absorbable synthetic material that is permanently implanted using small incisions as an alternative to other methods of treating pelvic organ prolapse.

The FDA issued warnings in July to inform the public and medical community about the growing number of reports involving transvaginal mesh failure after use to repair pelvic organ prolapse, including erosion of the mesh into the vagina, pain, bleeding, organ perforation and recurrence of POP.

According to a report the FDA agency is considering the reclassification of all transvaginal mesh products as Class III medical devices, which would prevent companies from seeking market approval through the agency’s “fast track” 510(k) approval program. The program allows medical devices to be approved without rigorous testing if they are functionally equivalent to existing products.

Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) and rival makers of transvaginal meshes told Food and Drug Administration advisers they agreed on the need for more safety studies of the implants as well as labeling changes to warn of potential risks.

Manufacturers including J&J and Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc. (ENDP) proposed that new versions of the devices require clinical trials before they can be sold and existing implants be tracked for safety.

More than 75,000 women received vaginally implanted meshes last year to strengthen weak pelvic muscles that fail to support internal organs. Patients claiming the meshes led to internal injuries have filed almost 500 lawsuits against two of the manufacturers, New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&J and C.R. Bard Inc. of Murray Hill, New Jersey.

The FDA is evaluating a U.S. Institute of Medicine report in July urging it to scrap the 510(k) process for moderate-risk devices. The current system allows devices like the mesh implant to enter the market if manufacturers show they are “substantially equivalent” to others already for sale. The IOM said a new process should be devised that provides reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of moderate-risk devices.

Last month, the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen filed a petition with the FDA calling for a transvaginal mesh recall to be issued to prevent the needless exposure of patients to the risk of the painful and life-altering complications.

As a result of complications and failure following the pelvic organ prolapse repair, a number of women throughout the United States are pursuing a transvaginal mesh lawsuit against the makers of the products, arguing that they failed to properly research the products or warn about the risk of the painful and often disfiguring injuries that can result from the pelvic mesh.

As a Texas medical doctor and Medical Malpractice attorney, I am providing this case law update and commentary.

As part of Texas's tort reform laws, enacted by the Texas legislature in 2003, one of the requirements in order to file a medical malpractice claim, was the furnishing of a medical expert's report within 120 days of filing the lawsuit.The 5th District Court of Appeals says that the legislation serves the state's interest in preventing frivolous medical liability lawsuits and related health care system costs. This medical expert report requirement is also known as the Texas' certificate-of-merit law, and is similar to many other states' medical malpractice reform.

Recently Texas' certificate-of-merit law passed another constitutional challenge after the 5th District Court of Appeals validated the requirement for plaintiffs to file an expert report demonstrating the merits of a medical liability case.

The 5th District Court of Appeals rejected arguments that the legislation amounted to an unconstitutional special law that treated medical liability lawsuits differently from other cases. Further, the court said that the provision subjecting plaintiffs who file a deficient report to financial penalties does not violate the constitutional separation powers.

Trial court judges have discretion to determine the amount of monetary sanctions and to inquire whether plaintiffs made a good-faith effort to pursue a medical malpractice or wrongful death case.

The August 12 opinion states that the expert report requirement "rationally relates to the interest of the state to prevent medical practitioners from defending frivolous claims at a high cost to the health care system."

According to the Texas Medical Association's statistics, since the 2003 law was enacted as part of a liability reform package that included a $250,000 noneconomic damages cap, Texas has seen a 50% drop in medical negligence cases, a 30% reduction in physicians' liability insurance rates and more than 20,000 newly licensed doctors.

Critics of the law state that those changes may have happened anyway because of the increase in Texas' population, which boomed as a result of the oil and gas business and the resulting need for more physicians and that as a function of doctors per capita, Texas is actually less served by the total number of physicians. So the new law is a red herring and an excuse for the insurance companies to be treated as a special interest deemed worthy of protection. Is it any wonder that the shiniest, tallest and the most aesthetically pleasing buildings in Texas are owned by insurance companies? Follow the money trail my friends.

The Texas liability reform package is now being touted as a role model for other states to deny plaintiffs their day in court.

The added expert report requirement means an extra layer of protection for physicians and hospitals. Plaintiffs in medical malpractice claims have to show ahead of discovery that they have a meritorious claim, whereas in any other personal injury claim, for example a car wreck injury case, you can take depositions and exchange discovery to determined what happened. In 2006 the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that invalidated the state's certificate-of-merit statute as a special law.

The Legislature's imposition of mandatory sanctions, of the defendant's cost of defense and attorny fees, if the medical expert's report is considered defective, usurps judiciary's powers and places an unfair burden on plaintiffs who make a good-faith effort to pursue a case. The cost of defense and attorney fees can be in thousands of dollars that the plaintiffs will have to pay.

This ruling arises from a wrongful death claim Joshua Hightower's parents filed after their son died from complications of rabies contracted during a kidney transplant at Baylor University Medical Center in 2004. Other patients who received organs from the same donor also died of the disease.

The Hightowers filed two physician expert medical reports supporting their claim that the surgery was risky given the donor's history of drug use and incarceration, and that the hospital and transplant doctors misrepresented the risks involved.

A trial court found the reports deficient and dismissed the case. The appeals court agreed, saying neither report showed "a connection between the donor's alleged high-risk status and the rabies virus. ... Joshua was injured by rabies, a condition of the donor that no one was aware of at the time of the surgery."

The judges said that "expert reports need not demonstrate all of a plaintiff's proof, but they must explain the basis of the expert's statement to link the conclusions to the facts."

Having been involved in many medical malpractice cases, I know first hand of the difficulties in obtaining a medical expert's report that is not conclusory and that adequately addresses the standard of care, the conduct that involves the deviation of the standard of care, the damages that result and the causation ie how the deviations caused the damages.

In other words the doctors who write these reports have to understand complex legal theories and case law in order to write reports that pass muster with the court. Doctors are not lawyers and because of their training they do not understand the legal basis of the claim. They understand the medicine but these reports are not about the medicine but law. You therefore have no medical personnel unless they have a legal background or exposure, being able to write these legal treatises which is basically required to pass the court's muster.

Meanwhile in California...
State public health officials have fined 12 California hospitals for medical errors that hurt or killed patients, according to a report. Three of the hospitals — L.A. County/USC Medical Center, Torrance Memorial Medical Center and Brotman Medical Center — are in Los Angeles County.

The penalties were issued for errors such as leaving foreign objects in patients' bodies during surgery and administrating the wrong medication. They occurred in 2009 and 2010. The fines, which hospitals can appeal, range from $50,000 to $75,000 for each mistake.

"Most of these are preventable medical errors," said Ralph Montano, spokesman for the California Department of Public Health. "Either someone was harmed or killed or likely to be harmed."

So here you have it folks, the rich get richer and the usual poor plaintiffs get the short end of the stick.

As a Texas medical doctor and Fosamax ONJ and femur fracture side effect Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their side effects from using Fosamax and similar drugs. We are providing the following update and commentary.

An FDA advisory panel will meet this week to review the risks associated with long-term use of Fosamax and other bisphosphonate medications. Fosamax and other bisphosphonate medications have been linked to a potential risk of spontaneous femur fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), which is a rare jaw bone condition.

A panel of medical experts will review whether the FDA should adjust the length of time Fosamax and other similar drugs are used. They may recommend that the medication users should be required to take a “drug holiday” to reduce the risk of the serious and potentially debilitating problems associated with long-term use.

Fosamax is designed to strengthen the bones and reduce the risk of fractures associated with osteoporosis, long-term Fosamax side effects have been linked to decay of the jaw bone and reports of femur fractures. Our law office has been fielding many calls from concerned patients suffering from these side effects.

Osteonecrosis of the jaw, which is known as ONJ or jaw necrosis, can be caused when side effects of Fosamax and other bisphosphonates interrupt the blood supply to the jaw. This can result in the death of the jaw bone. This side effect may result in the need for surgery to remove portions of the jaw.

Long term use of bisphosphonate medications has been linked to an increased risk of bone fractures. A growing number of people have reported suffering spontaneous and unexplained femur fractures on Fosamax. These fracture side effects appear to occur with little or no trauma at all. Side effects of Fosamax may weaken the ability of the femur bone to repair itself from microdamage, increasing the risk of a sudden femur fracture.

In October 2010, the FDA required new warnings about the risk of thigh fractures from Fosamax and other bisphosphonate medications. During a review of the potential Fosamax side effects, the FDA determined that the risk of fractures of the thigh bone may be connected to long-term use of bisphosphonates.

Merck & Co. currently faces hundreds of Fosamax jaw decay lawsuits and Fosamax bone fracture lawsuits that have been filed by individuals who claim the drug maker failed to adequately warn about the potential side effects.

As a Texas Medical doctor and Fort Worth Personal Attorney, I am providing this commentary regarding the state of traffic in our Great State of Texas, particularly in the Dallas Forth Worth Metroplex.

I was sitting here in my office on a Friday afternoon, before the long holiday weekend for Labor Day, when I browsed this interesting article that I would like to share.

I-35W in Fort Worth is the most stressful road in Texas, and fifth overall on the state's list of 100 most congested roadways. According to the Texas Department of Transportation's 2011 edition of the 100 most congested roadways, I35w Interstate 35W north of downtown Fort Worth is the most stressful road to travel on in Texas during peak congestion periods.

The stretch of I-35W between I-30 and 28th Street north of downtown is the fifth most congested roadway in the state, according to calculations made by the Texas Transportation Institute. And I-35W has the highest score in the state when ranked by the congestion level during rush hours -- tied for first place with U.S. 281 in the San Antonio area.

Also in Tarrant County, Northeast Loop 820 between U.S. 377 and the Northeast Interchange is the 17th most congested roadway. If you want to review the list, click here. The top three most congested roads in Texas are Woodall Rodgers Freeway, LBJ Freeway and Central Expressway in Dallas, followed by I-35 in Austin.

There is an obvious relationship between stressful driving and car accidents. Y'all be safe this holiday weekend, as for me I am going to drive into Dallas as soon as this blog is published.

As a Texas medical doctor and Transvaginal Mesh Recall and Replacement Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their implanted Transvaginal Mesh medical device. We are providing the following update and commentary. The FDA recommends surgical mesh be reclassified as "High Risk."

FDA Transvaginal Mesh Safety Alert - Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit and Class Actions being filed across the Nation. Johnson & Johnson, Boston Scientific Corp. (BSX) and other makers of surgical mesh may have to submit added safety data to regulators to keep their products on the market under a Food and Drug Administration staff recommendation.

The transvaginally implanted products fail to lead to better outcomes than non-mesh repair and should be reclassified as posing a high risk to patients, according to a FDA report. Patient advocates are demanding a recall of the devices, now classified as moderate risk.

The devices were approved through a streamlined process called 510(k) that is used to evaluate products similar to those already cleared and itself is under an agency review. The U.S. Institute of Medicine cited flaws with surgical mesh in July when it urged the FDA to abandon the process and require makers to prove each product is safe and effective on its own merits.

Mesh products “may expose patients to greater risk” than traditional repairs without mesh, FDA staff said in the documents. The agency received 1,503 reports of complications associated with the material from January 2008 to December 2010 when used for pelvic organ prolapse, the FDA said in a safety warning July 13. The devices were used in 75,000 transvaginal surgeries last year, according to the FDA.

The agency advised patients to be aware of risks including mesh erosion, pain and urinary incontinence, and to have annual check-ups after surgery. The FDA said it has cleared 85 surgical mesh devices to treat pelvic organ prolapse from 1992 and 2010.

Consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, based in Washington, said Aug. 25 that the mesh devices should be recalled and reclassified.

According to FDA data, the devices are used in surgeries to address prolapsed organs and incontinence. About 300,000 women underwent surgical procedures last year to repair prolapsed organs.

As a Transvaginal Mesh Lawyer, our attorneys are reviewing and filing cases across the nation. The FDA recently issued a Transvaginal Mesh Safety Alert because the product, primarily manufactured by Bard, Boston Scientific and Johnson and Johnson, has been shown to cause injuries in female patients.

Bard, Gynecare, AMS (American Medical Systems) and Boston Scientific have the largest market shares of transvaginal mesh products.

C.R. Bard's products include:

Bard Pelvitex
Bard Pelvisoft
Bard Pelvilace or Pelvicol
Bard Utrtex
Bard Uretex TO
Bard Uretex TOO2
Bard Uretex TOO3

Gynecare/Ethicon/Johnson & Johnson products include:

Gynecare Prosima
Gynecare TVT Exact
Gynecare TVT Abbrevo
Gynecare TVT Retropubic System
Gynecare TVT
Gynecare TVT Obturator
Gynecare TVT Secur
Gynecare Gynemesh PS
Gynecare Prolift
Gynecare Prolift+M

AMS products include:

AMS MiniArc Precise Single-Incision Sling
AMS MiniArc Single Incision Sling
AMS Monarc Subfascial Hammock
AMS In-Fast Ultra Transvaginal Sling
AMS BioArc
AMS Sparc Self-Fixating Sling System
AMS Elevate
AMS Perigree
AMS Apogee

Boston Scientific products include:

Boston Scientific Arise
Boston Scientific Pinnacle
Boston Scientific Advantage Fit
Boston Scientific Lynx
Boston Scientific Obtryx
Boston Scientific Prefyx PPS
Boston Scientific Solyx

As a Texas medical doctor and Transvaginal Mesh Recall and Replacement Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their implanted Transvaginal Mesh medical device.

According to the Public Citizen watchdog group, the surgical mesh products made by Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) and Boston Scientific Corp. (BSX) to correct falling pelvic organs in women should be immediately recalled because of painful side effects.

Public Citizen, said that mesh products made of non-absorbable synthetic material can erode and cause pain, bleeding and urinary incontinence. The mesh is implanted through incisions made in the wall of the vagina to reinforce the tissues around the pelvic organs.

Surgical mesh is a medical device that is generally used to repair weakened or damaged tissue. It is made from porous absorbable or non-absorbable synthetic material or absorbable biologic material. In urogynecologic procedures, surgical mesh is permanently implanted to reinforce the weakened vaginal wall to repair pelvic organ prolapse or to support the urethra to treat urinary incontinence.

Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) occurs when the tissues that hold the pelvic organs in place become weak or stretched. Thirty to fifty percent of women may experience POP in their lifetime with 2 percent developing symptoms. When POP happens, the organs bulge (prolapse) into the vagina and sometimes prolapse past the vaginal opening. More than one pelvic organ can prolapse at the same time. Organs that can be involved in POP include the bladder, the uterus, the rectum, the top of the vagina (vaginal apex) after a hysterectomy, and the bowel.

Stress Urinary Incontinence
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a leakage of urine during moments of physical activity, such as coughing, sneezing, laughing, or exercise.

On Oct. 20, 2008, the FDA issued a Public Health Notification and Additional Patient Information on serious complications associated with surgical mesh placed through the vagina (transvaginal placement) to treat POP and SUI.

Based on an updated analysis of adverse events reported to the FDA and complications described in the scientific literature, the FDA identified surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP as an area of continuing serious concern.

The FDA is issuing this July update to inform that serious complications associated with surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP are not rare. It is not clear that transvaginal POP repair with mesh is more effective than traditional non-mesh repair in all patients with POP and it may expose patients to greater risk. This Safety Communication provides updated recommendations for health care providers and patients and updates the FDA’s activities involving surgical mesh for the transvaginal repair of POP. Read the FDA PDF Report here.

In order to better understand the use of surgical mesh for POP and SUI, the FDA conducted a systematic review of the published scientific literature from 1996 – 2011 to evaluate its safety and effectiveness. The review showed that transvaginal POP repair with mesh does not improve symptomatic results or quality of life over traditional non-mesh repair. The FDA continues to evaluate the literature for SUI surgeries using surgical mesh and will report about that usage at a later date.

The literature review revealed that:

Mesh used in transvaginal POP repair introduces risks not present in traditional non-mesh surgery for POP repair.
Mesh placed abdominally for POP repair appears to result in lower rates of mesh complications compared to transvaginal POP surgery with mesh.
There is no evidence that transvaginal repair to support the top of the vagina (apical repair) or the back wall of the vagina (posterior repair) with mesh provides any added benefit compared to traditional surgery without mesh.
While transvaginal surgical repair to correct weakened tissue between the bladder and vagina (anterior repair) with mesh augmentation may provide an anatomic benefit compared to traditional POP repair without mesh, this anatomic benefit may not result in better symptomatic results.

Public Citizen, estimates that 67,500 women had the non-absorbable mesh implanted last year. According to the Food and Drug Administration, in a safety warning July 13, the agency received 1,503 reports of complications associated with the material from January 2008 to December 2010 when used to repair pelvic organ prolapse.

“Even the FDA seriously questions the safety and effectiveness of these mesh products, so they should be removed from the market immediately,” Michael Carome, deputy director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, said in a statement.

The material is made by at least nine manufacturers, according to the FDA.

Public Citizen wants the FDA to require manufacturers to recall non-absorbable surgical mesh devices and future versions to be subject to more stringent approval requirements.

As a Texas medical doctor and YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella Personal Injury attorney, I am providing this litigation update, information and commentary.

Judge Herndon overseeing the federal Yaz and Yasmin MDL, has rejected the consolidation of multiple cases during the early bellwether trials. The Court plans for “meaningful” settlement negotiations after the initial trials are held. These mini trials will help decide how juries will to respond to similar evidence and testimony like other cases in the litigation.

There are more than 6,350 lawsuits that have been centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. All of the cases allege that Bayer failed to adequately warn about the risk of serious and potentially life-threatening side effects of Yaz and Yasmin birth control, such as a stroke, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis or gallbladder disease.

In October 2010, the Court issued an order for a handful of cases to be prepared for three early trials, known as bellwether cases. The first trial, which is scheduled to begin in 2012, will involve a pulmonary embolism injury claim. The second trial will involve a gallbladder injury and the third trial will involve a venous thromboembolism (VTE), a deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

In August 19, 2011, the Court issued an order for the Gallbladder (“GB”) trial setting, that the Parties shall exchange their GB trial-pool selections on September 7, 2011. For the Venous Thromboembolism (“VTE”) trial setting, the Parties shall exchange their VTE trialpool selections on December 2, 2011.

Each side shall select four GB cases and four VTE cases. Each side shall exercise any veto (maximum of one, minimum of zero) on September 9, 2011, for the GB cases. Each side shall exercise any veto (maximum of one, minimum of zero) on December 6, 2011, for the VTE cases.

On September 14, 2011, after the exercise of any vetoes over the parties’ GB trial-pool selections, the parties shall submit the names of the remaining GB cases to the Court without indicating which party picked which case. Also on September 14, 2011, each party shall provide to the Court and to the other party a factual summary concerning each GB case submitted to the Court for trial selection, so that the Court receives two submissions on each case.

On December 12, 2011, after the exercise of any vetoes over the parties’ VTE trialpool
selections, the parties shall submit the names of the remaining VTE cases to the Court without indicating which party picked which case. Also on December 12, 2011, each party shall provide to the Court and to the other party a factual summary concerning each VTE case submitted to the Court for trial selection, so that the Court receives two submissions on each case.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys requested Judge Herndon to consolidate several cases for the 2nd and 3rd trials. They argued that trying cases one plaintiff at a time would “commit this litigation to a lifespan of eternity.” Plaintiffs states that there has been no movement by Bayer towards a Yaz settlement agreement, and suggested that effeciences would be served by trying several cases at a time after the 1st bellwether trial.

On August 18, Judge Herndon rejected this request and indicated that the 2nd and 3rd bellwether trials will proceed and shall be individual plaintiffs.

“The Court has no intention of presiding over anything into eternity, let alone this litigation, and the Court is presently working on a process that will engage the parties in settlement discussions following the bellwether trials in a meaningful way,” Judge Herndon wrote.

Yaz and Yasmin are birth control pills that contain a newer type of progestin, known as drospirenone, which has been linked to an increased risk of blood clots and other injuries. The Yaz and Yasmin litigation also involves cases filed over a newer version of the birth control pills, sold as Beyaz, as well as generic equivalents, such as Ocella and Gianvi.

Although the first trials are approaching, the number of lawsuits is expected to continue to grow as Yaz and Yasmin lawyers review and file additional cases in the coming months and years for women who have experienced health problems from the birth control pills. Early estimates suggested that more than 25,000 women may eventually file a Yaz birth control suit.

As a Texas medical doctor and DePuy Hip Recall and Replacement Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their implanted DePuy ASR and DePuy Pinnacle Metal on Metal Hip prosthesis.

The Food and Drug Administration has received many complaints recently about failed hip replacements. The FDA has received more than 5,000 reports since January concerning metal-on-metal hips. The majority of complaints involve patients who have had an all-metal hip removed, or will soon undergo such a procedure because a device failed after only a few years. Metal-on-metal hip replacement systems are a widely used type of artificial hip, which are designed to last about 15 years. However, complaints suggest that thousands of people are experiencing early failure of the hip implants within a few years of surgery, often leading to additional surgery to replace the hip.

The complaints confirm that all-metal replacement hips are becoming the biggest and most costly medical implant problem since Medtronic recalled a widely used heart device component in 2007.

Some patients have suffered crippling injuries caused by tiny particles of cobalt and chromium that the metal devices shed as they wear. This is known as metallosis. This may result in soft tissue damage, inflammatory reactions, bone loss, genetic damage, asceptic fibrosis, local necrosis or other problems that may lead to the need for a risky hip revision surgery.

Hip replacement is one of the most common procedures in the United States and all-metal implants accounted for nearly one-third of the estimated 250,000 replacements performed each year. According to one estimate, some 500,000 patients have received an all-metal replacement hip.

One of the artificial hip devices, the A.S.R., or Articular Surface Replacement, was recalled last year by Johnson & Johnson and accounted for 75 percent of the complaints. Under F.D.A. rules, many all-metal devices were sold without testing in patients or without a requirement that producers track their performance. The F.D.A. in May ordered producers to study how frequently the devices were failing and to examine the threat to patients.

In August 2010, a DePuy ASR hip recall was issued for more than 90,000 of the metal hip implants, after it was discovered that a higher-than-expected number were failing within a few years of surgery. Similar problems have been reported in connection with other metal-on-metal hip implants sold by other companies.

In February 2011, the FDA launched a new website in February 2011, which was designed to provide information about the risks associated with metal-on-metal hip replacements.

The FDA has now asked device manufacturers to obtain more information about the level at which the metal particles shed by hip replacements becomes dangerous, how much metal they actually shed and what the potential side effects of metallosis are.

As problems and questions grow, some surgeons are abandoning the all-metal hips, saying they are unwilling to expose new patients to potential dangers when safer alternatives — mainly replacements that combine metal and plastic components — are available.

For many patients, it is too late. The number of complaints filed with the F.D.A. about a product understates a problem because while companies must file reports, doctors and patients do not have to. The filing volume for the DePuy A.S.R. and the Zimmer Durom cup probably reflects a surge of lawsuits filed against their makers.

According the recent New York Times review, there were 7,500 complaints about the A.S.R., nearly 5,000 of them coming since January. In the case of the Durom cup, about 1,600 complaints were filed with the regulator from 2007 to this June.

It is impossible to say how many adverse reports about all-metal hips have been submitted. The Times analysis found some 200 complaints about an all-metal version of another DePuy device called the Pinnacle as well as 400 additional complaints that noted metal-related problems in Pinnacle patients. But the Pinnacle is sold in several versions, so it was not clear how many of the metal-related complaints were linked to the all-metal device.

Many individuals throughout the United States have already filed metal-on-metal hip replacement lawsuits over problems allegedly caused by metallosis or metal poisoning. All DePuy ASR hip lawsuits have been consolidated in federal court as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, in Northern District of Ohio. Lawsuits over DePuy Pinnacle hip metal-on-metal implant replacements, which is another has been consolidated in the Northern District of Texas in Dallas.

Continue reading "Risks of DePuy Metallosis Following a Metal On Metal Hip" »

As a Texas Medical Doctor and Dallas dangerous dog attorney, I am writing this update to inform the public about recent dog attacks.

A Washington jury found Pierce County partly responsible for injuries suffered by a woman mauled by a pit bull. The jury awarded $2.2 million to the woman who was attacked by a neighbor's dog who entered her house through an open door.

The jury determined the owners of the dog were 52 percent responsible. Pierce County received 42 percent of the liability because animal control officials took no action after getting a dozen complaints from the neighborhood. The injured woman, was assigned 1 percent of the blame. She suffered injuries while trying to pull the pit bull off her two Jack Russell terriers.
Read full story here.

Around the Web
A 9 tear old girl is recovering after a savage mauling by a neighbor's pit bull and may have suffered permanent nerve damage. Sabrina Carrasco of Sacramento, was attacked after the pit bull got out of the fenced yard where it was kept.
Read full story here.

A 75 year old San Diego woman faced the possible amputation of a second limb after she was attacked by a pair of pit bulls.The woman was jumped by the two dogs in the backyard.

Surgeons at Scripps Mercy Hospital had to remove her badly mauled leg and tried to save her equally mangled arm, but the injuries to the woman's arm were so severe that it might have to be amputated as well. Read full story here.

A 74-year-old Florida man died after two next-door dogs ripped off one of his arms, nearly detached his other arm and severely disfigured his face, police said. Read more here.

A 4-year-old boy died after being bitten in the throat by one of his father's dogs, New York City police said. Read more here.

Four pit bull mix dogs fatally mauled a New Mexico woman while she was on a Sunday afternoon walk, police said. Read full story here.

A pet Rottweiler forced its way into a Houston home and killed its owners' baby daughter. The attack occurred while Alva Vaughn was washing another of her nine dogs in the bathroom. The 3 months old baby, was in a swing in the living room. When Vaughn heard a dog barking, she found the child on the floor with her head and hands mangled. Read the full story here.

Folks need to bear in mind that certain breeds of dogs are dangerous and no amount of love and attention can fix the wild nature. Most if not all people would consider a lion or a tiger impossible to tame and those big cats are too dangerous to be a pet in a neighborhood. Likewise some dog breeds are just bred for their viciousness and attacking qualities. These dogs are too dangerous to be pets.

Read more about dog bites here from the CDC.

As a DePuy Pinnacle Hip Replacement attorney and Texas Medical doctor I am providing this important update, regarding the first MDL hearing held in my home town of Dallas, Texas.

Attorneys from throughout the United States who represent DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement plaintiffs, met today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. This hearing was held in Dallas, and was the first status conference with the judge presiding over the recently formed multi-district litigation (MDL). The meeting between the plaintiff and defense attorneys was quite cordial and the hearing with Judge Kinkeade, lasted over 2 hours. This was an informal, esssentially a meet and greet type of hearing, much different from other types of contentious hearings.

It was interesting to stand at the back of the courtroom and observe the proceedings, the court room was jam packed, standing room only.

The meeting of the attorneys representing DePuy and various plaintiffs with Judge Kinkeade, addressed the format and structure of the pretrial proceedings and the composition of a committee of plaintiffs’ attorneys, who will serve in leadership positions and perform coordinated actions of the lawsuits consolidated in the MDL.

In May 2011, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) ordered that all DePuy Pinnacle lawsuits filed in federal district courts throughout the United States will be consolidated for pretrial proceedings before U.S. District Judge Kinkeade.

According to a Master Case List released by the court on July 20, there are already 213 cases consolidated in the MDL. As DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement lawyers continue to investigate and file new cases, the federal MDL will continue to grow.

All of the suits have similar allegations that the DePuy Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System was defectively designed or manufactured, and that inadequate warnings were provided about the risk of early complications or problems, which have been developing within a few years of the surgery. In some cases, the DePuy Pinnacle hip problems may result in the need for additional surgery to replace or revise the hip replacement.

Many of the petitions also allege that DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, has been aware of the problems with their metal-on-metal hip implants for some time and that a DePuy Pinnacle hip recall should have been issued several years ago.

DePuy filed a brief last week regarding the selection of the plaintiffs’ leadership positions. DePuy claimed that several DePuy Pinnacle lawyers representing plaintiffs in the federal MDL proceedings are continuing to file cases in state courts, naming local defendants such as physicians and sales representatives to avoid removal to federal court. DePuy argued that those attorneys should not be appointed to leadership positions, because such conduct impedes the progress of the litigation and undermines the goals of the MDL proceeding.

Johnson & Johnson and DePuy also face thousands of lawsuits over the recalled DePuy ASR hip replacement system, because of a higher-than-expected failure rate. The DePuy ASR hip was approved as a substantial equivalent design to the DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip, and faces the similar allegations regarding design problems with the two devices.

In October, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) issued a warning about potential problems with metal on-metal hip replacements, indicating that patients and the medical community should be aware that pain months after hip replacement surgery may be a sign of metal-on-metal hip cobalt toxicity. In addition, the FDA launched a new website in February to provide information about the risks associated with metal-on-metal hip replacements.

As a Texas medical doctor and Actos Bladder Cancer Attorney I am providing this information and commentary.

The maker of the world's best-selling diabetes drug is facing many lawsuits as adverse medical research shows that taking the pill for more than a year raises the risk of bladder cancer.

In June, Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd. halted sales of Actos, in Germany and France after pressure from government health regulators. Actos (pioglitazone) is a medication manufactured and sold by Takeda Pharmaceuticals for treatment of Type 2 diabetes. The drug is part of the same class of medications as Avandia (rosiglitazone), which has been linked to an increased risk of heart problems. As a result of concerns about Avandia side effects, sales of Actos have grown substantially in recent years.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency have issued warnings about the cancer risk based on new research. The FDA has approved updated label information for pioglitazone (Actos) and medications that contain it, following its warning in June about bladder cancer risk with the drug.

The FDA new labeling, released Friday, warns that use of pioglitazone for more than a year may increase the risk of bladder cancer, a finding based on an interim analysis of an epidemiological study.

Other medications that will carry the warning include pioglitazone/metformin (Actoplus Met), pioglitazone/metformin extended release (Actoplus Met XR), and pioglitazone/glimepiride (Duetact).

The updated label recommends against use of pioglitazone in patients with active bladder cancer and urges cautious use in those with a history of bladder cancer.

It also urges patients to contact their healthcare provider if they experience any potential symptoms of bladder cancer, including blood in their urine, urinary urgency, or pain on urination.

Actos, despite other serious side effects, became the No. 1 diabetes pill after Avandia, the only other drug in that class, was found in 2007 to greatly increase risk of heart attacks. Avandia's use was banned in the Eurpoean Union and sharply restricted here.

Recently lawsuits were filed in courts across the country. They allege Actos triggered bladder cancer, in some cases deadly, in patients who took the pills daily for years.

The claims allege that when a manufacturer distributes a drug, they owe it to the public to ensure that their product is safe for use and it appears that Takeda Pharmaceuticals failed to fulfill that fundamental duty.

The FDA analyzed data from the first five years of a 10-year Actos safety study Takeda begun in 2002 and concluded this June that risk of bladder cancer was 40 percent higher for patients taking Actos for at least a year.

As a Texas medical doctor and Transvaginal Mesh Attorney I am providing this information and commentary.

Read previous Transvaginal Mesh side effect blog here.
A number of lawsuits over Bard Avaulta mesh and other transvaginal products manufactured by C.R. Bard have been filed throughout the United States. The general allegations in these claims are that women experienced painful complications after receiving the vaginal mesh products for repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and other gynecological and urological medical conditions.

Most recently, more than 100 people have filed a Bard Avaulta vaginal mesh lawsuit. At least 84 of the cases are filed in the federal court system, where they have been consolidated for as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, before Judge Goodwin in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. Another 37 cases have been filed in New Jersey state court, where the litigation has been centralized before Judge Higbee in Atantic County.

According to a case management order issued in the Bard Avaulta MDL, the next step of the litigation involves the selection of a pool of potential bellwether cases. In the order, Judge Goodwin indicated that the discovery process is not anticipated to begin before October.

Other products manufactured and sold by C.R. Bard have been included in the MDL and New Jersey state court litigation, including the Align, Pelvicol, Pelvilace, PelviSoft, Pelvitex, uretex and Ugytex mesh systems.

All of the complaints involve allegations that the transvaginal mesh products were defectively designed and that C.R. Bard failed to adequately research the risks associated with the mesh or warn about the risk of possible complications that can result in pain and disfigurement.

Bard vaginal slings have been associated with erosion of the mesh into the vagina, infection, recurrence of prolapse, urinary problems and painful sexual intercourse, among others complications. Awareness about the potential risk or transvaginal mesh problems has increased in recent weeks, following a warning issued by the FDA last month.

In July 2011, the FDA issued a statement indicating that they have been unable to find any evidence that Bard Avaulta mesh and other transvaginal mesh systems for repair of pelvic organ prolapse provide any significant benefits over other available means of treatment. More than 1,500 reports of complications with vaginal mesh products, such as the Bard Avaulta Mesh and other similar systems, have been received by the FDA over the past three years

As a Texas medical doctor and Fracking water contamination attorney, I want to pose this rhetorical question; What happens when the foxes are guarding the hen house? Consider that as you savor your morning coffee, which may be contaminated with benzene, from a contaminated water aquifer.

Oil and gas industry as well as government regulators have maintained for many decades that a drilling technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, that is used for natural gas wells has never contaminated underground drinking water. The fracking process, involves water and toxic chemicals being injected at high pressure into the ground to break up rocks and release the gas trapped there. This process according to industry officials, occurs thousands of feet below drinking-water aquifers and because of that distance, the drilling chemicals allegedly pose no risk.

According to ExxonMobil at a Congressional hearing on drilling...“There have been over a million wells hydraulically fractured ...and there is not one, not one, reported case of a freshwater aquifer having ever been contaminated from hydraulic fracturing...”

But there is in fact a documented case, and the E.P.A. report suggests there may be more. Researchers, were unable to investigate many suspected cases because their details were sealed from the public when energy companies settled lawsuits with landowners. E.P.A. says this practice continues to prevent them from fully assessing the risks of certain types of gas drilling.

The American Petroleum Institute, dismissed the assertion that sealed settlements have hidden problems with gas drilling, and according to their data, they have found that drinking water contamination from fracking is highly improbable.

The documented E.P.A. case, and the report was published in 1987, and the contamination was discovered in 1984. The report concluded that hydraulic fracturing fluids or gel used by the Kaiser Exploration and Mining Company contaminated a well roughly 600 feet away on the property of James Parsons in Jackson County, W.Va., referring to it as “Mr. Parson’s water well.”

“When fracturing the Kaiser gas well on Mr. James Parson’s property, fractures were created allowing migration of fracture fluid from the gas well to Mr. Parson’s water well,” according to the agency’s summary of the case. “This fracture fluid, along with natural gas was present in Mr. Parson’s water, rendering it unusable.”

In their report, E.P.A. officials also wrote that Mr. Parsons’ case was highlighted as an “illustrative” example of the hazards created by this type of drilling, and that legal settlements and nondisclosure agreements prevented access to scientific documentation of other incidents. “This is typical practice, for instance, in Texas,” the report stated. “In some cases, the records of well-publicized damage incidents are almost entirely unavailable for review.”

Industry officials emphasize that all forms of drilling involve some degree of risk. The question, they say, is what represents an acceptable level. Once chemicals contaminate underground drinking-water sources, they are very difficult to remove, according to federal and industry studies.

A 2004 study by the E.P.A. agency concluded that hydraulic fracturing of one kind of natural gas well — coal-bed methane wells — posed “little or no threat” to underground drinking water supplies. The study was later criticized by some within the agency as being unscientific and unduly influenced by industry.

Instances of gas bubbling from fracked sites into nearby water wells have been extensively documented. The industry has also acknowledged that fracking liquids can end up in aquifers because of failures in the casing of wells, spills that occur above ground or through other factors.

Both types of contamination can render the water unusable. However, contamination from fracking fluids is widely considered more worrisome because the fluids can contain carcinogens like benzene.

The risk of abandoned wells serving as conduits for contamination is one that the E.P.A. is currently researching as part of its national study on fracking. Many states lack complete records with the number or location of these abandoned wells and they lack the resources to ensure that abandoned and active wells are inspected regularly.

A 1999 report by the Department of Energy said there were about 2.5 million abandoned oil and natural gas wells in the United States at the time.

Short answer, carbon based energy is not the answer, in this current heat wave that most of the country is withering under, think of the amount of solar energy that can be harvested?

Studies have shown that a solar array set up, in Nevada can supply all of the energy needs of the USA, for the next century.

Continue reading "Fracking Water Contamination" »

As a Texas medical doctor and Transvaginal Mesh Attorney I am providing this information and commentary.

11.6% of women who undergo surgery with transvaginal placement of Ethicon Gynecare Prolift Mesh for repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) have to undergo additional operations due to post operative complications.

This complication rate was found as a result of a new study, published by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Most of the re-operations were due to urinary incontinence that occurred after the mesh was implanted, with other problems including transvaginal mesh complications and prolapse recurrence.

Researchers reviewed the outcomes for 524 patients who received the Ethicon Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh over a 4 year period. At a follow up of 38 months, 11.6% had to undergo reoperation after receiving the Prolift Mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Over 50% of those reoperations were due to urinary incontinence, More than 25% due to mesh-related complications and more than 25% due to recurring prolapse. The researchers found that the number of mesh-related complications and POP decreased when experienced medical teams implanted the mesh.

The Gyncare Prolift Total, Anterior and Posterior Pelvic Floor Repair Systems was first introduced in September 2005, and Gynecare Prolift+M variations were introduced in May 2008. The vaginal mesh or bladder sling is designed reinforce weakened or damaged tissue on the pelvic floor that hold organs in place, such as the bladder, the uterus and the rectum.

Recently, the FDA issued a warning about the risk of problems with Ethicon Gynecare vaginal mesh and other similar products used for pelvic organ prolapse. The agency declared that transvaginal surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse does not provide any benefit over other means of treatment, and has been associated with hundreds of reports of serious problems.

Between 2008 and 2010, the FDA received more than 1,500 reports of transvaginal mesh problems after pelvic organ prolapse repair surgery, including erosion of the mesh into the vagina, contraction or shrinkage of the mesh, infection, pelvic pain, urinary problems, vaginal scarring among other complications.

A number of Gynecare Prolift mesh lawsuits have been filed against Ethicon, Inc., which is a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. At least 400 complaints have been filed in New Jersey state court over the Prolift mesh and other similar vaginal bladder sling products made by Ethicon, such as Gynemesh, Prolene Mesh and TVT slings.

In addition to Ethicon vaginal mesh products, problems have also been associated with slings sold by American Medical Systems (AMS), Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard and other companies. Transvaginal mesh lawyers are also reviewing potential claims against manufacturers of these products for women who experienced problems with surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse repair.

Continue reading "Ethicon Gynecare Prolift Mesh Linked to 11.6% Reoperation Rate" »

As a Texas medical doctor and Dallas Hydraulic Fracking Attorney I am providing this information and commentary.

The EPA is prohibited from regulating hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act. On July 28, 2011, the EPA proposed federal regulations to reduce smog-forming pollutants released by the hydraulic fracturing approach to gas drilling.

According to the EPA, If approved, the rules would amount to the first national standards for fracking of any kind. The agency sets guidelines when companies inject fluids underground, but in 2005 Congress prohibited the EPA from doing so for fracking. Regulation has been left to the states, some of which compel companies to report what chemicals they use and have imposed tougher well-design standards.

The new EPA proposal would limit emissions released during the stages of natural gas production and development, and targets the volatile organic compounds released in large quantities when wells are fracked. According to the EPA, drillers would have to use equipment that captures these gases. According to environmental experts, the proposed rules represent a step by federal regulators amid a growing controversy over fracking's safety.

The American Petroleum Institute, the country's main oil and gas lobbying group, has requested that the EPA delay finalizing the rules for at least six months beyond the current Feb. 2012 deadline.

The Marcellus Shale Coalition, a group representing gas drillers in the Northeast, issued a statement criticizing the proposed regulations, saying they would "undercut" gas production.

The EPA proposal is the result of a successful 2009 lawsuit brought against the agency by WildEarth Guardians and another advocacy group alleging that the agency had not updated air-quality rules as required. The EPA is supposed to review such rules at least every eight years, but in some cases had not done so for 10 years or more.

According to Jeremy Nichols, the climate and energy program director for WildEarth Guardians, hydraulic fracturing is a major source of emissions because when fluids used to frack a well return to the surface, they carry gases that can be vented into the air. In fracking's case the soupy return contains methane, volatile organic compounds and toxic chemicals such as benzene, which generally spray into the environment. In some gas drilling areas, where emissions from drilling are particularly high, they no longer meet federal air quality standards.

The EPA proposal also calls for reducing emissions of toxic chemicals, such as cancer-causing benzene, produced by processing, transmitting and storing natural gas. Some environmentalist experts were disappointed that the proposed rules do not target methane, a potent greenhouse gas that is also the primary ingredient of natural gas. The oil and gas sector accounts for nearly 40 percent of all methane emissions nationwide, according to the EPA.

Click here. Drilling Regulatory Staffing in Your State. Search for how many wells have been drilled and how many gas regulators are in your state.

Click here. Graphics: What is Hydraulic Fracturing? Anatomy of a Gas Well

Continue reading "EPA Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Contamination" »

As a Texas medical doctor and Dallas DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement Attorney I am providing this information and commentary.

DePuy Orthopaedics ASR hip replacement devices have resulted in a tsunami of lawsuits against DePuy's parent company, Johnson & Johnson. Could the DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement result in a similar wave of litigation against the device maker?

According to sources, Johnson & Johnson faces approximately 1,000 lawsuits related to its metal-on-metal hip replacement devices. Both the ASR and the Pinnacle are metal-on-metal devices. The ASR devices were recalled following reports of high failure rates in the devices. The Pinnacle has not been recalled.

DePuy claims that a report from Britain that showed a high failure rate was the first sign that there was a problem with the metal-on-metal hip device. When DePuy knew about the high failure rate of its ASR devices will be a key issue in litigation concerning the ASR. Some lawsuits allege DePuy knew in 2007, approximately two years before the device was recalled, about the high failure rate associated with the ASR.

In addition to failure of the hip device—which can result in revision surgery to replace the faulty hip device—some patients say they have developed toxic levels of cobalt and chromium in their bloodstream, a side effect of metal debris coming loose from the hip replacement device. This medical condition is called metallosis.

Some lawsuits have been filed against DePuy concerning the Pinnacle, although those lawsuits reportedly number in the dozens, not in the thousands. According to reports, similar defects have been reported in the Pinnacle as in the ASR devices. DePuy defends the Pinnacle as a safe and effective device.

According to experts, Johnson & Johnson could face up to $1 billion in liability and costs linked to the DePuy ASR lawsuits. Many lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson have been consolidated in federal court. Whether or not Johnson & Johnson and DePuy Orthopaedics will face a wave of litigation related to the Pinnacle remains to be seen.

Continue reading "DePuy ASR and Pinnacle Metal on Metal Hips" »

As a Texas medical doctor and Yaz Side Effect Product Liability attorney, I am providing this litigation update regarding the increased discovery that has been allowed in the federal MDL.

NON-BELLWETHER CASE-SPECIFIC DISCOVERY.
The judge presiding over all federal Yaz lawsuits and Yasmin lawsuits has expanded the scope of discovery in the litigation beyond the selected bellwether cases. According to Judge Herndon's most recent order, "... This matter is before the Court for case management. The Court is in the process of compiling a list of the the "oldest 100 non-bellwether" cases. Thus, a list identifying the 100 member actions that will be subject to core, case-specific discovery pursuant to Doc. [1866] will be forthcoming..."

In essence the Court is allowing case-specific discovery to move forward in up to 100 other cases filed on behalf of women who allege that side effects of the Bayer birth control pills caused them to suffer injuries. The Court has expanded the scope of discovery beyond the 24 cases selected last year to serve as a pool of bellwether lawsuits. Case-specific discovery, including depositions of individual plaintiffs, will also now be permitted in the oldest 100 non-bellwether cases that have been filed.

About 6,350 lawsuits are now consolidated as part of the Yasmin and Yaz litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois and the number of cases is expected to only increase as Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella lawyers file additional cases.

All of the suits involve claims that Bayer failed to properly research their birth control pills or adequately warn about the increased risk of serious and potentially life-threatening injuries from the birth control pills containing drospirenone, such as a stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis. Yaz and Yasmin were the first birth control pills to contain drospirenone, a new type of progestin.

The outcome of the bellwether trials and information obtained from the additional plaintiff depositions could help facilitate an eventual Yaz settlement agreement between the parties.

Continue reading "Case Specific Discovery in Yasmin and Yaz Litigation " »

As a Texas medical doctor and Ethicon Gynecare Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit attorney, I am providing this important update regarding the New Jersey litigation involving these products.

Several hundred patients have filed a transvaginal mesh defective product lawsuit in New Jersey state court against Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson over side effects from their Gynecare mesh products. Gynecare mesh products are used for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence.

Women filed these lawsuits, received Gynecare Prolift mesh, Gynecare Gynemesh, Gynecare Prolene mesh, Gynecare TVT sling or another pelvic mesh product manufactured by Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson.

These transvaginal mesh products are used strengthen damaged tissue, to repair pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and female stress urinary incontinence (SUI). These products were marketed as a safe and effective alternative to traditional surgical procedures, and women allege that Ethicon Gyncare mesh problems caused them to experience pelvic pain, infections, urinary problems, erosion of the mesh and other complications.

All of the Ethicon Gynecare mesh lawsuits filed in New Jersey state court are centralized for pretrial proceedings before Judge Higbee in Atlantic County. According to court information, there are now about 500 cases that have been filed.

The lawsuits claim that Johnson & Johnson knew the products were unreasonably dangerous, but continued to manufacture and sell them. Other a;;egations iclude manufacturing a defective product, negligence, failure to warn, strict liability and fraud.

According to a study in the Journal of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, researchers concluded that there was a high rate of vaginal mesh failure with Gynecare Prolift mesh, while providing no difference in cure rates.

Earlier, the FDA issued a warning about the risk of problems from transvaginal mesh when used for pelvic organ prolapse, indicating that the agency was unable to find any significant benefit for the products over other available means of treatment.

In addition to Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon mesh products, problems have also been associated with transvaginal mesh sold by American Medical Systems (AMS), Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard and other companies.

Continue reading "Ethicon Gynecare Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Dangerous Drug attorney, I am writing about this interesting medical study in the recent American Journal of Medicine.

According to the findings of a new medical study, patients with hypertension and heart problems who regularly take common over-the-counter painkillers could be at a greater risk of heart attack, stroke and death.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used in pain management in patients with osteoarthritis and other painful conditions. In the United States an estimated 5% of all visits to a doctor are related to prescriptions of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and they are among the most commonly used drugs. In 2004, rofecoxib, VIOXX, marketed as a cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) selective inhibitor, was withdrawn from the market after the results of a randomized placebo controlled trial showed an increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with the drug.

In this recent study, patients with heart disease and high blood pressure were at 47% increased risk of the cardiovascular events if they were chronic users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), examples include Advil, Aleve, Celebrex, Motrin and the recalled drug Vioxx.

The findings were published in the latest issue of The American Journal of Medicine. The study looked at data on 882 long-term NSAID users and 21,694 nonchronic NSAID users. All had hypertension and heart disease and had an average age of 65. Researchers found that 4.4 out of every 100 chronic NSAID users suffered a nonfatal heart attack, nonfatal stroke, or died. The rate was only 3.7 out of 100 for nonchronic NSAID users.

After five years of chronic NSAID use, high blood pressure patients with heart disease were at 126% increased risk of death and 66% increased risk of heart attack.

In June, Danish researchers published a study that found that NSAIDs could cause abnormal heart rhythms. That study, published in the British Medical Journal, found a 40% to 70% increase in the risk of atrial fibrillation among NDAID users. Use of non-aspirin NSAIDs was associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation or flutter. Compared with non-users, the association was strongest for new users, with a 40-70% increase in relative risk (lowest for non-selective NSAIDs and highest for COX 2 inhibitors). Atrial fibrillation or flutter needs to be added to the cardiovascular risks to be considered when prescribing NSAIDs.

In January, researchers found that all NSAIDs appeared to increase the risk of heart problems, and all except Aleve carried an increased risk of cardiovascular death. The study was published in the British Medical Journal, focusing on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The researchers looked at the cardiovascular risk of seven different generic NSAIDs, including generic Aleve (naproxen), Advil and Motrin (ibuprofen), Voltaren and Cataflam (diclofenac), Celebrex (celecoxib), Arcoxia (etoricoxib), Vioxx (rofecoxib) and Prexige (lumiracoxib).

In June 2010, Danish researchers published a study that found evidence of NSAID heart problems, with the recalled drug Vioxx, as well as Voltaren and Cataflam being linked to the highest risk of death due to cardiovascular problems. Voltaren and Cataflam were also associated with double the risk of heart attack, while Vioxx was linked to triple the increased risk. The study was published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, that indicated the class of drugs, which include Motrin and Advil, increase the risk of cardiovascular problems in healthy users. The study indicates that the risk appears to vary widely from brand to brand, with Vioxx, Voltaren and Cataflam as the worst offenders, and the pain reliever Aleve actually appearing to lessen the risk of death.

Lawsuits over Vioxx were filed by thousands of people following a September 2004 recall of the drug amid reports that it increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes. The prescription medication, which was approved for treatment of chronic pain from arthritis and other conditions that cause acute pain, was used by more than 80 million people worldwide.

Keywords: Coronary artery disease, Hypertension, Myocardial infarction, Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, NSAIDs, Advil, Aleve, Cataflam, Celevrex, Heart Attack, Heart Disease, Motrin, Stroke, Vioxx

Continue reading "Chronic NSAID Usage Linked to Heart Attack, Stroke and Death" »

As a Dallas Denture Cream Side Effect Attorney, I am providing this Poligrip Zinc side effect litigation update.

GlaxoSmithKline may have paid out more than $120 million in Poligrip denture cream settlements to resolve claims brought by consumers who suffered permanent nerve damage due to zinc in the adhesive products. According to sources, the manufacturer has settled more than 100 denture cream lawsuits at an average cost of just over $1 million per case.

Glaxo agreed to remove zinc from its line of denture-cream products after researchers linked some neurological problems, including nerve damage, to use of zinc-laden denture adhesives. The company’s Super Poligrip Original, Ultra Fresh and Extra Care products all contained zinc, which improves adhesive power. Glaxo and Procter & Gamble Co. (PG), the Cincinnati-based maker of the competing Fixodent denture cream, had lawsuits filed against them consolidated before a federal judge in Florida in 2005.

Product liability lawyers allege that the drugmakers knew for years that their products contained harmful levels of zinc and failed to warn customers. Zinc poisoning can deplete the body of copper, which can lead to nerve damage, resulting in weakness in the arms and legs, balance problems and memory loss.

A flood of law suits followed a 2008 University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas medical study of patients suffering from neurological problems. The study linked the cause to denture-cream use. According to the complaints, high amounts of zinc in the denture adhesive can enter the body through use of Super Poligrip, leading to permanent neurological problems like neuropathy, numbness, tingling, pain, weakness, loss of sensation, loss of balance, paralysis and difficulty breathing.

The first Fixodent nerve damage trial is scheduled to begin on June 20. In that case, lawyers for Florida resident Marianne Chapman allege Procter & Gamble defectively designed Fixodent by including zinc in its formulation. The consolidated case is In Re Denture Cream Products Liability Litigation, 09-02051, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami.)

There have been no reports of Fixodent denture cream settlements. Proctor and Gamble argues that its products contained less zinc than those of Glaxo and that it does not believe Fixodent can cause neurological damage.

All federal lawsuits over zinc poisoning from denture cream have been centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida for pretrial litigation. Individual complaints filed by dozens of people throughout the United States have been consolidated to avoid duplicative discovery, inconsistent pretrial rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the court, the parties and the witnesses.

Continue reading "Denture Cream Zinc Poisoning Lawsuit Update" »

As a Plavix side effect attorney, I am providing this lawsuit update regarding the side effects from Plavix. Read further information from the FDA on Plavix.

A Tennessee woman has filed a product liability and Plavix injury lawsuit against Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb, claiming that side effects of Plavix, a blood-thinning medication, caused her to suffer a blood clot in the brain, and that the drug makers over-promoted the medication without adequately disclosing the potential risks for users.

The Plavix lawsuit was filed on July 5 by Marcella Chesney in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Chesney alleges she was prescribed Plavix in March 2010, and four months later suffered subdural hematomas, which are blood clots on the brain. Chesney suffered permanent and debilitating injuries because of the injury from Plavix and will have to take medications for the rest of her life.

Chesney claims that Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb knew or should have known that Plavix was no more effective than aspirin as a blood thinner, but instead promoted the drug as a “super-aspirin.” Those claims are similar to a number of other Plavix injury lawsuits that have been filed in courts throughout the United States.

In April, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi called for a mass tort designation for the Plavix litigation pending in New Jersey state courts, where at least 40 claims have been filed. All of the complaints filed so far involve identical allegations, that the makers of Plavix promoted the expensive medication as a safer alternative to aspirin. Plaintiffs allege that they suffered injuries as a result of their unnecessary use of Plavix, such as gastrointestinal bleeding, heart attacks, strokes and a blood disorder known as TTP, or thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpora.

The drug makers have been accused of repeatedly overstating the safety and effectiveness of Plavix, and complaints point out that the companies were repeatedly cited by the FDA for illegal, off-label promotions and for advertising campaigns that trumpeted its benefits over aspirin and how safe it was; both claims according to several scientific studies and the FDA said were unproven.

QUICK FACTS: PLAVIX SIDE EFFECTS
Plavix (generic: clopidogrel bisulfate) is a drug that prevents the formation of blood platelets that could result in clotting. It is prescribed for heart attack prevention, stroke reduction and as an anticlotting agent.

The manufacturers promoted Plavix as a safer alternative to aspirin which reduces the risk of gastrointestinal problems. Recent studies indicate that Plavix provides no benefits over aspirin and actually increases the risk of heart attacks, strokes and gastrointestinal bleeding for some users.

Continue reading "Plavix Side Effect Lawsuit Filed" »

As a Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella side effect and blood clot attorney, and Texas Medical doctor I am providing this update regarding the bellwether trial status for the New Jersey State MDL litigation trial schedule.

The first trial dates for any Yaz, Yasmin or Ocella lawsuits pending in New Jersey state court will begin in the fall of 2012, with at least two cases to be selected as test cases out of hundreds of claims pending in the state.

There are about 1,000 Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella product liability lawsuits pending in New Jersey state courts involving claims that women suffered serious or deadly injuries as a result of side effects of Yaz, Yasmin or Ocella birth control, containing the fourth-generation progestin drospirenone which are all manufactured by Bayer.

All of the suits involves claims that Bayer failed to properly research their birth control pills or adequately warn about the increased risk of serious and life-threatening injuries from the birth control pills containing drospirenone, causing stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis.

According to a case management order issued July 8 by New Jersey Superior Court Judge Martinotti, the first Yaz trial in New Jersey state court should be ready to go before a jury on September 10, 2012. A second trial date has been set for November 27, 2012.

The parties have been directed to identify a pool of 18 cases that may be selected for an early trial date, known as bellwether cases. Judge Martinotti has asked each side to select three cases involving allegations of pulmonary embolism, three involving claims of gall bladder injury and three involving allegations of venous thromboembolism, such as a deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

In addition to the cases pending in New Jersey state court, more than 6,000 other cases are pending in federal court and other state court systems. The federal Yaz litigation has been centralized as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) before Judge Herndon in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

At least three trial trial dates are anticipated in the federal MDL, one involving a pulmonary embolism, one involving a gallbladder injury and one involving a venous thromboembolism, with the first Yaz trial in federal court expected to begin early next year.

QUICK FACTS: YAZ LAWSUITS ALLEGATIONS
Throughout the United States, a number of Yaz birth control lawsuits have been filed against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which was formerly known as Berlex, Inc. and Berlex Laboratories, Inc., claiming that the drug makers:

Failed to adequately warn consumers and the doctors about the potential risk of Yaz side effects.
Failed to adequately test and research Yaz birth control before placing it on the market, which could have shown that patients would face an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and other life-threatening health problems.
Failed to issue a Yaz recall or remove the birth control pill from the market after it became apparent that it is an unreasonably dangerous drug, for which the harmful side effects outweigh any potential benefits provided over other available birth control pills.
Aggressively marketed Yaz and encouraged misuse and overuse despite the known Yaz dangers to maximize profits at the expense of patients’ health.

The drug makers had access to all the facts concerning the potential Yaz problems, and ignored the connection between their drug and deadly side effects. Yaz safety concerns were hidden and misrepresentations were made to to convince consumers and doctors to use the birth control pill instead of other available products. This increased the drug makers’ profits at the expense of women throughout the United States. Another example of corporations putting profits before people.

In complex litigation involving a large number of claims with similar underlying facts, early trials are useful in helping the parties gauge the strengths and weaknesses of their cases, and may help facilitate a possible Yaz settlement agreement that includes other lawsuits in the litigation.

Continue reading "Yaz Injury Update: New Jersey BellWether Trials To Start" »

As a Vaginal Mesh Defective Product Lawsuits attorney, and Texas Medical doctor I am providing this important update.

According to a safety communication issued by the Food and Drug Administration, Women who have vaginal surgery to fix a gynecologic condition called pelvic organ prolapse may wind up with more problems than benefits if a plastic mesh is used.

The FDA said it plans to convene an advisory committee to determine whether to ban the mesh - manufactured by Mass-based Boston Scientific Corp., Covidien PLC of Mansfield, and several other companies - for this procedure.

About 100,000 women with pelvic organ prolapse are treated with plastic mesh each year, but in most cases, according to the FDA, the condition can be treated successfully without mesh.

Mesh-related problems reported to the FDA include painful sexual intercourse, infections, urinary problems, and bleeding, usually from the mesh eroding through the stitched tissue or from skin contracting tightly around it.

Boston Scientific, is one of several companies that already face lawsuits over the mesh. Dozens of women who said they endured painful complications after the company’s mesh was implanted filed complaints last year in a California court, and many of the cases are now being transferred to jurisdictions across the country where the plaintiffs live.

Covidien, a company incorporated in Ireland with its corporate headquarters in Mansfield, supplies mesh to Bard, which markets it to health care providers to treat pelvic organ prolapse.
According to attorneys who represent more than 100 women in a complaint against Bard lodged in federal court in West Virginia, said the manufacturers initially designed the mesh for hernia repair. While regulators gave companies clearance to market it for pelvic organ prolapse repair, they did not look to see if, mechanically or otherwise, these products worked in the pelvis. “They should have known that they needed to check and test.’’

In 2008, the FDA announced that problems could be associated with transvaginal placement of the mesh, which is used along with surgical stitches to support sagging pelvic organs such as the bladder, uterus, and bowel after they have been lifted back out of the vagina, where they descended. From 2008 to 2010, the FDA received 1,503 adverse event reports associated with mesh used for pelvic organ prolapse repair, five times as many as the agency received from 2005 to 2007. It also received three reports of deaths that were related to the mesh placement procedure.

Recent studies indicate that about 10 percent of women who have the mesh placed transvaginally experience mesh erosion within 12 months of surgery and that more than half require additional surgeries to remove the mesh. Sometimes, the mesh becomes so intertwined with scar tissue that it cannot be removed. Furthermore, the FDA found that the mesh does not make the surgery any more effective.

According to Dr. William Maisel, the FDA’s deputy director of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health, “The evidence we reviewed calls into question the clinical benefit of mesh, and it certainly shouldn’t be used routinely for all transvaginal prolapsed repairs.''

In 2010, 75,000 women had vaginal surgery with mesh to repair pelvic organ prolapse. That surgery was performed three times as often as abdominal surgical mesh repair, according to the FDA, since it does not require a painful incision through the skin and offers a less painful recuperation for women.

The FDA cited studies showing abdominal mesh repair for pelvic organ prolapse led to vaginal erosion in 4 percent of women within 23 months of surgery. The FDA urged patients with the condition to ask their surgeon about all treatment options, including those without mesh, before having the operation.

The reassessment of surgical mesh comes as FDA reviews its fast-track system for clearing medical devices, which has been largely unchanged since the 1970s. Like 90 percent of medical devices sold in the U.S., pelvic mesh was cleared under the FDA's fast-track system, which grants market approval in 90 days to devices that are considered low-risk.

Medical device manufacturers have spent the last year lobbying the FDA and Congress to speed up device approvals as the government reviews the process. Safety advocates say the agency has been overusing the system and clearing high-risk devices that should be subject to more testing.

According to Dr. Diana Zuckerman, the agency should have required the studies it is now contemplating before mesh products were approved. "If they had been required to go through the more rigorous approval process, similar to that for prescription drugs, it would have been obvious years ago that surgical mesh has more risks than benefits in many types of surgery," said Zuckerman, who directs the National Research Center for Women & Families.

The FDA will hold a meeting in September to discuss studies that would identify which patients benefit most from mesh implants. The FDA will ask panelists at the meeting whether pelvic surgical mesh should be reclassified as a high-risk device.

Surgeons began using mesh to repair hernias in the 1950s, and over the next 40 years they adapted the technique for women's health conditions. FDA cleared the first mesh for prolapse in 2002, but since it was similar to devices that had been used for decades it did not have to undergo human testing.

The mesh was approved through the FDA's 510(k) process, which calls for companies to prove that a product is "substantially equivalent" to one already on the market -- usually without clinical studies on patients. The approval process is currently being scrutinized by the Institute of Medicine on behalf of the FDA.

Among the manufacturers are Boston Scientific Corp., American Medical Systems Inc. (now part of Pennsylvania-based Endo Pharmaceuticals) and Coloplast. Other companies making the mesh include Cook Medical, Covidien PLC, C.R. Bard Inc., and Ethicon, a division of Johnson & Johnson.

Continue reading "Vaginal Mesh Injury Lawsuits" »

Is an Actos recall in the works? As an Actos Bladder Cancer attorney, and Texas medical doctor I am providing this Actos update.

Actos (pioglitazone) is one of the world's widely prescribed diabetes medications. Also marketed in combination with glimepiride (Duetact) and metformin (Actoplus Met, Actoplus Met XR), Actos is used by millions of patients with Type-2 diabetes. The drug works by controlling blood glucose levels through its action with insulin.

Now, Actos has also been linked to life-threatening side effects. In June 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning to alert patients and healthcare professionals of an increased risk of bladder cancer associated with Actos. This followed another FDA warning, issued in June 2007, with reports of liver damage and cardiovascular problems among patients taking Actos.

If you have been diagnosed with bladder cancer or another condition you feel may be linked to taking Actos, the FDA recommends that you schedule an appointment with your doctor immediately.

Bladder Cancer Risk and Actos Usage
The FDA issued its Actos bladder cancer warning after an interim analysis of a 10-year epidemiological study conducted by the drug's manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals. The analysis showed no increased risk of bladder cancer among users as a whole. The longest-term users of Actos and those with the highest cumulative dose of the drug showed increased levels of bladder cancer.

A separate study of Actos, conducted in France, has also linked the drug to bladder cancer. The FDA is aware of these findings and has stated that it intends to conduct a thorough review of the study and its findings. The agency has also stated that it will continue monitoring data from Takeda's ongoing study.

In the meantime, the FDA has advised patients that taking Actos for longer than a year puts them at risk. The FDA recommends that patients with active bladder cancer avoid taking Actos. Physicians should use caution when prescribing Actos to patients with a history of bladder cancer, weighing the benefits of the drug to the risk of recurrence.

The FDA has also provided the following tips for patients:

Taking Actos may increase your odds of developing bladder cancer
Go to a doctor if you notice that your urine is red in color or if you see blood; if you are experiencing an extreme urge to urinate or pain while doing so; or if you are experiencing pain in your lower abdomen or back
Do not take Actos if you are receiving bladder cancer treatment
Report any side effects you notice to the FDA MedWatch program
Read the medication guide you get with your Actos prescription, which contains detailed information on risks associated with the drug

These warnings and recommendations will appear on the Warnings and Precautions section of the drug's label, and in the accompanying medication guide.

Actos Side Effects and Potential Injuries
The FDA's latest Actos warning follows another warning issued in June of 2007. At that time, the agency issued a "black box warning" requiring the manufacturers of Actos and Avandia (known as thiazolidinediones) to include warnings alerting patients and their doctors of cardiovascular and liver problems linked to the drug. Black box warnings appear on the packaging of drugs and are the strongest action taken by the FDA short of a recall.

These warnings were issued after the findings of a Cleveland Clinic study showed that thiazolidinedione use increased the risk of heart attack by as much as 42 percent. The findings also showed an increased risk of hepatitis, liver inflammation, elevated liver enzymes (an indication of liver damage) and liver failure.

Continue reading "Actos Bladder Cancer Injuries" »

As a Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Blood Clot side effect and wrongful death attorney, and Texas medical doctor I am providing this update.

In one of the latest court battles pitting consumers against a giant drugmaker, thousands of victims are alleging Bayer did not provide adequate warnings about the health risks associated with Yaz, and they are blaming the drug for causing blood clots, heart attacks, strokes and sudden deaths.

Yaz and its predecessor, Yasmin, are oral contraceptives, including widely used generics such as Ocella, that contain a combination of the estrogen ethinyl estradiol and a synthetic hormone drospirenone. Both drugs were made by Berlex Labs, which was acquired in 2006 by Bayer Healthcare, the U.S. division of Bayer AG. The Food and Drug Administration approved Yasmin in 2001, and five years later they allowed Berlex to begin selling Yaz, another version of the drug.

The two pills, backed by heavy marketing campaigns, quickly became best-sellers, generating billions in annual sales for Bayer. When they were approved by the FDA, the pills were considered safer than older forms of oral contraceptives because they were taken for 24 days rather than the usual 21. But there were concerns about the health risks associated with drospirenone. A year after Yasmin went on the market, the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen placed the drug on its list of “Do not use pills.”

The group warned consumers that Yasmin did not work better than older oral contraceptives that were less likely to cause dangerous side effects like blood clots. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, said “When you have enough evidence to suggest that there is no unique benefit and there are unique risks, that should be it.”

In the case of Yaz, the product liability lawsuits claim that Bayer provided inadequate warnings about the health risks for women taking the drospirenone-containing birth control pills.

Yaz Pulmonary Embolism PE Risks
It is important to understand that if you are taking Yaz birth control, you are at a higher risk of Yaz pulmonary embolism. Women in the following categories have an even higher risk for Yaz related pulmonary embolism:

If you are over the age of 35
If you smoke more than 15 cigarettes per day
If you have a family or personal history of pulmonary embolism or blood clots

Yaz Death
Pulmonary embolism usually results in death because the emergency units cannot reach the patient in time. A staggering statistic is that 33 percent of all untreated pulmonary embolism attacks result in death. It is hard to process that the death may have been prevented with adequate information and packaging. Women should have been informed of the increased risks involved with taking Yaz birth control including PE and death.

More than 1,000 lawsuits have been filed in Bergen County — one of four courts where the mass tort litigation will be heard. Thousands of other cases are filed in courts in Philadelphia, California and Illinois.

In June, FDA regulators acknowledged new evidence that raised more questions about the safety of Yaz and birth control pills like it, including the top-selling generic Ocella. The agency posted a notice on its website saying it was aware of studies recently published in the British Medical Journal that showed oral contraceptives containing drospirenone were two to three times more likely to cause blood clots than other birth control pills.

Continue reading "Yaz Pulmonary Embolism PE" »

As a Dallas Medical Malpractice attorney, and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this update regarding the medical malpractice cases in Miami VA hospital with improperly cleaned equipment.

A Miami U.S. Air Force vet who says he contracted hepatitis C from a colonoscopy done at the Miami VA hospital with improperly cleaned equipment will go to trial in Miami federal court. A Coral Gables veteran who filed the medical malpractice lawsuit, claims that an improper colonoscopy at the Miami Veterans’ Administration hospital gave him hepatitis C.

11,000 U.S. veterans received colonoscopies with improperly cleaned equipment at VA hospitals in Miami, Murfreesboro, Tenn., and Augusta, Ga., between 2004 and 2009. Of the veterans who had the procedure at the three facilities, five have tested positive for HIV, 25 for hepatitis C and eight for hepatitis B.

Robert Metzler, now 69, a U.S. Air Force veteran, says he got a colonoscopy at the Miami VA hospital in 2007 and two years later was told he has hepatitis C.

The lawsuits were filed after a 2009 investigation by the VA’s own Administrative Investigation Board revealed more than 11,000 colonoscopies were done at three VA hospitals using equipment that had been rinsed after each patient rather than being sterilized by steam and chemicals as called for by the manufacturer. Investigators who took apart water tubes on some of the equipment that was supposed to be clean and ready for use instead found “discolored liquid and debris.”

The AIB report said the colonoscopies in Miami were done in an environment of inadequate training, lack of supervision and inadequate communication.

U.S. Army veteran Juan Rivera of Miami sued for medical malpractice when he became HIV positive after a colonoscopy at the Miami VA hospital, that case settled out of court in March 2011.

In the Metzler case, court papers filed by the USA in April 2011 argue that the chances that the veteran contracted hepatitis C from the VA equipment are no more than “two in one trillion.” Hepatitis C can’t survive outside a human host for more than four days, the documents say, and “substantially more than four days had passed” between any previous patient with Hepatitis C who had a colonoscopy and the one performed on Metzler.

Metzler’s case is based on the claim that he had a blood test in August 2006 at the VA, with no sign of hepatitis C. His colonoscopy was in June 2007 and he was notified in March 2009 that he needed to come in to the VA for testing because the endoscope used in the procedure may have been contaminated, accodring to his lawyer. A month later, he was told he was positive for hepatitis C.

Continue reading "Miami VA Colonoscopy Hepatitis C Case Goes to Trial " »

As a Multaq Dangerous Drug attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this information on a drug company sponsored trial of its drug Multaq, which was halted because of increased cardiovascular side effects and injuries.

Sanofi, maker of dronedarone (Multaq), has stopped its phase 3b trial of its antiarrhythmic drug due to an increase in cardiovascular events seen in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation - an unapproved indication for the antiarrhythmic drug. The PALLAS trial was testing the drug in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (AF) and at least one other cardiovascular disease risk factor; at present, dronedarone is approved in patients with nonpermanent AF.

According to the primary medical investigator, ". . . there was a significant increase in major cardiovascular events, and in our study that was defined as a composite of stroke, MI, systemic embolism, or cardiovascular death. . . . These were pretty important events."

Multaq, is approved for patients with the non-permanent kind of atrial fibrillation. The trial, known as the PALLAS study, was testing Multaq’s usefulness in patients with permanent atrial fibrillation (more than 6 months of the abnormal rhythms).

Dronedarone has faced a range of criticisms since its approval in the US in July 2009, including questions about its safety/efficacy tradeoff and the design and execution of the ATHENA study. Just last week, newspapers in France reported that French health authorities had concluded that the efficacy of dronedarone was "insufficient"—an opinion that could lead to the drug being dropped from the country's drug reimbursement formulary.

Dronedarone, sold by sanofi-aventis, is currently approved to treat atrial flutter and paroxysmal or persistent - but not permanent atrial fibrillation.

The phase 3b trial, called PALLAS, had enrolled 3,148 patients with permanent atrial fibrillation, with 70% showing symptoms for more than two years, according to a company statement. Sanofi did not specify the cardiovascular events seen in the dronedarone-treated patients, or the magnitude of the increase.

In January, sanofi-aventis and the FDA warned that reports of acute liver injury associated with the drug had been received. The statement noted that patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and "vascular risk factors" are at high risk for cardiovascular events.

An earlier trial of dronedarone in patients with relatively severe heart failure, called ANDROMEDA, was halted early when mortality in patients receiving the drug was found to be twice that seen in the control group.

Sanofi-aventis has alerted healthcare professionals to several reports of liver function test abnormalities and hepatocellular injury in patients treated with its atrial fibrillation drug dronedarone (Multaq). The Dear Healthcare Provider letter included two post-marketing case reports of acute liver failure that required transplantation, occurring at four-and-a-half and six months after the start of dronedarone therapy. The patients - both female and about 70 years old - had had normal hepatic serum enzymes before starting the drug.

In the letter, sanofi-aventis instructed healthcare professionals to tell patients to immediately report any symptoms suggestive of hepatic injury. According to the FDA, these include anorexia, nausea, vomiting, fever, malaise, fatigue, right upper quadrant pain, jaundice, dark urine, or itching.

Periodic liver enzyme tests, especially in the first six months of treatment, should also be considered, according to the FDA, although it is unknown whether such a strategy will prevent the development of liver injury.

Dronedarone's prescribing information will be updated to include the guidance from the Dear Physician letter, and will be distributed after the FDA approves it. The agency confirmed that a warning about potential liver injury will be added to the drug's label.

According to the FDA, from the drug's approval in July 2009 through October 2010, about 492,000 prescriptions for dronedarone were dispensed and about 117,000 patients filled prescriptions at U.S. pharmacies.

The drug was approved with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy to prevent use in patients with severe heart failure or in those with less severe heart failure who were recently hospitalized for the condition. Such patients had a doubling in the risk of death in a placebo-controlled study.

Continue reading "Multaq Study Stopped: Linked to Other Heart Problems" »

As a Texas Bard Avaulta litigation and Product Liability Attorney and Texas medical doctor, I am providing this update.

Laura Jones, of El Paso, Texas, has filed a lawsuit against American Medical Systems (AMS) over problems with vaginal mesh manufactured by the company. Jones had an AMS vaginal sling implanted in June 2009 to restore normal vaginal structure. Following the pelvic organ prolapse surgery, Jones experienced severe pain, urinary problems and had to undergo surgeries to have the AMS surgical mesh removed. The complaint was filed last month in Los Angeles Superior Court by against AMS and a number of other unnamed manufacturers.

According to Jones’ lawsuit, the transvaginal sling eroded, shrunk and part of it extruded into her vagina. The complaint alleges that AMS failed to warn patients about the risk of vaginal mesh side effects, claiming that the manufacturer should be held responsible under theories of strict liability, negligence, breach of implied and express warranty, fraud, misrepresentation and violating California consumer protection laws.

Recently, several AMS vaginal mesh lawsuits have been filed for women who experienced problems after receiving pelvic organ prolapse products. The FDA issued a warning about vaginal mesh complications in October 2008, indicating that more than 1,000 people had reported experiencing problems with products made by at least nine different manufacturers. Recently a medical study revealed that there were more complications with the vaginal mesh slings. In the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers found that vaginal mesh surgery brought better results for treating pelvic organ prolapse, but carried risks of surgical complications and other problems after surgery, including pain during sex and new urinary incontinence.

Last year, settlements were reached in a number of Mentor ObTape vaginal mesh lawsuits filed by women who experienced problems after receiving that product. The product made by a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. The complaints alleged that the complication rate associated with Mentor ObTape mesh could be as high as 18%. The Mentor ObTape was removed from the market in 2006, three years after it was introduced.

Over the past year, a growing number of Bard Avaulta vaginal mesh lawsuits have also been filed by women who have experienced problems. All of the complaints involve similar claims that C.R. Bard’s Avaulta Anterior and Posterior BioSynthetic Support System, which was introduced in 2007, was negligently designed and that the company failed to warn patients of possible complications that can result in severe pain and disfigurement.

In October 2010, the federal Bard Avaulta litigation was consolidated as part of an MDL for pretrial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

Continue reading "AMS Vaginal Sling Lawsuits" »

As a Texas Chantix side effect and Product Liability Attorney and Texas medical attorney, I am providing this update.
New medical research suggests that Chantix side effects increases the risk of heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular events.

Pfizer’s smoking cessation drug Chantix raises the risk of suffering a cardiac event by 72%, according to a study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

Researchers found that those who took Chantix were substantially more likely to suffer heart problems than those who took a placebo, and two of the co-authors suggested that the findings were strong enough that the FDA should consider a Chantix recall due to the risk of heart attack and stroke.

The study comes just three weeks after the FDA issued a drug safety communication about the risk of heart problems from Chantix, warning that the smoking cessation drug might increase the risk of certain cardiovascular events, including the risk of heart attack, among individuals who had cardiovascular disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is notifying the public that the smoking cessation aid Chantix (varenicline) may be associated with a small, increased risk of certain cardiovascular adverse events in patients who have cardiovascular disease. This safety information will be added to the Warnings and Precautions section of the Chantix physician labeling. The patient Medication Guide will also be revised to inform patients about this possible risk.

The warning risk of a heart attack or stroke from Chantix is just the latest of serious side effects associated with the drug. Warnings about the risk of life-threatening psychological side effects of Chantix, which increases the risk of suicide, was added to a black box on the medications label two years ago.

Chantix (varenicline) was approved in the United States by the FDA in 2006 as a prescription medication to help people quit smoking. The prescription medication designed to help people stop smoking already holds the title of being the drug associated with the most FDA adverse event reports of any prescription medication in the United States.

A number of Chantix lawsuits have been filed in courts throughout the United States on behalf of individuals who have died or suffered serious injuries as a result of a suicide or unusual behavior allegedly caused by Chantix.

Continue reading "Chantix Increases Heart Attacks" »

As a DePuy ASR and Pinnacle Metal on Metal Hips attorney, I am providing this update. It is in our nature to want the latest and greatest — whether it is a faster car, a smarter computer or a smaller cell phone, and this applies equally to medicine, where we want the newest and presumably safer drugs and medical devices.

But medical innovation can become a trap for the unwary; we are now seeing this playing out with deadly consequences for thousands of patients who are using the 4th generation birth control pills Yaz and Yasmin over the safer 3rd generation older contraceptive pills and those folks who now are the recipients of metal on metal artificial hips.

The metal-on-metal hips, were regarded by hip manufacturers and surgeons as a technological break through over previous designs that used both metal and plastic. Now the FDA (who had been asleep at the wheel) and medical researchers are panicking to determine how many implant recipients have been injured by the devices.

The Food and Drug Administration recently ordered manufacturers of all metal hips to undertake emergency studies of patients. The rush to implant the latest and greatest, and patients' demand shows how innovation’s siren call led a product promoted as a breakthrough without convincing evidence that it was better or even as good as existing options.

In 2010, DePuy, the orthopedics division of Johnson & Johnson, recalled one of its all-metal hips, the ASR, which was failing at a high rate. Furthermore, another DePuy product, the Pinnacle (which has not yet been recalled) is now under scrutiny for excessive failures. Another manufacturer, Zimmer Holdings, also briefly halted sales of one of its metal models, the Durom. DePuy, Zimmer and other companies continue to deny that there are any problems with their products.

THE modern artificial hip, which was developed in the 1960s, uses a simple design. A metal “ball” made of cobalt and chromium replaces the top of the thigh bone, while a “cup,” typically made of plastic, serves as an artificial hip socket. By the 1990s, the devices were considered highly effective, with studies then finding that implants still worked a decade after surgery in 95 percent of patients.

By 2008, metal on metal hips were used in one out of every three hip replacements, of approximately 250,000 hips implanted annually in the United States. By using a metal cup, which is thinner than a plastic one, a surgeon could implant a bigger ball component, which was assumed to be less likely to dislocate than a smaller one. But recent research, demonstrates that such oversized components may be the reason the devices shed metallic debris.

As the number of affected patients nationwide increased, it became apparent that the devices had not been properly tested. Under F.D.A. regulatory rules, most all-metal hips do not have to undergo clinical trials before sale. They are tested in labs on machines that simulate millions of steps to study the forces exerted by years of motion. According to testing experts, all-metal devices proved worse than metal-and-plastic ones to small variations in how they were implanted, with components sometimes striking together and generating debris.

The devices, as a group, are twice as likely as metal-and-plastic ones to require early replacement, according to data from Australia’s orthopedic registry, one of the most comprehensive databases on implants. Most importantly, damage from debris generated by metal implants in some patients, has caused crippling tissue and muscle damage, and has produced neurological problems, a condition known as metallosis.

It is estimated, about 500,000 patients in the United States may have gotten an all-metal hip, and thousands will have painful early-replacement procedures. The lawsuits against DePuy and other makers of all-metal hips may emerge as the largest product liability cases of this decade.

Continue reading "DePuy ASR and Pinnacle Metal on Metal Hips" »

As a Dangerous and Defective Drug attorney, I am writing this opinion piece, regarding the latest US Supreme Court Generic Drug Decision, which in my humble opinion is disastrous to Patient Safety. The case is PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing.

On June 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that Generic Drug Manufacturers cannot be sued for failing to warn consumers of the possible side effects of their defective products, as long as they use the same warnings on the brand-name drugs. This decision is absurd on its face; this means that brand-name drug manufacturers can be held responsible for their failure to warn consumers about the dangers, but generic manufacturers are now provided an all encompassing shield that brand-name manufacturers do not have.

The seriousness and ramifications of this opinion cannot be understated. The Court’s decision now prevents millions of Americans, who have been seriously injured by generic drugs, from seeking compensation for their injuries. Generic drug manufacturers have a huge business in the United States. This opinion immunizes those drug manufacturers from liability. Another win for Big Pharma, and the consumer gets it again.

The dissent, ridiculed the Court’s decision, stating, “As a result of today’s decision, whether a consumer harmed by inadequate warnings can obtain relief turns solely on the happenstance of whether her pharmacist filled her prescription with a brand-name or generic drug. The Court gets one thing right: this outcome makes little sense.” “In some States, pharmacists must dispense generic drugs absent instruction to the contrary from a consumer’s physician. Even when consumers can request brand-name drugs, the price of the brand-name drug or the consumers’ insurance plans may make it impossible to do so. As a result, in many cases, consumers will have no ability to preserve their state-law right to recover for injuries caused by inadequate warnings.”

In many cases, once generic versions of a drug enter the market, the brand name manufacturers stop selling the drug. A consumer may have no option but to use a generic drug, and then find themselves without a remedy if they develop a catastrophic injury.

This decision also means that brand-name manufacturers will be held to a different yet safer standard. The Supreme Court decided in Wyeth v. Levine, brand-name manufacturers are responsible for their warning labels and required to update them at all times.

Patients will now be taking generic drugs at their own risk. It is absurd that doctors and patients will have to make medical decisions knowing that only brand-name drug manufacturers – not generics – can be held accountable for their drugs' dangerous side-effects.

Today, 70 percent of all prescription drugs are filled with generic versions, accounting for about 2.6 billion prescriptions every year. Additionally, the generic drug industry continues to expand – nine of the industry's 10 biggest blockbuster drugs are going off-patent within in the next few years.

The ruling is an immense blow for consumer rights, equality and fairness, principals upon which the American legal system was founded.

As an Actos Side Effects Lawsuit and Piaglitazone Bladder Cancer Lawyer, I am writing this Actos update, regarding the Actos dangerous drug cancer side effects.

Actos (pioglitazone) is a medication manufactured and sold by Takeda Pharmaceuticals for treatment of Type 2 diabetes. The drug is part of the same class of medications as Avandia (rosiglitazone), which has been linked to an increased risk of heart attacks.

What is Actos?
Actos or Pioglitazone is used with a diet and exercise program and sometimes with other medications, to treat type 2 diabetes. Pioglitazone is in a class of medications called thiazolidinediones. It works by increasing the body's sensitivity to insulin, a hormone that controls blood sugar levels. Pioglitazone is not used to treat type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis.

Fast FDA Facts About Actos
*Sold as a single-ingredient product under the brand-name Actos. Also sold in combination with metformin (Actoplus Met, Actoplus Met XR) and glimepiride (Duetact).
*Used along with diet and exercise to improve control of blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
*From January 2010 through October 2010, approximately 2.3 million patients filled a prescription for a pioglitazone-containing product from outpatient retail pharmacies.

Diabetes Drug Actos Bladder Cancer Risks
The FDA has issued a new warning of increased bladder cancer risk associated with use of the diabetes drug Actos (pioglitazone).The agency's warning comes five days after Germany and France pulled Actos from the market.

The warning comes after a review of data from a five-year analysis of an ongoing study of Actos by the manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals.The results show that although there was no increased risk of bladder cancer among Actos users overall, there was an increased risk of bladder cancer among those who had used the drug the longest. There was also a greater risk of bladder cancer among Actos users who had been exposed to the highest cumulative dose of the drug.

According to the FDA, Actos should not be prescribed to people with bladder cancer or people with a history of bladder cancer.Some medical experts believe that an Actos recall is imminent or that new warnings about the risk of bladder cancer from Actos should be added to the medication.

Research Data Summary
To address the long-term risk of bladder cancer associated with pioglitazone use, the drug manufacturer (Takeda) is conducting a ten-year, observational cohort study in patients with diabetes who are members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) health plan. Patients selected in this study had diabetes mellitus and were ≥40 years of age at study entry. The study group included 193,099 patients with diabetes.

The primary outcome of the cohort study is an incident (new) diagnosis of bladder cancer identified from the KPNC cancer registry. A planned five-year interim analysis was performed with data collected from January 1, 1997 through April 30, 2008.

The results showed that after adjusting for risk factors, there was no significant increase in the risk for bladder cancer in patients ever exposed to pioglitazone compared to patients never exposed to pioglitazone.

But, the risk of bladder cancer increased with increasing dose and duration of pioglitazone use. Compared to never being exposed to pioglitazone, a duration of pioglitazone therapy longer than 12 months was associated with a 40% increase in risk. The hazard ratio after more than 24 months of pioglitazone use was 1.4. Based on these data, FDA calculated that duration of therapy longer than 12 months was associated with 27.5 excess cases of bladder cancer per 100,000 person-years follow-up, compared to never use of pioglitazone.

Possible signs or symptoms of Actos bladder cancer may include:

Blood in the Urine
Pain During Urination (Dysuria)
Frequent Urination
Feeling of Need to Urinate Without Results

Although it appears that information about the risk of Actos cancer problems has been known to the manufacturer for some time, inadequate warnings were provided to consumers and medical doctors. Further, it appears that the manufacturer may have placed their desire for profits ahead of patient safety by failing to adequately warn about the potential risk of bladder cancer. As a result, consumers diagnosed with bladder cancer may be able to obtain compensation through an Actos lawsuit.

Continue reading "Actos Bladder Cancer Warning & Side Effects" »

As a TEXAS Zimmer NexGen Knee replacement attorney, I am providing this update regarding the request for consolidation of these cases in one federal court.

A motion was filed in June, calling for all Zimmer NexGen knee lawsuits filed in various federal district courts throughout the United States to be centralized before one judge for coordinated handling during pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

Zimmer NexGen knee replacement lawyers expect that there may become many similar claims filed on behalf of individuals who allege that they received a defective knee implant and had to undergo revision surgery or suffered permanent and debilitating injuries as a result of a problems with a Zimmer NexGen knee.

The motion was filed on June 6 on behalf of plaintiff Fred Stone, who has proposed that the federal Zimmer NexGen knee litigation be consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

At the time the motion was filed there were 28 Zimmer NexGen knee implant claims pending in 13 federal judicial districts across the country, and plaintiff attorneys indicated that there were at least 200 other potential cases that had not yet been filed.

All of the lawsuits involve problems with the Zimmer NexGen high-flex knee implants, Zimmer NexGen MIS tibial components or Zimmer NexGen LPS gender solutions. Some patients who received the Zimmer NexGen knee replacement systems complained about a number of problems, including reports of pain, loosening of the implant and failure of the replacement knee leading to revision surgery.

Plaintiffs claim to have suffered catastrophic implant failures, had permanent problems walking or had to undergo revision surgery to remove or replace the implants because they failed far in advance of their projected lifespan. Plaintiffs allege that the device maker stated that using the Zimmer NexGen knee was safe, despite knowledge of serious injuries associated with the components. Zimmer also understated the risk of Zimmer NexGen knee problems, according to allegations raised in the complaints.

In September 2010, recalls were issued for several components due to apparent manufacturing defects or design defects. A Zimmer NexGen MIS recall was issued for more than 68,000 knee components following at least 114 reports of problems that caused some individuals to experiencing loosening of the parts or the need for additional knee surgery. In addition, a Zimmer NexGen LPS recall was issued due to nonconfirming and inconsistent geometry.

More than 150,000 Zimmer NexGen CR and Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous Femoral implants have been sold since 2003, and some doctors have reported experiencing a substantially higher-than-expected failure of the replacement knee within a few years of surgery.

MDL Consolidation Pending
Consolidation of the lawsuits over Zimmer NexGen knee replacement systems before one judge as part of an MDL is designed to reduce duplicative discovery, avoid contradictory rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the court, witnesses and parties. While the pretrial management of the cases in an MDL is often managed similar to how a Zimmer NexGen class action lawsuit would be handled, each claim will still remain an individual lawsuit.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation is scheduled to consider consolidation of the cases next month at a hearing on July 28 in San Francisco, California.

Continue reading "Zimmer NexGen Knee Replacement Injury" »

As a Texas Zocor 80 mg Rhabdomyolysis Side Effects & Injury Attorney, I am providing this update regarding the recent FDA June 8, 2011 warning notice.

The FDA is calling for severe limits on the use of the cholesterol drug ZOCOR, generic simhttps://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/medwatch/medwatch-online.htmvastatin at its highest dose, because of an increased risk of muscle injury, myopathy and rhabdomyolysis from Zocor side effects. The product liability lawyers at Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm are evaluating and accepting potential Zocor lawsuits for individuals who have been injured, since it appears that the manufacturer knew or should have known of these serious side effects and failed to issue warnings for the 80 milligram (mg) dosage.

On June 8, the FDA required that new warnings to be added to the label for cholesterol-lowering medications containing simvastatin, indicating that 80 milligram dose has been associated with an increased risk of myopathy. The medication is also used in combination with other drugs in the medications Vytorin and Simcor.

Zocor rhabdomyolysis side effects causes 5 out of every 100,000 people who regularly take Zocor 80 mg dose to be hospitalized. Rhabdomyolysis from Zocor is a rare but serious and potentially life-threatening injury, which causes muscle tissue to break down and can lead to kidney damage or kidney failure, requiring kidney transplant.

Symptoms and Signs of Zocor rhabdomyolysis include:
Muscle Cramps, Muscle Tenderness, Stiffness, Pain
Dark Urine, no Urine

Zocor is a cholesterol-lowering drugs known as statins. All statins carry some risk of rhabdomyolysis and myopathy, BUT the risk appears to be unacceptably high with 80 mg doses of simvastatin. That risk is increased even further when combined with certain other drugs and in people who are genetically predisposed to Zocor rhabdomyolysis.

The FDA released these new recommendations and warnings after reviewing clinical trial data and other information which has been available to the manufacturers for some time.

Fast Facts About ZOCOR Simvastatin
*Sold as a single-ingredient generic medication and under the brand-name Zocor. It is also sold in combination with ezetimibe as Vytorin, and niacin as Simcor.
*Used together with diet and exercise to reduce the amount of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (“bad cholesterol”) in the blood to decrease the risk of heart attack, stroke, and cardiovascular death.
*The 80-mg dose lowers the LDL cholesterol by an additional 6% over simvastatin 40 mg.
*It is estimated that approximately 2.1 million patients in the U.S. were prescribed a product containing 80-mg simvastatin in year 2010.

ZOCOR LAWSUIT EVALUATIONS
Individuals who have suffered Zocor muscle problems or rhabdomyolysis after using 80 mg simvastatin may be entitled to compensation through a Zocor lawsuit as a result of the manufacturer’s failure to fully research the side effects of simvastatin at high doses or adequately warn about the risk of Zocor problems.

If you as a patient have a severe injury from taking ZOCOR you can file a complaint with the FDA HERE:

Contact FDA
Report a Serious Problem
1-800-332-1088
1-800-FDA-0178 Fax

MedWatch Online

Regular Mail: Use postage-paid FDA Form 3500
Mail to: MedWatch 5600 Fishers Lane
Rockville, MD 20857

Continue reading "Zocor Rhabdomyolysis Side Effects & Injury" »

As a Crestor Side Effect attorney and cardiologist, I am writing this blog article to highlight the side effects of cardiac for patients who are taking statins, particularly Crestor to manage their high cholesterol levels.

According to new medical studies, the use of statins, especially Crestor, can be a major cause of cardiomyopathy, a heart problem caused by heart muscle weakening. Statins are prescribed to lower cholesterol levels. The drugs do this by by inhibiting the key enzyme HMG-CoA reductase, which is involved in the cholesterol synthesis pathway. But a side effect of statins leads to reduced levels of Coenzyme Q10, an important chemical required for proper muscle functioning.

A 2009 Lancet article focused on that issue and indicated that statins, like Crestor, as one cause of heart failure. (See Florkowski, S Molyneux, P George, M Lever, N-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and statins in heart failure, Lancet 2009.)

Cardiovascular side effects from Crestor use are serious and may be life-threatening. If you or a loved one experienced cardiovascular injury or death, congestive heart failure, or immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy while taking Crestor, you may have a claim.

Crestor (generically known as Rosuvastatin), is an oral prescription drug designed to reduce the cholesterol blood levels when used together with lifestyle changes of diet and exercise. AstraZeneca, the manufacturer, designed the drug to reduce the production of cholesterol in the liver and by increasing the liver’s ability to remove “bad” LDL cholesterol. Crestor has been marketed as a "super-statin" because it claims to lower LDL cholesterol more than other statin drugs.

There are currently five statin drugs on the market in addition to Crestor: Lescol (fluvastatin), Lipitor (atorvastatin), Mevacor (lovastatin), Pravachol (pravastatin) and Zocor (simvastatin). Baycol (cerivastatin), another statin drug, was removed from the market in 2001 because of serious side effects reported by patients.

Crestor History
The FDA withheld approval for Crestor following concerns to the recall of Baycol and the kidney and muscle side effects reported in Crestor drug trials that were similar to those associated with Baycol. The FDA approved Crestor in August 2003 for the 5, 10, 20, and 40 mg doses following a clinical trial involving approximately 12,000 patients. The 80 mg dosage was not approved.

In March 2004, the non-profit organization Public Citizen asked the FDA to remove Crestor from the market, stating that Crestor side effects were severe and that the drug should never have been placed on the market. Read the FDA response to the Public Citizen petition on Crestor. The FDA issued a Public Health Advisory for Crestor on June 9, 2004, warning of the “increased risk for serious muscle toxicity (myopathy) associated with Crestor use, especially at the highest approved dose of 40 mg.”

In March 2005, the FDA issued an alert warning that “Rhabdomyolysis (serious muscle damage) has been reported in patients taking Crestor as well as other statin drugs. The labeling for Crestor has been revised to include information on the safe use of Crestor to reduce the risk for serious muscle toxicity, especially at the highest approved dose of 40 mg.”

Zocor Side Effects and Warnings
FDA in June 2011 warned about the risk of muscle injury in patients taking the highest dose of anti-cholesterol Zocor. Now patients and plaintiffs considering a Crestor lawsuit may be considering if the FDA’s Zocor warning applies to Crestor side effects. The FDA has recommended to patients and doctors that, “Zocor, Simvastatin 80 mg should not be started in new patients, including patients already taking lower doses of the drug.”
Click here for Public Citizen opinion of Zocor.

SEARCH Study Results Leads to FDA Zocor Warning
The recent FDA study was based on data from the trial SEARCH (Study of the Effectiveness of Additional Reductions in Cholesterol and Homocysteine) which assessed the frequency of serious cardiovascular injuries, including heart attack and death, in patients who took the maximum Zocor dosage of 80 mg as compared to those who took only 20 mg of the drug.

Crestor Side Effects Similar to Zocor Warning
Zocor muscle injuries are similar to the Crestor side effects. The higher the dosage of a “super-statin,” the greater the risk a patient runs of developing Crestor side effects such as muscle pain and weakness, and the potentially fatal rhabdomyolysis, in which muscle fiber breakdown products is released into the bloodstream and causes kidney damage or failure.

Continue reading "Crestor Side Effects & Cardiomyopathy" »

Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm is currently evaluating and accepting Fosamax long bone fracture cases and defective drug product liability claims. We are providing this Fosamax lawsuit update for the benefit of our readers and current Fosamax injury clients.

All federal Fosamax Femur low-impact bone fractures lawsuits have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of a new MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which will be centralized in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

At least 37 Fosamax fracture lawsuits are currently pending in federal district courts throughout the United States, and those cases will be transferred to New Jersey for further litigation. In addition, as new complaints over femur fractures on Fosamax are filed in the federal court system, they will also be added to this new MDL.

Fosamax lawsuits over jaw problems, known as osteonecrosis of the jaw, which will remain centralized as part of a different MDL in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

All of the complaints involve similar allegations that side effects of Fosamax, can increase the risk of atypical thigh bone fractures, which often occur with little or no trauma at all. Plaintiffs claim that Merck failed to adequately warn about the risk of femur fractures from Fosamax, or that users should seek immediate medical attention if they experience groin pain, which may occur several weeks before a complete fracture while on Fosamax.

In October 2010, the FDA required new warnings about the risk of bone fractures from Fosamax and other similar bisphosphonate medications. There are currently more than 900 Fosamax jaw lawsuits consolidated in New York, as part of an MDL that was established in August 2006. Fosamax fracture lawsuits were previously excluded from that MDL, because it was determined that the evidence of general causation leading to femur fractures would likely differ substantially from cases dealing with jaw bone damage.

Continue reading "Fosamax Bisphosphonate Femoral Fracture Litigation" »

As a Texan YAZ, Yasmin, Ocella Dangerous Drug and Side Effect Attorney and medical doctor, we are in the process of evaluating, accepting and filing lawsuits against Bayer regarding the dangerous side effects of YAZ, Yasmin, Ocella oral contraceptives.

The Food and Drug Administration said it is conducting a safety review of certain types of drospirenone containing birth-control pills to see if they increase the risk of blood clots when compared to other older birth control pills.

The FDA said the review is focusing on products that contain drospirenone, which is used in pills including Yaz and Yasmin, which are marketed Bayer AG. Drospirenone is a type of female sex hormone called a progestin.

Most birth-control pills contain two types of hormones, estrogen and progestin. The FDA said two recently published studies reported a greater risk of blood clots for women taking birth-control pills containing drospirenone, compared to birth-control pills containing another progestin known as levonorgestrel.

The FDA said some previous studies have reported that the risk of blood clots for women who use birth-control pills containing drospirenone is higher than that for women who use birth-control pills containing levonorgestrel.

Blood clots form inside a vein, known as deep vein thrombosis, or DVT. The clots can break loose and travel to other areas of the body such as the lungs, known as pulmonary embolism, or PE.

The FDA said it is "currently evaluating the conflicting results from these studies and will look at all currently available information to fully assess the risks and benefits of drospirenone-containing birth-control pills." An FDA-commissioned study involves more than 800,000 U.S. women and results are expected later this summer.

The European Medicines Agency said the risk of developing blood clots for oral contraceptives containing drospirenone was higher than that of pills containing levonorgestrel. EMA said the product labels of birth-control pills containing drospirenone will be updated.

The most recent studies were published earlier this year in the British Medical Journal. They compared women taking birth-control pills containing drospirenone with women taking birth-control pills containing levonorgestrel and found the risk of blood clots to be 2 to 3 times greater among women taking drospirenone products.

Continue reading "FDA To Investigate YAZ, Yasmin and Ocella" »

As a Dallas, Texas Personal Injury and Product Liability attorney I am providing this update regarding the risk of brain cancer and cell phone use.

In 2010, a major study in 13 countries found no clear evidence that exposure to the radiation from cellphones causes brain cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, a unit of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared this week that the radiation is “possibly carcinogenic” to humans.

The agency, stated that heavy users of cellphones had an increased risk of developing a rare brain tumor known as a glioma. Cellphones were placed in a “possibly carcinogenic” category.

The report comes as a proposed class action lawsuit against 19 defendants, mostly cell phone manufacturers and telecommunications companies, has landed at the U.S. Supreme Court. The defendants which include Nokia, AT&T Inc and Samsung Electronics Co Ltd are accused of misrepresenting that their cell phones are safe, when they in fact knew of potential dangers.

Still, many experts remain skeptical, and despite a huge world wide increase in cellphone use over the past twenty years, brain cancer rates in the United States have been declining. Scientists are unclear as to how the radio frequency waves emitted by cellphones, which may break chemical bonds and disrupt DNA, cause cancer.

The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the safety of cellphone emissions, said it would review the forthcoming research study carefully but that “the existing weight of scientific evidence does not show an association between non-thermal radio frequency energy and adverse health outcomes.”

Heavy users of cellphones might want to use headsets, speaker phones or text messaging to keep the device at a distance. Many folks would be surprised to learn that cellphone manufacturers, to prevent personal injury liability claims, already advise users in very small print to hold the phones a short distance from the body while making telephone calls.

Continue reading "Cell Phones and Brain Cancer Attorney" »

We are currently evaluating and accepting PROPECIA induced sexual dysfunction cases.

Eddie Sebastia from Florida has filed a product liability lawsuit against Merck, he alleges that side effects of the hair loss drugs Propecia and Proscar ruined his sex life.

The Propecia erectile dysfunction lawsuit was filed by Sebastia, claims that Merck failed to warn doctors and patients that side effects of Propecia, or Proscar, could result in permanent sexual problems.

Sebastia took Propecia and Proscar from 1998 to 2008, and claims that the medications caused him to develop erectile dysfunction, testicular pain, descreased sex drive, depression and anxiety.

Propecia (finasteride) was approved in 1992 for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, and also is approved to treat male pattern baldness. It was originally marketed by Merck as Proscar.

In March, researchers from the U.S. published a study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine that found side effects of Propecia were linked to sexual problems in men. Researchers indicated that the class of drugs known as 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors can cause loss of libido, depression erectile dysfunction, reduced semen production and growth of male breast tissue. They also agreed that in some cases these side effects appeared to be permanent.

While the drugs carried some warnings, the lawsuit alleges that those warnings were insufficient and understated the potential risks.

Continue reading "Propecia Side Effect Attorney" »

I am a Texas YAZ, Yasmin, Ocella Dangerous Drug Attorney and medical doctor and we are in the process of evaluating, accepting and filing lawsuits against Bayer regarding the dangerous side effects of YAZ, Yasmin, Ocella oral contraceptives.

Bayer’s birth control pills will be reviewed by FDA regulators after some studies suggested they may cause more blood clots than other oral contraceptive medicines.

According to the FDA, two recent reports in the British Medical Journal found a twofold to threefold greater risk of blood clots in women taking pills like Bayer’s Yaz.

European regulators said last week that they were revising the products’ prescribing information to include the new safety findings.

While all birth control pills pose a risk of blood clots, the F.D.A. review focuses on the hormone drospirenone, found in Bayer’s Yaz, Yasmin, Beyaz and Safyral. The agency expects to have results later this summer of an 800,000-person study it commissioned to examine the risks.

In the meantime, regulators said doctors and patients should watch for symptoms of blood clots, including leg or chest pain.

RECOMMENDATION: If your birth control pill contains drospirenone, do not stop taking it without first talking to your healthcare professional. Contact your healthcare professional immediately if you develop any symptoms of blood clots, including persistent leg pain, severe chest pain, or sudden shortness of breath. If you smoke and are over 35 years of age, you should not take combination oral contraceptives because they increase the risk that you could experience serious cardiovascular events, including blood clots.

Healthcare professionals and patients are encouraged to report adverse events or side effects related to the use of these products to the FDA's MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program:

Complete and submit the report Online: www.fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm

Continue reading " YAZ, Yasmin, Ocella Dangerous Drug Side Effect" »

As a DePuy Pinnacle Hip Failure and Replacement Attorney, I am providing this new information for my product liability clients.

On August 2010, there was a recall of the DePuy ASR XL artificial hip, and now DePuy may be facing the recall of the Pinnacle Acetabular Component. All federal lawsuits over DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement problems have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which will be centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued an order establishing the MDL, which will result in the transfer of 60 DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuits currently pending in federal district courts throughout the United States.

Like the DePuy ASR XL, the Depuy Pinnacle is a metal on metal system that was designed to last at least 10-15 years but now, orthopedic surgeons are reporting that these devices have been failing within one to two years of being implanted into their patients.

DePuy, a division of Johnson & Johnson, has implanted over 150,000 Pinnacle hip replacements since 2001. Its recent recall of the defective ASR metal-on-metal hip implant systems has thousands of hip implant patients to have additional hip revision surgeries.

The ASR and Pinnacle are both metal on metal systems, and the ASR is a monoblock design, the Pinnacle uses a modular system. The ASR cup is made of one solid piece of metal, the Pinnacle has an outer shell and the Pinnacle is designed allow the surgeon the option to place a metal, ceramic or polyethylene liner inside the metal outer cup.

The Pinnacle 36 mm Ultamet Metal-on-Metal component is failing at an unacceptably high rate. Research suggests that there is a design problem, and the device has been created with one of the lowest clearance levels in the industry. Experts investigating the product design believe that DePuy created a very narrow window for proper placement of the prosthesis and inadequately trained surgeons in the proper implantation technique.

The recalled DePuy ASR system and the Pinnacle was permitted under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) 510(k) approval process, which allows a medical device to be placed on the market without being subjected to clinical trials as long as the manufacturer can show that the device is “substantially equivalent” to a device already approved on the market. DePuy’s ASR system avoided clinical trials by showing that it was similar to the DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement system.

The FDA has received complaints and adverse incident reports against the Pinnacle system, and the Pinnacle’s propensity to prematurely separate from the bone. Constant friction in the metal on metal Pinnacle causes an increased risk of metallosis, the release of metal particles into the surrounding soft tissue or bloodstream, particularly chromium and cobalt.

The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm hip replacement team continues to investigate claims of Pinnacle failures and counsel our clients on what to do in the event that they need revision surgery.

Continue reading "DePuy Pinnacle Replacement Recall Lawsuit " »

Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm is investigating the connection between SimplyThick and cases of http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002133/">necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants. What is the Connection Between SimplyThick and Necrotizing Enterocolitis?

NEC has no definitive known cause. An infectious agent has been suspected, as cluster outbreaks in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) have been seen, but no common organism has been identified. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is suspected for causing necrotizing enterocolitis in premature infants and neutropaenic cancer patients, often secondary to gut colonization. A combination of intestinal flora, inherent weakness in the neonatal immune system, empirical antibiotic use for 5 days or more, alterations in mesenteric blood flow and milk feeding may be factors. The most common area of the bowel affected by NEC is near the ileocecal valve (the site of transition between the small and large bowel). NEC is almost never seen in infants before oral feedings are initiated. Formula feeding increases the risk of NEC by tenfold compared to infants who are fed breastmilk alone. Expressed breast milk protects the premature infant not only by its antiinfective effect and its immunoglobulin agents but also from its rapid digestion.

There are 15 reported cases of necrotizing enterocolitis in premature infants who were fed mother’s breast milk or infant formula thickened with SimplyThick, and 2 of the babies have died. The babies were fed SimplyThick for varying amounts of time before symptoms of NEC appeared. Major NEC symptoms include the following:

green vomit
diarrhea or bloody stools
swollen belly (abdomen)
red or blue color in the belly
breathing problems
slow heart rate.

The cases of necrotizing enterocolitis all involve premature infants who became sick over the past six months. Necrotizing enterocolitis most often occurs in babies within the hospital early in their premature course. But among the SimplyThick babies, some had been discharged from the hospital to home on a feeding regimen that included SimplyThick and then fell ill at home.

Severe cases of NEC can result in the following:

A segment of intestine may need to be removed.
Scarring and narrowing of the bowel.
The intestine may not be able to absorb nutrients normally, malabsorption.
If SimplyThick caused the NEC, and the baby dies, then the family has a wrongful death claim against the manufacturer.

Continue reading "SimplyThick Necrotizing Enterocolitis NEC " »

As a DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuit attorney, I am providing this update regarding the location of the MDL centralization.

All federal lawsuits over DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement problems have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which will be centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued an order establishing the MDL, which will result in the transfer of at least 57 DePuy Pinnacle hip lawsuits currently pending in federal district courts throughout the United States.

The litigation will be centralized before Judge Kinkeade for coordinated handling. In addition, as new complaints are filed by individuals who have experienced problems with a DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement, those cases will also be transferred to the Northern District of Texas for pretrial proceedings.

All of the lawsuits involve similar allegations that the DePuy Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System was defectively designed or manufactured, and that inadequate warnings were provided about the risk of complications or problems following hip replacement.

The MDL Panel determined that the actions all involve common questions of fact and that centralization of the cases will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses, as well as promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. Establishing a DePuy Pinnacle Hip MDL will also help eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings on discovery and other issues, and conserve the resources of the parties, the lawyers and the court.

The Panel selected the Northern District of Texas for the DePuy Pinnacle MDL because it is a geographically central location and has favorable docket conditions. The cases will be assigned to Judge Kinkeade, who is currently presiding over at least one of the cases, as the Panel determined that Judge Kinkeade has a current caseload conducive to handling the litigation.

Although plaintiffs requested that the centralized proceedings only include the DePuy Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip replacements, excluding those that use a polyethylene liner, the Panel determined that at this early stage the scope of the docket will not be limited. Therefore, lawsuits over all configurations of the DePuy Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System will be included as part of the MDL, as the manufacturer requested.

Continue reading "DePuy Pinnacle Replacement Hip MDL " »

As a Dallas SimplyThick Necrotizing Enterocolitis attorney, I am providing this FDA update and press release.

FDA notified parents, caregivers and health care providers not to feed SimplyThick, a thickening agent for management of swallowing disorders, to infants born before 37 weeks. The product may cause necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), a life-threatening condition characterized by inflammation and death of intestinal tissue. SimplyThick is a brand of thickening agent—available to consumers and medical centers—to help manage swallowing difficulties. It is sold in packets of individual servings and in 64-ounce dispenser bottles. The product can be purchased from distributors and local pharmacies throughout the United States.

On May 20, the FDA issued a SimplyThick public health warning following 15 cases of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants who were fed it, including at least two deaths. The FDA said the thickening agent should not be given to any infants who were born before 37 weeks of gestation.

FDA officials said they were first made aware of the potential risk of bowel problems from SimplyThick after reports were submitted by doctors to the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) on May 13. At least four different medical centers have had infants contract necrotizing enterocolitis from SimplyThick.

FDA officials indicate that they are unable to determine, why SimplyThick side effects would cause necrotizing enterocolitis in premature infants. The condition usually affects infants very early, but those that appear to be related to SimplyThick had a late onset, with some not being affected until they had been released from the hospital.

Necrotizing enterocolitis is an intestinal disorder that results in inflammation and necrosis of intestinal tissues. It is usually diagnosed in premature babies and can be life-threatening. Symptoms can include a bloated abdominal area, green-tinged vomiting and blood stools.

The FDA is currently investigating the link between SimplyThick and the bowel problems for infants. Parents, doctors and care givers are urged not to give SimplyThick to premature infants. Parents and caregivers who have questions or concerns related to the use of the product and/or who have medical concerns should contact their health care provider.

Health care professionals and patients are encouraged to report adverse events or side effects related to the use of this product to the FDA's MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program by:

Completing and submitting the adverse report online: www.fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm
Downloading the pre-addressed, postage-paid FDA Form 3500 (calling 1-800-332-1088 request the form), and faxing it to 1-800-FDA-0178; or
Mailing the completed form to MedWatch 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.

Continue reading "SimplyThick Necrotizing Entercolitis Recall" »

As a Dallas, Texas Steven Johnson Syndrome attorney, I am providing this jury verdict against J&J Motrin.

A Pennsylvania jury ruled that a Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) unit must pay $10 million in damages to the family of a 13-year-old girl who suffered skin burns and eye damage after she took Children’s Motrin.

Jurors found J&J’s McNeil Consumer Products unit liable for Brianna Maya’s injuries. Maya, was left blind in one eye and suffered burns over 84 percent of her body after taking Motrin in 2000 when she was 3 1/2.

J&J, and McNeil have faced at least two other jury trials over claims the companies hid the pain relievers’ links to Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, an allergic drug reaction that can leave patients with damaged eyes, blistered mouth and burned skin.

A California jury cleared J&J and McNeil of liability in 2008 for injuries suffered by an 11-year-old girl who took the pain relievers and developed the syndrome. Two years later, a federal jury in Illinois awarded a woman who took Children’s Motrin and suffered similar injuries $3.5 million in damages. A judge threw that award out on procedural grounds.

In the Philadelphia case, Maya's attorney argued that Maya developed a rash, skin lesions, eye infections and lung damage after taking Children’s Motrin in 2000, according to court filings. He contended J&J officials didn’t include a warning on that year’s label alerting consumers the fever medicine can trigger Stevens- Johnson Syndrome.

The companies later warned that ibuprofen, the pain reliever’s active ingredient, could trigger “a severe allergic reaction,” the symptoms of which could include rashes and blisters, according to court filings. The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas jury found that McNeil was negligent for not providing a proper warning about Children’s Motrin’s risks and that failure was “a factual cause” of the girl’s injuries. The panel rejected claims that the pain reliever was defectively designed or that McNeil officials’ conduct warranted an award of punitive damages.

The case is Maya v. Johnson & Johnson, 002879, February Term 2009, Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County (Philadelphia).

Continue reading "Steven Johnson's Syndrome Verdict Against J&J Motrin" »

As a Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice attorney, I providing this tragic case of wrongful death following a fairly common plastic surgery procedure.

Lisa Martinez, 32, went in for a procedure with Dr. Robert Young, a San Antonio plastic surgeon. Lisa was getting a plastic surgery procedure known as a "Brazilian Butt Lift."

According to court documents, Dr. Young was collecting fatty tissue from the hips and lower and mid back, and then injecting it back into her buttocks. During the surgery, according to the medical examiner, Lisa suffered intra-abdominal hemorrhaging due to a perforated aorta. The artery supplying blood to the rest of the body was punctured. The family ordered an autopsy and the family is filing a medical malpractice lawsuit.

All surgical procedures are associated with complications, and the surgeon has to take care to avoid the complications and to be vigilant in order to diagnose, recognize and treat the potential complications.

The failure to diagnose, recognize and treat the potential complications, is considered negligence and forms the basis of a medical malpractice lawsuit.

The surgeon should have anticipated some bleeding from this type of surgery and if the patient continues to deteriorate, then he needs to take extra steps to diagnose and treat the problem. Here it appears that the perforation in the aorta, which is extremely rare complication from this type of surgery, considering the anatomy, was unrecognized and untreated leading to the tragic outcome of death.

Will there be any justice for Lisa and her family, who have been impacted by this tremendous loss? Only time will tell. In Texas medical malpractice cases, pain and suffering is capped at $250,000 and if Lisa was not employed, that would be the maximum compensation the family could possibly receive. And only if they are successful in a jury trial. In Texas in medical malpractice cases, the plaintiffs are only successful in 15% of lawsuits. In other words 85% of Texans are poured out, so much for Tort Reform. Good luck to you if you get injured or killed by medical malpractice.

Continue reading "Medical Malpractice Wrongful Death During Plastic Surgery" »

As a Zimmer Durom Cup hip lawsuit attorney, I am provided this litigation update.

The pending federal Zimmer Durom Cup hip lawsuits that were consolidated and stayed in the multidistrict litigation, or MDL, are now starting to move forward, as Zimmer has been ordered to answer the complaints in cases where mediation has occurred and no settlement has been reached.

Some Zimmer Durom Cup settlement agreements have been reached, and mediations are continuing in other claims. At least seven lawsuits were designated this month as “Non-Settling Cases”, which will allow discovery to begin.

In June 2010, all product lawsuits regarding Zimmer Durom Cup hip replacements were consolidated and centralized as part of an MDL in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

In a recent court order, Judge Arleo lifted the stay with respect to the non-settling Zimmer Durom Cup lawsuits, allowing the parties to begin the exchange of information needed to prepare the cases for trial. The parties have been permitted to proceed with depositions with respect to common issues and case-specific issues in the non-settling cases.

The Zimmer Durom Cup hip implant was first introduced in the United States in 2006, and almost immediately complaints emerged about a high number of hip replacement failures involving the Zimmer Durom Cup, where the component loosened and required revision surgery.

A temporary Zimmer Durom Cup recall was issued in July 2008, so that revisions could be made to the product’s warnings and instructions to ensure that doctors were properly trained on the surgical techniques needed to implant the artificial hip correctly. Read the FDA Zimmer Durom Cup recall packet.

Approximately 12,000 individuals had the Zimmer Durom Cup hip system implanted between 2006 and 2008. While Zimmer’s 2008 estimates suggested that failure rates as high as 5.7%, some claims have suggested that between 20% and 30% of people may experience problems with a Zimmer Durom Cup hip.

Continue reading " Zimmer Durom Cup Hip Lawsuit Update" »

Abbott Laboratories is being sued by children who were born with birth defects, after their pregnant mothers took the epilepsy drug Depakote.

The Depakote lawsuit was filed on May 3 in St. Clair County Circuit Court in Illinois by plaintiffs from across the country. The complaint alleges that Abbott Laboratories failed to fully research the side effects of the antiepileptic drug and failed to adequately warn about the risk of spina bifida and other birth defects from Depakote.

Depakote was approved in the United States in 1978 for treatment of certain forms of epilepsy. Depakote pregnancy side effects have been linked to an increased risk of severe birth defects when taken during the first trimester.

According to allegations, Abbott knew about the potential risk of Depakote birth defects on or before the date it began marketing the drug in the United States, and failed to adequately warn women or the medical community about the true nature and extent of the risk.

In 1995, a study reported an incidence rate of neural tube defects from Depakote, that was ten times greater than with other anti-epileptic drugs. Other research has found that more than one out of every ten infants exposed to Depakote during the first few weeks of pregnancy may develop major congenital abnormalities.

The families allege that Abbott attempted to minimize the risk of Depakote birth defects and disregarded the danger on the product labeling. The drug maker has also allegedly worked to expand the drug’s use through “off-label” promotions for depression, bi-polar disorder and treatment of migraines.

In 2006, the FDA added a “black box” warning about the potential risk of Depakote birth defects after a study found that 20% of pregnant mothers who gave birth while on Depakote had a child with malformations or a birth defect. Birth defects associated with Depakote include spina bifida, cleft palate, abnormal skull development, malformed limbs, holes in the heart and urinary tract problems.

In May 2010, medical researchers found that Depakote injuries to infants could occur after using the drug as early as the first trimester, which means that by the time many women discover they are pregnant, it could be too late to get off the drug and avoid birth defects for their unborn child.

Continue reading "Depakote Lawsuits Filed For Children with Spina Bifida and Other Neural Tube Birth Defects" »

The Food and Drug Administration has ordered all producers of “metal-on-metal” artificial hips to undertake studies, which have been linked to high early failure rates and severe health effects.

The producers of “metal-on-metal” hips will have to conduct studies of patients to determine whether the implants are shedding high levels of metallic debris.

The FDA on May 6 sent the request to J&J and 20 other device makers, including Biomet Inc., Stryker Corp. and Zimmer Holdings Inc., asking them to conduct postmarket surveillance of the hip replacements.

Metal-on-metal hips, in which the ball-and-socket components are made from metals like cobalt and chromium, accounted for about one-third of the 250,000 hip replacement procedures preformed annually in the United States.

In March, the British Orthopaedic Association, reported that one model of all-metal hip made by a unit of Johnson & Johnson was projected to fail in one-half of the patients who received it within six years after implant. The company no longer sells the ASR device.

The British medical group also estimated, based on hospital data, that the early failure rate for all-metal hips made by other manufacturers was higher than expected, ranging from 12 to 15 percent within five years after implant. Artificial hips are designed to last for 15 years or more.

According to Dr. Maisel, the F.D.A. official, it was up to each manufacturer to determine how to conduct its studies. Under the agency rule, producers have 30 days to file a proposed plan with the F.D.A. He also said companies would be expected to collect information from patients who received the devices, including taking blood samples to determine the levels of metallic ion in their systems.

The companies are also being asked to determined how frequently the devices are failing.

“This is the largest group of studies that we have asked for,” for an approved class of devices, said Dr. Maisel.

Along with the DePuy division of Johnson & Johnson, other major producers of hip implants include Zimmer, Stryker, Biomet and Wright Medical.

Continue reading "FDA Investigates Metal on Metal Hip Manufacturers" »

As a Zimmer NexGen LPS Lawsuit Attorney, I am providing this update.
Product liability lawsuits have been filed by individuals who experienced problems with Zimmer NexGen LPS knee replacements, alleging that they required revision surgery after the artificial replacement knee systems began to loosen or fail.

The Zimmer NexGen LPS knee lawsuits were filed by Angela Coleman, of Michigan, David R. Langevin, of Minnesota, and Barry Davis, of Kentucky. All three complaints involved knee replacements with Zimmer NexGen Legacy Posterior Stabilized (LPS) parts, which use a “high-flex” femoral component.

The Zimmer NexGen LPS “high-flex” components are designed to allow a greater degree of flexion than the standard femoral component. The plaintiffs allege that higher flexation places the knee replacement at a higher risk of loosening.

Plaintiffs indicate that the device maker created the impression that using the Zimmer NexGen knee was safe, despite knowledge of serious injuries associated with the components. According to allegations raised in the complaints, Zimmer understated the risk of problems with Zimmer NexGen LPS-Flex Gender Solutions.

According to a study published by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British Edition) in 2007, researchers found that 38% of individuals implanted with a Zimmer NexGen LPS-Flex total knee replacement reported loosening shortly after 2 years post implant, with more than half of those individuals requiring knee revision surgery due to pain.

A Zimmer NexGen LPS recall was issued in September 2010, involving certain high-flex femoral components that were found to have nonconforming and inconsistent geometry. Over the past year, a number of patients throughout the United States have filed a Zimmer NexGen knee replacement lawsuit alleging that they experienced similar problems as a result of design defects associated with various components.

In March 2010, concerns were raised when Dr. Richard A. Berger, presented data that suggested problems with the Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex knee resulted in the need for revision surgery in nearly 9% of cases examined and caused knee replacement loosening in more than a third of cases. Most of the complaints filed in recent months over the Zimmer knee replacements have been Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex lawsuits.

Continue reading "Zimmer NexGen LPS Lawsuit " »

According to a large European study published this week, Bisphosphonates, a class of drugs used to prevent and treat osteoporosis is associated with an unusual type of thigh fracture.

According to orthopedic surgeons, they were seeing an increase in cases where are severe fractures in which the thighbone snaps in two. Last October, the federal Food and Drug Administration announced a change in labeling on the drugs to reflect the risk of atypical fractures in patients taking bisphosphonates.

In the current study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers analyzed data from all 1.5 million women in Sweden who were age 55 or older in 2008. They obtained X-rays of 1,234 of the 1,271 women with fractures and found 59 who suffered the more unusual kind of fracture.

The women with atypical fractures were also compared with 263 controls with fractures in a similar location. The researchers found that 78% of the women with atypical fractures took bisphosphonates, compared with 10% of controls.

Bisphosphonates, which include brands such as Actonel, Zometa and Boniva, are used mainly by post-menopausal women as a way to prevent fractures that are associated with osteoporosis. Some 36.5 million prescriptions were dispensed for the drugs in 2010, and total U.S. sales were more than $4.2 billion.

Bisphosphonates examples include: Alendronate (Fosamax), Etidronate (Didronel), Ibandronate (Boniva), Risedronate (Actonel), Zoledronic acid (Reclast).

Per Aspenberg, a professor of orthopedic surgery at Linköping University in Sweden and a co-author of the study, said the findings indicated a patient's risk of fracture diminished by 70% after stopping the drugs for a year. Aspenberg noted that if a person has taken bisphosphonates for five years, they could stop taking the drug and its protective effect will last for at least another five years as the risk for atypical fractures decreases. Given this finding, Aspenberg thinks patients should take a drug holiday after five years.

Continue reading "Bisphosphonate Use and Atypical Femoral Fractures " »

Over the last few months our office has been inundated with phone calls from patients suffering from bone pains, hip dislocations, injuries and concerns over the DePuy ASR Hip Implant Recall that officially began in August of 2010. Texas hip replacement patients with the ASR implant devices in them have raised serious concerns about their blood cobalt levels and chromium levels and are rightly concerned about what the future holds for them.

Nobody looks forward to having a hip replacement, it is usually an option of last resort, especially with the long, slow recovery time and the pain and suffering that it is involved. Toxic cobalt levels have been linked to an inflammatory condition that is linked with necrosis of surrounding tissue and eventual bone loss in the hip joint.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently launched Web information pages to address the risks and side effects associated with metal-on-metal hip implants. A serious concern with metal hip implants is metallosis. Metallosis is the result of the body reacting to a metal implant. It occurs when the rubbing of metal-on-metal components releases cobalt and chromium ions into the bloodstream. The resulting local effect is inflammation and scarring around the implant. Other side effects associated with metal-on-metal hip implants include pain in the groin, hip or leg, swelling near the hip joint and a limp or change in walking ability.

The ASR Hip Resurfacing System and ASR XL Acetablular Systems were recalled after the devices were associated with higher failure rates than other models. A second, corrective surgery was needed in 12 to 13 percent of patients five years after the initial operation.

We currently have a client who was the recipient of bilateral DePuy ASR hips. Over the past few months she began to experience increasing pain in the hips joints. Simultaneously, it was noted she had elevated cobalt and chromium blood levels. Just last week, she had both DePuy hips removed and replaced in a lengthy operation.

I admire her courage to having both surgeries at the same time. She explained, that she had no choice, she was a care giver to an elderly mom and her husband and did not have the time to go through 2 separate hip surgeries, to deal with recovery and rehabilitation period, which could last several months. We spoke to her today, one week out of her surgery. She was recovering from the ordeal and was in good spirits.

Continue reading "DePuy ASR Hip Recall Metallosis Explanation" »

U.S. Medicare and Medicaid officials have found problems at Dallas County's general hospital after a newspaper investigation into a woman's botched 2008 knee replacement surgery. This hospital became famous world wide after the Kennedy assassination in the 1960's.

The U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services found that failures by Dallas's Parkland Memorial Hospital resulted, in some cases, in rape, amputation and death. Hospital officials have assured that they have resolved the problems cited in the report. The agency performed an inspection of the hospital after the Dallas Morning News reported on its investigation into the case of Jessie Mae Ned, whose knee replacement led to nearly follow-up surgeries, infections, amputation of her left leg and $1 million in Medicaid billings.

The inspection report by the federal agency noted that Parkland had no formal policy in 2008 for faculty supervision of doctors in the residency program of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas. Those residents provide most of the medical care at Parkland, which is a teaching hospital.

In Ned's case, the primary surgeon during her first operation, the knee replacement, had been out of medical school for almost a year. The young resident and a medical school student oversaw Ned's care for the first 72 hours after her surgery but overlooked a rare surgical injury to a leg artery that led to her devastating postoperative complications. The records show a UT Southwestern faculty surgeon was present during the surgery, but show no sign of his involvement in the 72 hours of postoperative care.

The January federal inspector's report showed that aside from failing to "ensure that the medical staff is accountable" for quality of care, "medical records were not complete." Also, Parkland "failed to identify a medical error" until after the newspaper's investigation.

Parkland is providing Ned with physical therapy and helping her learn to use the prosthetic leg she received in February. She has received no compensation from the hospital or the medical school for her lost limb.

Continue reading "Dallas Parkland Hospital Medical Malpractice" »

As a Dallas Antidepressant SSRI Birth Defects & Cranial Malformation Attorney, I am writing about the current state of SSRI induced birth defect lawsuits.

Selective seratonin reuptake inhibitor drugs are known as SSRI antidepressants.
Serious side effects are linked to the following antidepressants when taken while pregnant:

* Prozac®, * Xanax®, * Wellbutrin®, * Paxil®

Children born with heart birth defects, lung birth defects and other congenital birth defects have been linked to the possible use of a group of antidepressant drugs classified as Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors (SSRI) by women during pregnancy. In a medical study, infants exposed to SSRI antidepressants during the first trimester of pregnancy had a 60% higher probability of developing congenital heart defects compared to newborns whose mothers did not take SSRI antidepressants.

According to the FDA, healthcare professionals are advised to carefully weigh the potential risks and benefits of using SSRI therapy in women during pregnancy and to discuss these findings as well as treatment alternatives with their patients.

Additional research recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that use of anti-depressant medications during the latter half of pregnancy increases the risk the newborn will develop a serious respiratory disorder known as Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension (PPHN). When a newborn suffers from Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension (PPHN), the pulmonary arteries (blood vessels in the lungs) fail to fully open, and the newborn is unable to oxygenate his/her blood. Without an adequate supply of oxygen-rich blood, the infant can suffer serious complications.

Data from this study indicate that the use of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) such as Prozac®, Zoloft® and Paxil® during the second half of pregnancy may increase the risk of Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension (PPHN) by as much as six times the normal risk.

The anti-depressant drugs – known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) include the following:

* Paxil® (paroxetine), * Zoloft® (sertraline), * Wellbutrin® (bupropion), * Celexa® (citalopram), * Cipralex® (escitalopram), * Luvox® (fluvoxamine), * Remeron® (mirtazapine), * Effexor® (venlafaxine), * Prozac® (fluoxetine)

Continue reading "Antidepressant SSRI Birth Defects & Cranial Malformations " »

As a Dallas Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous knee replacement system and lawsuit attorney, I am providing this Zimmer update.

Some Zimmer NexGen knee replacement systems have been linked to reports of pain, loosening of the implant and failure of the replacement knee leading to revision surgery. These cases are being reviewed by Zimmer NexGen knee lawyers, who are evaluating the damages for individuals who have experienced problems after a Zimmer knee replacement.

Several different components used as part of Zimmer NexGen knee replacement systems have been associated with a potential increased risk of problems, which may result in pain, limited range of motion, loosening of components or the need for additional revision surgery. In March 2010, data was presented by a group of knee surgeons that indicates nearly 9% of patients who received the Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous Femoral component required revision knee surgery within two years and 36% showed signs of the replacement knee loosening.

At a conference of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons in March 2010, several prominent knee surgeons presented data on the outcomes of 108 knee replacement patients who received the Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous Femoral component at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago.

After only two years, the researchers reported:

* 9 patients required knee revision surgery due to loosening and pain
* 39 patients showed evidence of radiographic loosening

It is suspected that the higher-than-expected failure rate is linked to design problems with Zimmer NexGen replacement knees, as the orthopedic surgeons concluded that they were not caused by surgical errors, problems with the techinque or the type of patient who received the knee implant.

More than 150,000 Zimmer NexGen CR and Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous Femoral implants have been sold since 2003, and some doctors have reported experiencing a substantially higher-than-expected failure of the replacement knee within a few years of surgery.

The Zimmer replacement knee is a “high-flex” component, which attaches to the bottom of the thigh bone. In most knee replacement systems, a type of surgical cement is used to hold the implant in place. But, the Zimmer NextGen knee does not use a cement and this may be a design defect which increases the risk of a knee replacement loosening and needing additional surgery to revise the implant.

As a result of recalled Zimmer knee replacements and potential problems with the design for certain NexGen components, thousands of individuals may have been exposed to an increase risk of early failure. A number of individuals throughout the United States are pursuing compensation through a Zimmer NexGen knee replacement lawsuit as a result of the manufacturer’s failure to adequately research the artificial knee system or warn about the risk of Zimmer knee problems.

Continue reading " Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex Porous Knee Litigation" »

Botox-maker Allergan Inc. was ordered by a federal court jury to pay $212 million to a Virginia man who alleged that use of the drug left him severely disabled.

The verdict awarded Douglas Ray, 67, $12M in compensatory damages and $200M in punitive damages. Ray was injected with the drug in 2007 to treat hand tremors. Ray suffered brain damage and now requires round-the-clock care. The suit, filed a VA federal court alleged that Allergan failed to adequately warn about the potential risks of Botox for off-label use.

Even if the decision by the jury is upheld, Allergan might have to pay only a small fraction of the penalty.Allergan said that Virginia state law caps punitive damages at $350,000. In September, Allergan agreed to pay the federal government $600 million to settle civil and criminal allegations that it illegally marketed and sold the drug through 2005 for unapproved uses, such as treating headaches.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from DANGEROUS DRUG SIDE EFFECT, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

As a Texas Accutane Inflammatory Bowel Disease side effect attorney I am providing this Accutane lawsuit update regarding Accutane and the generic versions of the drug.

The Judge overseeing the New Jersey State MDL for Accutane has proposed that brand name Accutane litigation against Hoffman-LaRoche be combined with lawsuits against the manufacturers of the generic version of the drug, isotretinoin.

If granted, the additional defendants in the consolidated Accutane lawsuits would include the following manufacturers. Ranbaxy Laboratories manufactured an Accutane version called Sotret which has been withdrawn. Barr Pharmaceutical manufactured Claravis, which contains the same active agent as Accutane (isotretinoin). Claravis continues to be manufactured with similar Accutane side effects and warnings. Mylan, Inc.is a generic pharmaceutical company and distributes Amnesteem, a form of isotretinoin, which presently remains in stores.

Genpharm, ULC was the first manufacturer authorized by the FDA to produce generic versions of Accutane and manufactured Amnesteem. The manufacturing and packaging activities were delegated to Cardinal Health 409 and sold to Mylan Laboratories, who distributed it around the world. Along with Cardinal Health 409 and Mylan Inc., Genpharm could be among the generic drugmaker defendants in the consolidated Accutane lawsuits.

Judge Higbee who is overseeing the centralized New Jersey Accutane lawsuits, implemented an April 15 deadline by which parties could comment or object to the addition of the generic drug makers to the centralized Accutane litigation. No final decision has yet been announced.

Accutane is a acne medication manufactured by Hoffman LaRoche and the subject of an Accutane recall in 2009. According to scientists, Accutane has serious long term side effects including Crohn's Disease, Ulcerative Colitis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD).

If you took Accutane to treat acne and suffer from IBD, our Accutane attorneys may be able to recover you and your family compensation by filing an Accutane Crohns lawsuit or Accutane Ulcerative Colitis lawsuit against the manufacturer of the acne medication.

Continue reading " Accutane Inflammatory Bowel Disease Side Effects " »

As a Texas Plavix Side Effect attorney, I am providing this update regarding the current status of Plavix injury lawsuits and a request for consolidation in New Jersey State Courts.

Bristol Myers Squibb Co. and Sanofi-Aventis pharmaceutical companies are calling for centralization of all Plavix lawsuits filed in New Jersey state court, pointing to a growing number of complaints filed by users who allege that the drug makers fraudulently promoted their popular blood thinner and failed to adequately warn about the risk of potentially life-threatening side effects of Plavix.

Plavix (clopidogrel) is a antiplatelet agent that prevents blood platelets from sticking together to form clots. It is prescribed to prevent heart attacks, strokes and blood clotting (thrombosis) when drug coated stents are used in patients with coronary arteriosclerosis.

More than 40 people have filed a Plavix lawsuit in courts throughout the United States, including at least five in Atlantic County, New Jersey. Many cases are likely to be filed in New Jersey state court, where Sanofi-Aventis is headquartered and Bristol Myers Squibb has five facilities.

All of the complaints filed so far allege that the makers of Plavix promoted the expensive medication as a safer alternative to aspirin, although it may actually provide no benefit over taking aspirin. Plaintiffs allege that they suffered injuries as a result of their unnecessary use of Plavix, such as gastrointestinal bleeding, heart attacks, strokes and a blood disorder known as TTP, or thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpora.

Plaintiffs say that the two companies repeatedly overstated the safety and effectiveness of Plavix, and point out that the companies were repeatedly cited by the FDA for illegal, off-label promotions and for ads and campaigns that touted its benefits over aspirin.

The two companies say that the lawsuits and their claims are numerous and similar enough to warrant mass tort designation in New Jersey, and have asked that the caseload be transferred to Bergen County, due to its current low mass tort caseload.

A mass tort designation would centralize all cases filed in New Jersey state court before one judge for pretrial proceedings in order to avoid duplicate discovery and conflicting rulings. The claims would remain individual lawsuits for purposes of determining damages and each claim would be judged independently at trial.

The commonly used combination of Plavix and aspirin may expose patients to a higher risk of bleeding than previously believed, according to the findings of a new study. Researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have released the results of a study on the side effects of Plavix and aspirin when combined to help fight blood clots (DAT Dual Antiplatlet Therapy).

The study was published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, and determines that there is a clinically significant risk of hemorrhaging when the drugs are used together that doctors and patients need to recognize and anticipate.

CDC researchers compared the rate of incidents from acute hemorrhaging from DAT to those related to another antiplatelet drug called Warfarin. They found an estimated 7,654 emergency department visits every year for hemorrhage-related adverse events from DAT, compared to 60,575 emergency department visits from Warfarin bleeding incidents. Once the researchers adjusted for the rate of prescriptions they found that the rate of emergency department visits due to acute hemorrhages from Plavix and aspirin combined was 1.2 per 1,000 outpatient prescription visits, compared to 2.5 per 1,000 for Warfarin.

Continue reading "Plavix Side Effect Lawsuits" »

As a DePuy ASR Replacement and Recall attorney I am providing this guide and update.
Over 90,000 US citizens are recipients of the recalled DePuy ASR DePuy hip implant. We think only a fraction of individuals with an ASR DePuy hip implant have been identified, because they do not want to go through the tough surgical ordeal again. Our goal is that we want to get all recipients of the recalled ASR DePuy hip implant identified, so that they get meaningful legal and medical help.

The ASR DePuy implants were widely used throughout the United States from 2005, until 2010. We are recommending every recipient, or family member of a recalled ASR DePuy hip implant to call us, if they are suffering pain, problems walking, swelling of the hip, or lack of flexibility. It has already been well documented that there is an extremely high failure rate for the ASR DePuy hip implants.

Women are reporting more problems, and a higher failure rate, with the DePuy ASR XL Acetabular hip replacement system. Women are also more likely to develop some of the serious side effects of the defectively designed implant, including metallosis.

Metallosis is a build-up of cobalt and chromium ions in the soft tissue of the body, particularly around the joints. Metallosis has been noted in people with all kinds of metal-on-metal joint implants and replacement systems. The engineering of the implant is causing far more friction, which leads to metallic debris being released into the tissue surrounding the implant.

The design of the ASR XL Acetabular system was developed to provide a greater range of motion. The DePuy engineers removed the plastic liner from the inside of the hip implant and made the acetabular cup shallow so that patients could move their legs in a wider arc.

The femoral head moves constantly back and forth as the hip implant's owner moves normally, and that puts stress on the acetabular cup. In an implant with a deeper acetabular cup than the DePuy ASR hip implant, there is more material to accommodate the strain of motion. The force is distributed over a bigger surface, which means that the implant overall can hold up to that strain better.

The already-shallow hip implant is made smaller overall to accommodate a woman's smaller frame. Women have naturally wider hips and larger hip sockets than men do, which means that the shallow acetabular cup becomes in effect even shallower.

And the smaller the surface area of the implant, the more likely the material will break down rapidly releasing metal ions into the body. Those metal ions accumulate in the soft tissues surrounding the hip joint, causing metallosis.

Women also more likely to see the problems that develop as a result of metallosis, including metal hypersensitivity, heavy metal poisoning (which includes chromium poisoning and cobalt poisoning) and tissue and bone deterioration.

Continue reading "DePuy ASR Hip Recall Guide and Metallosis Risk" »

As a Crestor Liver Failure, Heart Failure Side Effect Attorney, I am writing this article to warn folks of the dangers associated with Crestor.

AstraZeneca, the global pharmaceutical giant and manufacturer – marketer of the popular cholesterol drug Crestor (Rosuvastatin), is being faced with the possibility of very serious and life threatening sides effects associated its cholesterol drug. Crestor (Rosuvastatin) is currently a very popular cholesterol lowering “statin” drug. Through independent medical research studies, Crestor, is shown to have significantly higher potential risks for certain serious side effects. According to documentation, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) appears to have not been aware of these risks when it approved Crestor for sale in the US in 2003.

Statins were initially approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for reducing high cholesterol levels in order to prevent repeated heart attacks and strokes in at-risk patients. When used for that purpose, the drugs drive down the risk of another heart attack or stroke by lowering levels of LDL (or “bad”) cholesterol.

Heart Attack and Stroke - Having the most potent statin on the market is problematic because, though statins reduce the risk of heart attack or stroke by lowering the levels of fatty deposits circulating in the bloodstream, research suggests that statins dampen the inflammatory processes. This can lead deposits of plaque to break away from blood vessel walls and cause sudden blockages of arteries leading to the heart or brain, and therefore heart attacks and strokes.

One of the major side effects of Crestor (Rosuvastatin) is a life threatening disorder known as Rhabdomyolysis. Rhabdomyolysis – This is a degenerative muscle disease that has been found in patients taking Crestor. It is a considerable depletion of muscle tissue throughout the body. As the muscles atrophy, the patient experiences weight loss, loss in body mass and serious weakness. This Crestor side effect also affects the most important muscle in the body, the heart. In a research study conducted by the independent watchdog group, Public Citizen, prescription data for Crestor was compared to that of other statin drugs. This research study showed that Crestor caused rhabdomyolysis almost 22 times more than its lowest dose competitor and 3 times more than its highest dose competitor. These are significant results.

The reason for the study’s outcome is that the higher the dose of the active ingredient, Rosuvastatin, the higher the risk of rhabdomyolysis. AstraZeneca, promotes Crestor as being the most powerful statin on the market. This may be true, but at what cost to a patient’s health? Recent studies have shown that only 10 mg of Crestor (Rosuvastatin) has a significantly positive effect, but these positive benefits plateau and the negative side effects of rhabdomyolysis, heart failure, heart attack, stroke, liver failure, kidney failure, and potentially diabetes increase significantly at the higher prescribed and advertised dosages.

Continue reading "Crestor Liver Failure And Heart Failure Side Effects " »

As a YAZ, Yasmin, and Ocella Side Effect and Injury attorney, I want to bring to the attention of my blog readers, the latest medical information regarding these 4th generation oral contraceptive pills. According to a pair of studies published this weekend in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), the most popular birth control pills used by teenagers, Yasmin and YAZ doubles the risk of blood clots compared to a older generation birth control pill. Two new studies add to the growing evidence that birth control pills containing a newer type of progestin may put some women at higher risk for blood clots.

The medical report and analyses is a major warning for the heavily-marketed Yasmin and YAZ, which are popular with young adults and women with a history of menstrual disorders.

In the first study, researchers from the Boston University School of Medicine examined women ages 15 to 44 who started taking Yasmin and YAZ, which contain a contraceptive called drospirenone, instead of the much older drug levonorgestrel, which is sold under a variety of brand names. Accodrding to researchers those women who used Yasmin and YAZ were twice as likely to hospitalized with their first deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolisms, known as venous thromboembolism. Thromboembolism is the medical term for a blood clot in the veins, often in the legs, that gets dislodged and can cause fatal clogging in the lung arteries.

"These findings support more recent studies that suggest that drospirenone oral contraceptives are not as safe," wrote Susan Jick and Rohini Hernandez in the BMJ. Jick and Hernandez recommended that "in the absence of other consideration, [Yasmin and YAZ] should not be the first choice in oral contraception."

A second study published in the BMJ only examined UK patients and found an even higher risk; three times the chance of blood clots compared to the older drug.

German pharmaceutical giant Bayer, which manufactures Yasmin and YAZ, in a statement, said that the side effects were "an uncommon event" and noted that pregnancy would increase the deadly risks even more. Pregnancy actually puts women at higher risk for blood clots than birth control pills, a blood clot occurs in one pregnant woman for every 1,000 to 1,500 pregnant women, while one in 3,000 women who take birth control pills experience some form of blood clot, according to the National Blood Clot Alliance. This is a flawed argument, Bayer should compare non pill users wiith women taking YAZ, Yasmin.

In March 2010, Bayer put additional risk warnings on the European product label for the Yasmin pill but said at the time that the overall benefit-risk profile remained unchanged.Bayer said in its 2010 annual report that there were about 6,850 lawsuits pending in the United States with plaintiffs claiming they had suffered injuries from Bayer's Yasmin and Yaz pills or generic copies sold by Teva's Barr Laboratories.

So what does it all mean? The increased risk suggested by these studies is about two to three times those from older pills, and that any woman taking the newer medicines will get a blood clot is higher than other types of birth control. And the whole idea of medication is that the cure is less risky than the disease; here the data coupled with other research, unequivocally demonstrates that there are safer oral contraceptives than YAZ and Yasmin and that the company is putting profits over people safety. Remember physicians, the Hippocratic Oath, "first do no harm."

Read my earlier blog, questioning whether YAZ, Yasmin would be recalled.

Continue reading "YAZ, Yazmin, Ocella Side Effects And Injury " »

As a Dallas Car Accident Attorney I am providing this update regarding the most dangerous time for car accidents in Dallas.

Minimizing risk is not about when you are on the road, but how careful you are while on the road. The most dangerous month, is August, and Saturday the most dangerous day, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Auto accidents kill more than 40,000 people in the U.S. each year; they are the No. 1 cause of death for people between the ages of 1 and 34.

Time of Day Does Matter According to the the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, IIHS, an average 6.6 people are killed between the hours of 5 p.m. and 6 p.m., and another 6.6 between the hours of 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. Those rates are the overall highest of any time during the day. In 2007, 14,055 people were killed in the 5 p.m. hour. But the hours between midnight and 4 a.m. have the highest number of fatalities when calculated as a percentage of the amount of people on the road, according to AAA. During that time, statistically speaking, 5.87 per 100 million people on the road will be killed.

Time of day plays an important role in evaluating fatal crashes, because other dangerous factors are increased at night. Drunk driving, speeding and driving without a safety belt all increase during the night hours and each factor contributes directly to increased fatality rates.

Speeding is a factor in 30% of all fatal crashes, according to the NHTSA. 18% of fatal crashes during the day are alcohol-related, while 54% of crashes at night are alcohol-related. Two out of three the people killed at night are not wearing a seat belt.

Nationwide, 49% of fatal crashes happen at night, with a fatality rate per mile of travel about three times as high as daytime hours. During the day, the percentage of unrestrained fatalities tends to be under half.

The fewest deaths by crash in 2007, the latest year with complete data, happened early in the morning, between 4 a.m. and 5 a.m. Those hours see significantly less traffic--only 9% of the average amount during peak hours.

Mid-week days like Tuesday and Wednesday also pose the lowest number of fatalities, both averaging fewer drivers and 96 and 100 deaths per day, respectively. So the answer is if you want to drive without getting killed, limit your driving to Tuesday and Wednesday morning, between 4 and 5 am. Hardly a practical solution to this epidemic.

Weekends--when the greatest number of people are on the road--predictably see the highest numbers of crash victims, with a combined average of 143 deaths for Saturday and Sunday, according to the IIHS.

Read more here.

Continue reading "Car Accident Guru Reveals The Most Dangerous Time for Accidents" »

I have handled a few dog bite cases in my time. Nothing galls me more, especially when a child gets mauled by a so called pet dog. As a Dallas Dog Bite and Dallas Dog Attack Attorney, I have heard many instances where a dangerous dog such as a pit bull attacked a child aged around two years old or other infants. The child did not stand a chance.

Currently I am handling a case where a 2 year child was attacked and mauled by a small stray chihuahua dog who had been taken in 2 weeks earlier. My 2 year old client was bitten on the face and sustained injuries to her lip...the injuries could have been a lot worse.

I will keep you readers appraised of the development in my case.

Read more about dog bite rights here.

Continue reading "Dog Bites And Dog Attacks " »

As a Depuy ASR XL and ASR resurfacing hip recall attorney, I am trying to provide answers for my clients and potentials victims of the DePuy debacle.

If you are a victim of an ASR XL Acetabular System or an ASR Hip Resurfacing System, both of which were recalled by DePuy/Johnson & Johnson, you should expect financial compensation. In determining the amount of compensation you may be entitled to, you need to consider the following: the types of damages that available to people injured by defective products, and the recent results of a Sulzer hip implant lawsuit.

DePuy has promised, that it “…intends to cover reasonable and customary costs of treatment if you need services associated with the recall of ASR, including revision surgery if it is necessary.” DePuy names specific out-of-pocket expenses that it considers “reasonable,” including lost work time and travel expenses.

DePuy not provided any details on how, it intends to compensate you for the pain and suffering your DePuy hip replacement may have caused. To protect your legal rights, you should not call DePuy or sign any document the company provides without first speaking with a DePuy hip replacement attorney.

In a product liability case, a victim can recover economic damages (medical bills and lost wages) and non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering).

In 2000, Sulzer Orthopedics, Inc. recalled approximately 30,000 of its Inter-Op Acetabular Shell units. Because of a defective product, many recipients of this hip device required revision surgery, like with the DePuy hip recall. In 2002, Sulzer agreed to settle its class action and the company paid $1 billion to settle all the lawsuits. Those patients who required revision surgery were paid more than $200,000 each, and those who received faulty implants but did not undergo revision surgery received roughly $1,000 each. So time will tell regarding what DePuy will do and if history is going to be a guide.

We at this time do not know how the hundreds of DePuy ASR lawsuits will end up either through settlement or litigation. The fact is that taking legal action may be your only chance to recover financial compensation from DePuy. One thing is for certain, in mass tort cases, the companies usually settle, because it makes economic sense to do so and not because of any moral imperative or ethical considerations. It finally boils down to dollars and cents, like everything in life.

I have a client who is to undergo a double DePuy extraction next week, for cobaltism, metalosis and severe pain in both hips. She takes care of an elderly mother and her husband has chronic medical problems. She has been the main care giver to her family. Now with a double hip replacement, she will be the one who will require significant care and rehabilitation and she will need to make sure her family is taken cared of during her recovery, which could take as long as 6 months. The question she asks, will DePuy take care of her family diuring her rehabilitation? We have to wait and see.

Continue reading "Can I Get Compensation For a DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuit?" »

As a Yaz, Yasmin, Ocella Gallbladder disease attorney, I am providing information on this latest Canadian study, which found an increase of gallbladder disease in women who took Drospirenone containing birth control pills.

Women who take Yaz and Yasmin birth control pills, which contain drospirenone, are at greater risk of gallbladder damage than women on other oral contraceptives, according to a new Canadian study. The research study involved 2.7 million women who took birth control pills for at least six months between 1997 and 2009. A total of 27,087 women in the study group underwent surgery to have their gallbladders removed. The study found that while all birth control pills put women at some risk for losing their gallbladders, women who use pills with drospirenone were at greater risk.

Drospirenone is a synthetic progestin hormone which has diuretic properties. It is used in combination with another estrogen hormone, ethinyl estradiol, in Bayer’s Yaz and Yasmin. Bayer recently released Beyaz and Safyral, two more birth control pills identical to Yaz and Yasmin, with added folate.

Bayer is fighting allegations that its popular birth control pills can put women’s lives at risk, with more than 3,000 lawsuits filed against the company from women who say they were harmed by the pills.

The new study was funded by the Fonds de la recherché en sante du Quebec, a government-financed research agency, and is in the current issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

Continue reading "Does Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Cause GallBladder Disease?" »

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has dismissed an Agent Orange petition in a case originally brought by Vietnam veterans more than 30 years ago. This is a sad and tragic verdict for our men who gallantly fought for this country and who have been severely impacted by the diseases brought on by toxic exposure.

After their disability claims were denied, five veterans in 1979 filed a challenge to a 1978 Veterans' Administration publication suggesting that only limited claims could be brought based on chemical exposure to Agent Orange and other defoliants during the Vietnam War.

The Federal Circuit, after recounting the labyrinthine history of the case, ruled that it lacked jurisdiction because there was no court avenue for procedural challenges to Department of Veterans Affairs regulations until the 1988 Veterans' Judicial Review Act.

Agent Orange is the code name for one of the herbicides and defoliants used by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971.

A 50:50 mixture of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, it was manufactured for the U.S. Department of Defense primarily by Monsanto Corporation and Dow Chemical. The 2,4,5-T used to produce Agent Orange was later discovered to be contaminated with 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin, an extremely toxic dioxin compound. It was given its name from the color of the orange-striped 55 US gallon (200 L) barrels in which it was shipped.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

As a Texas Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Dangerous Drug Side Effect Attorney, I am providing this litigation update for current clients and potential new victims.

Many women who have suffered by side effects of Yaz and Yasmin birth control are expected to call for Bayer to issue a Yaz and Yasmin recall at an upcoming shareholder’s meeting. They claim that the popular birth control pills may be responsible for the death of more than 190 women in the United States. Bayer will hold its annual shareholder meeting on April 29 in Cologne, Germany.

Lawsuits against Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals continue to be filed on behalf of women who claim to have suffered serious injuries as a result of Yaz or Yasmin (generic: Ocella) birth control pills. Consumer groups and some members of the medical community are questioning Yaz side effects and the increased risk for blood clots and strokes. Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella are considered “fourth generation” combination birth control pills. They contain a newer type of synthetic progestin called drospirenone. This contraceptive is one of the most popular contraceptives and has been heavily marketed to women throughout the United States promoting its use in treating premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD).

In the latest study of teenage girls and birth-control habits suggests the oral contraceptive Yaz is more popular with teenage girls and young adults than ever before. In the study, Yaz was named “by far” the most popular oral contraceptive for US women aged 13-18. The study was based on the behaviors of more than 3 million American women between 2002 and 2009.

The FDA has at least 190 reports of Yaz and Yasmin deaths in the United States that were linked to the use of the highly successful birth control pills. That number is likely to be a fraction of the actual number of deaths from Yasmin and Yaz, as it is acknowledged that only about 1% to 10% of all adverse events associated with the use of medications are ever reported.

Bayer’s line of drosperinone-based oral contraceptives, Yaz and Yasmin, have been found to carry an 80% increased risk of thrombosis events than older birth control pills by some studies. Thousands of women throughout the United States have filed a Yaz lawsuit or Yasmin lawsuit against Bayer, alleging that the drug maker failed to adequately research the risks associated with the medication or warn women that they may be exposed to an increased risk of serious and potentially fatal side effects when using the birth control pills. Lawsuits also allege that Bayer engaged in deceptive and misleading advertisements that were directed to consumers and the medical community.

The Yaz and Yasmin lawyers at Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm represent women throughout the United States who are pursuing a lawsuit over an injury or death that may have been prevented if Bayer had recalled Yaz and Yasmin or provided adequate warnings. Potential Yaz and Yasmin recall lawsuits are being reviewed for women who have suffered an injury or death as a result of a:

* Stroke or Heart Attack
* Pulmonary Embolism
* Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)
* Gallbladder Disease

Continue reading "Will Yaz, Yasmin, and Ocella Be Recalled?" »

Every day, we are hearing a lot of bad news about the osteoporosis drug Fosamax. Made by Merck & Co., Fosamax has been a successful bone disease treatment on the market for over a decade. In January 2009, medical studies were released that hit the drug and its manufacturer hard. The first study links Fosamax to osteonecrosis, of the jaw, and the second, links Fosamax to esophageal cancer. Are these reports the Titantic that is about to hit the Fosamax iceberg?

Fosamax works by attacking cells in the body responsible for bone breakdown, which can help patients dealing with osteoporosis. At the same time, if the drug is too efficient, it can cause the bone to grow too dense, which takes up inner bone space where bone marrow is found. Bone marrow is responsible for bone healing and growth, so without enough marrow, the bone will die. If you do break a bone that has been subjected to Fosamax and similar drugs it won't heal.

Medical studies linking the drug to esophageal cancer report that many of those affected had used the drug for over two years. One thing is certain - we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Fosamax injuries. Currently there are over 1,000 Fosamax lawsuits in litigation, and as more studies are done to confirm the allegations against the drug, we may see even more patients coming forward.

Fosamax, when used over time, can cause dead jaw, and Fosamax femur fractures have been a major problem in some cases. When you have osteoporosis, your bones become extremely fragile, and fractures can happen even with just a bump or gentle fall. Most often, fractures happen in the hips, spine, and wrists. If you break your hip, you typically need major surgery to fix it, and even then, you may have problems walking for the rest of your life. With spinal fractures, the same is true, and patients generally have back pain and may have to deal with deformities.

Fosamax and the following drugs Actonel (risedronate sodium) tablets, Actonel with Calcium (risedronate sodium with calcium carbonate tablets), Atelvia (risedronate sodium) delayed-release tablets, Boniva (ibandronate sodium) tablets, Fosamax (alendronate sodium) tablets and oral solution, Fosamax Plus D (alendronate sodium/cholecalciferol) Tablets, Reclast (zoledronic acid) Injections are now required to have clear warning labels regarding low-energy, or low trauma fractures of the femoral shaft (leg bone).

As a Fosamax osteoporosis attorney, I suggest discussing this drug with any elderly female friends and relatives as they may be unaware of the current crisis and the FDA's warnings.

Continue reading "Texas Titanic About to Hit The Fosamax Iceberg?" »

As a Fosamax Femur Fracture attorney, I am providing this update regarding Fosamax Femur Fractures.

There are now many Fosamax femur fracture lawsuits filed by folks who have suffered a femur fracture or other bone fracture after taking the osteoporosis drug.The FDA added warnings about the risk of bone fractures from Fosamax and other bisphosphonate medications in October 2010, requiring drug makers to warn consumers that they should seek immediate medical attention if they experience new groin pain or thigh pain while taking the drug, which can occur weeks or months before a complete fracture of the femur on Fosamax occurs.

The Fosamax bone fracture lawsuits allege that Merck failed to adequately research their medication or provide adequate warnings before they suffered a femur fracture or bone break. Merck has asked the U.S. Judicial Panel to centralize and consolidate the Fosamax bone fracture litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, where most of the cases are currently pending and where the drug maker has its headquarters.

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) included publication of a major case control study relating to bisphosphonates (particularly Fosamax) and subtrochanteric femur fractures. The researchers who authored the study concluded that patients on long-term bisphosphonates for osteoporosis therapy had a 274% higher chance of subtrochanteric femur fractures than similar matched patients. (OR 2.74.) The authors concluded “these findings provide strong evidence that prolonged bisphosphonate therapy is associated with an increased risk of subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fracture.”

Bone fracture lawsuits were excluded from the prior Fosamax MDL, which was established in August 2006 for claims filed by individuals who suffered decay of the jaw bone from Fosamax.

A popular osteoporosis drug, Fosamax® and its generic form Alendronate®, is implicated to cause spontaneous fractures.Fosamax® is a drug used to strengthen bones, for many women it has worked successfully but according to medical reports, women who have taken the drug for five years are at risk of suffering spontaneous fractures.

Fosamax and the following drugs Actonel (risedronate sodium) tablets, Actonel with Calcium (risedronate sodium with calcium carbonate tablets), Atelvia (risedronate sodium) delayed-release tablets, Boniva (ibandronate sodium) tablets, Fosamax (alendronate sodium) tablets and oral solution, Fosamax Plus D (alendronate sodium/cholecalciferol) Tablets, Reclast (zoledronic acid) Injections are now required to have clear warning labels regarding low-energy, or low trauma fractures of the femoral shaft (leg bone).

As a Fosamax medication attorney, I suggest discussing this drug with any elderly female friends and relatives as they may be unaware of the current crisis and the FDA's warnings.

Doctors are seeing many femurs fractured in patients who have been on the drug. If you have taken Fosamax® or its generic form Alendronate® and believe to have been injured as a result, please fill out the form below to contact a Case Manager.

Continue reading "Fosamax Femur Fracture Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Propecia Side Effect Litigation Attorney, I want to pose the following question-how many men do you think, would trade a head of hair for the significant possibility of permanent impotence and male breasts (gynecomastia). Did not think so.

Finasteride is a highly potent inhibitor of Type II 5-Alpha Reductase, an enzyme that converts testosterone, into dihydrotestosterone (DHT).

Propecia (1mg) was approved by the FDA in 1997 and is marketed as a treatment for male pattern hair loss (MPHL), as DHT has been implicated in the balding process. Proscar (5mg) was approved in 1992 by the FDA for treatment of Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH - enlargement of the prostate).

Both Propecia and Proscar share the same active ingredient (Finasteride) which can aid in stopping hair loss.

Clinical studies of Finasteride for male pattern hair loss, including the Propecia clinical trials for the FDA, indicate that a certain percentage of men may experience negative sexual side effects from Finasteride, including decreased libido or sex drive, erectile dysfunction, and decreased ejaculate volume while on the medication.

In addition, prescribing information warns against possible physical changes to the body, including breast tenderness or enlargement (gynecomastia); hypersensitivity (allergic) reactions including rash, pruritis (itching) and urticaria (hives); swelling of the lips and face; testicular pain; ejaculation disorder; impotence; and male breast cancer. The official warning label for the drug in the U.S. says that sexual side effects — such as erectile dysfunction — occurred in less than 2 percent of men and that these side effects went away in men who stopped taking it. In a lawsuit filed in New Jersey federal court in February by two men who took Propecia claims that in the U.K., Sweden and Italy the Propecia warning label says that sexual dysfunction may be permanent.

Some men have also reported various other psychiatric, neurological and neurocognitive side effects from Propecia, including depression, sexual anhedonia, sexual anesthesia, anxiety, bipolar mood disorder, suicidal ideation, cognitive dysfunction (memory loss or difficulty with intellectual processing), slurring of speech, social withdrawal, lethargy/fatigue and listlessness, and other amotivational states.

Many men who took Propecia or Proscar for MPHL have experienced mental, physical, and sexual side effects while on the medication, then discontinued Propecia, and then fully expected to return to normal in accordance with representations made in the official prescribing information. Men worried about losing their hair may be losing far more than that if they take the popular drug Propecia.

Two new studies were published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine in March 2011. Young men are being prescribed these drugs, as hair loss treatments that may negatively impact their sexual life, possibly for a prolonged time after stopping the medication, according to Dr. Irwin Goldstein, the journal's editor-in-chief.

A new research says 5 to 23 percent of the millions of men who take the drug may become impotent and have lowered sex drives because of the active ingredient finasteride. And the problem may linger years after they stop taking the drug.

Continue reading "Propecia Product Liability Lawsuit Filed" »

As a Dallas Car Accident DUI Attorney, I am reporting this tragic pedestrian monster car wrongful death accident.

The parents of a Granbury college student who was struck and killed by a monster truck outside a Dallas strip club, have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the driver of the truck and the club.

The lawsuit comes after Kasey McKenzie, 23, was killed while leaving with friends after a party at the Spearmint Rhino Gentlemen's Club shortly after 2 a.m. when Eric Crutchfield, pulled his custom 2003 Ford F-250 truck out of a parking space and ran over her with both front and rear tires.McKenzie died at the scene.

The lawsuit claims that the club was negligent when bartenders served Crutchfield past the legal limit of intoxication and allowed him to get in his vehicle and drive, even though it was apparent he was drunk, according to the parent's lawyer.

The lawsuit also claims that Crutchfield was driving with a suspended license and was so intoxicated at the time of McKenzie's death that he didn't know he had hit anyone.

Crutchfield's truck had a lift kit that limited his field of vision and was not in keeping with federal and state regulations.

The Dallas resident was charged with intoxication manslaughter after his blood alcohol level was shown to be 0.18, more than twice the legal limit at 0.08, according to Dallas police spokesman Kevin Janse.

Continue reading "Dallas Monster Car Accident Wrongful Death" »

Defective Drugs and Product liability attorneys have submitted a proposal for the selection of bellweather trials in the federal NuvaRing multidistrict litigation (MDL).

NuvaRing is a form of birth control that releases a combination of etonogestrel and ethinyl estradiol through a ring that is inserted into the vagina once a month.

All NuvaRing lawsuits filed in federal district courts throughout the United States have been consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. These complaints all involve women who suffered the following injuries; stroke, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or sudden death. The claims allege that the drug makers failed to research the birth control ring or warn about the potential increased risk of these serious problems.

The bellweather process is common in complex litigation involving a number of claims that raise similar allegations. By selecting a small group of cases for an early trial, the parties are able to get an idea how a jury is likely to respond to evidence and testimony. The outcome of these trials shapes the litigation and may lead to an agreement to settle NuvaRing birth control lawsuits by the drug maker.

To reduce the number of cases that must go through expert discovery, the parties have proposed that nine cases constitute the final trial pool. Expert discovery would then be limited to the nine cases in the final trial pool, which will occur over 2012.

As of the end of 2010, more than 730 victims had filed a NuvaRing lawsuit and the number of cases is expected to increase over the next year. The vast majority of the pending NuvaRing cases filed throughout the country are included in the MDL, but additional lawsuits are pending in New Jersey state court and other state courts throughout the United States.

Continue reading "NuvaRing Birth Control Lawsuits Moving Ahead" »

A lawsuit has been filed against Merck, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint alleges that the drug manufacturer warned European users that the drug Propecia may cause sexual problems in men, but did not provide American users the same warning.

According to the complaint, plaintiffs were prescribed Propecia to combat male pattern hair loss, and they suffered serious sexual dysfunction.

The lawsuit alleges that the warnings about the risk of sexual problems from Propecia differed significantly in Europe from the label warnings to users of Propecia in the U.S.

In Europe, Propecia labels stating that erectile dysfunction problems may persist after the patient discontinues use treatment with Propecia were added in 2008.

Propecia (finasteride) was approved in 1992 for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, and also is approved to treat male pattern baldness.

Last month researchers from the U.S. published a study in the Journal of Sexual Medicine that found side effects of Propecia were linked to sexual problems in men. Researchers indicated that the class of drugs known as 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors can cause loss of libido, depression erectile dysfunction, reduced semen production and growth of male breast tissue.

The lawsuit over Propecia charges Merck with negligence, failure to warn, strict product liability, and breach of warranty.

Continue reading "Propecia Use Can Lead to Permanent Sexual Dysfunction" »

As a Dallas Medical License Defense Attorney, I am providing this article regarding a Houston Pain Pill Mill Doctor being busted again. It looks like this guy and his cronies did not learn their lesson. This is a quick fire way to lose your medical and pharmacy licenses.

A physician and two pharmacists arrested in a Houston high-volume pill mill operation, had previously faced disciplinary probes for distributing controlled drugs, and all three had been allowed to continue to work despite those allegations, according to professional disciplinary records.

For two years Dr. Gerald Ratinov, the state's top prescriber of the pain killer drug hydrocodone, has been under investigation by the Texas Medical Board (TMB) for operating another Harris County pill mill. At that site, an unlicensed foreign medical graduate dispensed drugs and patients received pain pills without proper examinations in 2008.

During the TMB disciplinary action, Ratinov, a 76-year-old neurologist, opened the Astrodome Health Clinic in September 2010 — another site described as a pill mill, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. And at that clinic and two other sites, he supervised unlicensed foreign medical school graduates and others who illegally supplied pills.

Ratinov now faces felony charges for illegally operating three pill mills: the Astrodome Health Clinic, The Abundant Life and Weight Loss Center and the Hobby Medical Center.

20 people face charges resulting from this week's pill mill sting, which involved three clinics and four pharmacies. The DEA, the Department of Public Safety, the medical and pharmacy boards and other agencies participated.

Two pharmacists arrested this week already had been on probation with the state Board of Pharmacy for previous prescription problems, according to Pharmacy Board records.

Continue reading "Houston Texas Pain Pill Mill Doctor Busted Again" »

As a Fort Worth Car Accident and Truck Accident attorney, I am reporting this tragic accident that lead to a wrongful death of the truck driver, from a tanker gasoline explosion. My thoughts and prayers go out to the Raya family.

Fort Worth police have arrested and charged Louis Nieves, 23, with intoxication manslaughter after a fiery traffic accident early in the morning that killed the driver of a fuel tanker truck and shut down the freeway most of the day.

Nieves was the driver of a small red pickup truck. Police reported he was driving the wrong way on Interstate 30 when he slammed into the oncoming 18-wheeler near the Beach Street exit at 2:37 a.m.

The freeway was shut down and traffic was backed up through downtown Fort Worth after the deadly wrong-way crash. The tanker exploded after impact, killing its driver. The truck was so badly burned that the flames destroyed the tanker and damaged the surface of the freeway.

The red pickup showed significant front end damage, but did not catch on fire. Emergency crews rushed Nieves to a nearby hospital. He was treated at the hospital, released and booked into the Fort Worth jail. Officers said several people called 911 to report the wrong-way driver.

The other two lanes remain badly damaged and must undergo extensive repairs. TxDOT said the road must be resurfaced and, underneath, steel beams and the concrete support system that burned must also be replaced.

The tanker was so badly burned, there is no obvious way to determine who owns it or even to whom it was registered.

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission has opened an investigation into where a 23-year-old pickup driver was drinking before he was involved in a fiery crash.

Louis Nieves, 23, who was arrested after the wreck, told a reporter for WFAA/Channel 8 TV that he had drunk 10 beers before getting behind the wheel and leaving a bar on East Eighth Street near the Fort Worth Convention Center.

Family and friends identified the tanker driver as 45-year-old Alejandro Raya of Fort Worth.

The beverage commission is investigating but won't identify the business until the investigation is further along.

Nieves, who faces a charge of intoxication manslaughter, remained in the Mansfield Jail with bail set at $90,000, according to Fort Worth police.

Alejandro Raya left a wife and three children, ages 21, 14 and 12. Alejandro Raya moved to the United States from Mexico in the 1980s. Raya was working for Petro-Chemical Transport, based in Addison, according to a company spokeswoman. Gasoline fuel that spilled from the tanker ignited, melting steel beams and concrete in the I-30 bridge over Sycamore Creek.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Truck Explosion Accident Wrongful Death" »

Lung Cancer, Mesothelioma and Asbestos Exposure

This article is one in a series of articles that I am writing as a Dallas Mesothelioma Attorney to educate folks about the man made toxins in the environment. Mesothelioma is called a “signature” disease—which indicates that the person was exposed to the causative agent. If someone has mesothelioma, they were almost certainly exposed to asbestos.

Mesothelioma rates continue to climb and by some estimates is set to peak around 2012-2015. Asbestos has been placed in many buildings as a fire retardant and insulator and now because of the long latency period, many contractors, pipe fitters and plumbers are coming down with the disease, some including folks who had exposure as long as 30-40 years ago. What a national tragedy.

Lung cancer, is a multi-factorial disease—Environmental factors are important in lung cancer causation. Lung cancer is cancer that starts in the lungs.

There are two main types of lung cancer:
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of lung cancer.
Small cell lung cancer makes up about 20% of all lung cancer cases. If the lung cancer is made up of both types, it is called mixed small cell/large cell cancer.

If the cancer started somewhere else in the body and spread to the lungs, it is called metastatic cancer to the lung.

The most important environmental factor is smoking. Asbestos exposure is important risk for development of lung cancer. Exposure to asbestos increases your risk of developing cancer—by an average of five times the risk of a non-smoker who was not exposed to asbestos.

Smoking makes a person ten times more likely to develop lung cancer. But for someone who smokes and was also exposed to asbestos, the risk of developing lung cancer is 50 times higher.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has included construction workers (including plumbers, electricians, painters and other construction-related trades), demolition workers, shipyard workers, firefighters and automobile mechanics among those at risk for dangerous asbestos exposures.

See NCI Asbestos Fact Sheet.

Continue reading "Mesothelioma And Asbestos Update" »

As a Fosamax Femur Fracture attorney, I am providing this update regarding Merck's application for an MDL.

Merck has filed a petition for MDL (multidistrict litigation) to consolidate and centralize all federal Fosamax bone fracture lawsuits for handling during pretrial litigation.

More than 900 Fosamax lawsuits against Merck have already been consolidated as part of an MDL in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; those involved claims that Fosamax caused jaw injury, known as osteonecrosis. There are now Fosamax suits filed by folks who have suffered a femur fracture or other bone fracture after taking the osteoporosis drug.

On March 23, Merck asked the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to create a new MDL for this type of injuries caused by Fosamax, where plaintiffs claim that long-term use of Fosamax increases the risk of low-trauma or no-trauma fractures, involving the femur or thigh bone.

The FDA added warnings about the risk of bone fractures from Fosamax and other bisphosphonate medications in October 2010, requiring drug makers to warn consumers that they should seek immediate medical attention if they experience new groin pain or thigh pain while taking the drug, which can occur weeks or months before a complete fracture of the femur on Fosamax occurs.

More than 100 people have filed a Fosamax bone fracture lawsuit, alleging that Merck failed to adequately research their medication or provide adequate warnings before they suffered a femur fracture or bone break. The claims are contained in 36 complaints that have been filed in at least 8 different federal district courts throughout the United States.

Merck has asked the U.S. Judicial Panel to centralize and consolidate the Fosamax bone fracture litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, where most of the cases are currently pending and where the drug maker has its headquarters. In the alternative, Merck requested that the Panel transfer the cases to the U.S. District for the Western District of Louisiana.

Bone fracture lawsuits were excluded from the prior Fosamax MDL, which was established in August 2006 for claims filed by individuals who suffered decay of the jaw bone from Fosamax.

A popular osteoporosis drug, Fosamax® and its generic form Alendronate®, is implicated to cause spontaneous fractures.

Fosamax® is a drug used to strengthen bones, for many women it has worked successfully but according to medical reports, women who have taken the drug for five years are at risk of suffering spontaneous fractures.

Doctors are seeing many femurs fractured in patients who have been on the drug. If you have taken Fosamax® or its generic form Alendronate® and believe to have been injured as a result, please fill out the form below to contact a Case Manager.

Continue reading "Fosamax Femur Fracture MDL Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Personal Injury Wrongful Death Attorney I am outraged and saddened at this tragic Cleburne school bullying death case.

Now I known and have witnessed first hand bullying in school and in colleges. And as we can see bullying exerts a tremendous toll on the psychological and physical well being of our youth. For too long the teachers and the school personnel with whom we entrust our kids, have a "I don't care attitude." They have to do a better job.

In Texas most teachers and principals have a "don't give a damn attitude" because of sovereign immunity under the Texas Tort Claim Act.

Hopefully this attitude will be majorly adjusted once the school districts have to shell out large significant money damages and which hits them in their pocket book. Charging individuals, such as teachers, principals and district superintendents would be significant to school bullying cases because it might change behavior. This is unfortunately the only language negligent people understand. My condolences and prayers are with the Carmichael family, and I hope they are successful in their case.

A federal lawsuit filed in Dallas alleges the Joshua school district and several school officials of violating the civil rights of 13-year-old Jon Carmichael by ignoring repeated acts of bullying against him.

The suit was filed by Carmichael's parents and seeks damages and compensation for his estate and heirs.

The lawsuit alleges school employees failed to intervene when he was bullied in physical education class and when he was thrown into a dumpster. In another incident, students saw that his head was placed upside down in a toilet and "flushed several times."

"Just prior to his death, he was stripped nude, tied up and again placed into a trashcan," according to the lawsuit. "The event was videotaped, put on YouTube but was later taken down."

According to Martin Cirkiel of Round Rock, Carmichael's attorney, the school personnel knew about many of the bullying incidents, then ignored or covered up other ones they didn't see firsthand.

The lawsuit also accuses school staff members of telling a student who had a video of the assault to destroy it and says Carmichael's personal journal has been "knowingly destroyed, withheld or purposefully hidden by staff, as well."

Carmichael hanged himself in a barn near his family home in Cleburne. He was the second Johnson County teenager to kill himself in six months. In both cases, families attributed the deaths partially to bullying. In October 2009, Hunter Layland, a 15-year-old freshman at Cleburne High School, shot himself.

Joshua school policy requires principals or appointees to investigate reports of bullying within 10 days. But the lawsuit says those policies weren't followed as "school district personnel clearly had an actual practice and custom of looking the other way."

Continue reading "Texas Joshua School District Sued For Bullying Wrongful Death" »

As a Dallas Sex Abuse Personal Injury Attorney, I am glad to report this sex abuse case with a good outcome.

What is the world coming to, when you cannot even go to a local burger joint with your kids?

A settlement has been reached in a suit filed against a Florida McDonald's after an employee exposed himself to a young female customer inside the restaurant. A sex offender with an extensive criminal history — including repeated arrests on suspicion of exposing himself — was arrested after he was caught touching himself in front of a girl inside a Seminole County McDonald's where he was working.

The incident eventually led to a guilty conviction for Robert Jonathan Walyus, and the victim's filing a lawsuit against him, McDonald's Corp. and the local-franchise owner.

The lawsuit claimed proper hiring supervision rules were not in place, allowing the restaurant to hire a sex offender with an extensive criminal history.

The suit claimed the incident caused the young girl to have anxiety attacks and an inability to main normal relationships with males. The terms of the settlement were undisclosed.

Continue reading "McDonald's Employee Sex Exposure Suit Settled" »

As a Texas Darvocet and Darvon Recall Attorney, I am providing this update regarding the request for consolidation of the litigation in federal court.

This week, a panel of federal judges will hear arguments to consolidate a growing number of Darvocet and Darvon lawsuits that have been filed over cardiac sudden death problems allegedly caused by these medications.

Plaintiffs first requested the consolidation in December, now some Darvocet lawyers expect that thousands are cases are likely to be filed by victims diagnosed with a heart arrythmia or sudden heart-related death from side effects of the medication.

In December, plaintiff Kristine Esposito, filed a Motion with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation seeking to have the Darvon and Darvocet litigation centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Other plaintiffs have filed documents known as briefs, requesting that the cases be consolidated in either the Eastern District of Louisiana or Western District of Louisiana.

The plaintiffs want to have the cases consolidated in one court, since all of the Darvon and Darvocet suits contain similar allegations that the manufacturer failed to adequately research the side effects of Darvocet and Darvon and failed to warn doctors and patients that propoxyphene-based drugs caused heart rhythm problems.

These type of consolidation is similar to class actions, and are known as an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.This type of centralization is usual in complex product liability claims involving a large number of lawsuits over injuries associated with a particular product. The process is designed to avoid duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent rulings by different judges and to promote the efficient litigation, both in time and cost.

Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of the name-brand versions of Darvon and Darvocet, has opposed consolidation of the litigation.

If the MDL Panel grants consolidation and determines that is appropriate in the litigation over Darvocet and Darvon, Xanodyne will argue that the cases should be centralized in the Eastern District of Kentucky. Xanodyne, the drug maker is headquartered in Kentucky.

Continue reading "Darvocet, Darvon, and Propoxyphene Wrongful Death Consolidation" »

As a Texas Topamax Dangerous Drug attorney, I am providing this latest FDA warning regarding Topamax.

This latest announcement by the FDA (see below) is particularly worrisome, as it demonstrates the teratogenic side effects of Topamax and the generic versions of this commonly utilized drug.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning about Topamax (topiramate), an anticonvulsant medication which is used in the prevention of migraine headaches and epileptic seizures. New medical study shows that Topamax and its generic versions increases the rate of cleft lip and cleft palate deformities if taken by women who are pregnant.

Cleft lip and cleft palate deformities are holes in the roof of the mouth that result from improper fusing of the lip and the palate during fetal development during pregnancy. The mouth birth defects can cause problems with eating and talking if not treated with surgery.

Product labeling for Topamax cautions about the risk of birth defects associated with the medication, but the warning label will now be revised to include stronger language that there is "positive evidence of human fetal risk based on human data."

Cleft lip and palate is very treatable; however, the kind of treatment depends on the type and severity of the cleft.

Most children with a form of clefting are monitored by a cleft palate team or craniofacial team through young adulthood. Treatment procedures can vary between craniofacial teams. For example, some teams wait on jaw correction until the child is aged 10 to 12 (argument: growth is less influential as deciduous teeth are replaced by permanent teeth, thus saving the child from repeated corrective surgeries), while other teams correct the jaw earlier (argument: less speech therapy is needed than at a later age when speech therapy becomes harder).

Still prevention is better than the cure, so best avoid the use of Topamax during pregnancy or if cannot, then use contraceptive devices.

Continue reading "Topamax Seizure Drug Causes Birth Defects " »

As a Dallas Wrongful Death attorney, I am providing this lawsuit article from Cleveland.

The family of a Cleveland man who was gunned down in 2009 during a robbery at a local bar have filed a lawsuit against the building owners and the security company.

The wrongful death suit claims local security officers did nothing to stop a group of men from attempting to rob Jeremy Pechanec and eventually executing him and a friend in a park across from the bar.

None of the bar's security cameras were on, the suit claims, and bar tenders continued to serve the men even as they began to harass Pechanec. The wrongful death lawsuit is seeking more than $100,000 in damages.

What is a Wrongful Death Lawsuit? Dallas Wrongful Death Attorney explains
A wrongful death lawsuit alleges that the victim was killed as a result of negligence on the part of the person or business entity being sued, and that the victim’s survivors are entitled to monetary damages as a result of the negligent act and improper conduct.

This type of legal civil claim is different from a normal negligence lawsuit, which is filed by the person injured for the resultant damages. Originally under “common law” (the general legal principles or judge made law, passed from England to the United States over many years), a wrongful death claim did not exist based upon the legal reasoning that the claim died or was extinguished with the victim where there was no way to compensate him for damages. The surviving family members then could not claim damages from the person who caused the victim's death. This was an injustice for the dead victim's family and a legal loop hole.

Read more here.

Continue reading "Wrongful Death Suit Filed After Man Murdered Outside of Bar" »

Dallas Topamax Cleft Palate Cleft Lip Attorney warns about the side effects of Topamax during pregnancy.

As I have previously reported, the FDA has required the makers of Topamax and generic topiramate to update their warning label regarding use of the Topamax drug during pregnancy. The usage of Topamax during pregnancy, can cause children to be born with a cleft lip or cleft palate. And shockingly enough, it appears that this particular birth defect information has been available for years and that Topamax birth defect side effects may cause malformations. Folks, the manufacturers have failed to adequately research their medication or warn consumers and doctors.

The medical journal Neurology, in July 2008, reported that pregnant women who received Topamax for epilepsy treatment, faced an increased incidence of babies with birth defects or congenital malformations. Topamax use during pregnancy was linked to babies born with cleft lip or cleft palate at a rate 11 times higher than would be expected in the general population and babies born with genital defects at a rate 14 times higher than would be expected.

Apparently this research and other post-marketing data was available to the Topamax manufacturers, and they failed to warn women about the risks of pregnancy and Topamax. If proper warnings was provided, these women could have chosen to take a different drug or taken contraception to ensure they did not become pregnant while on Topamax.

According to reports made to the North American Antiepileptic Drug Pregnancy Registry, the prevalence of oral clefts in children born to mothers who used Topamax while pregnant was 20 times higher than among women who did not take any antiepiletic drug. When compared to other epilepsy drugs, the prevalence of birth defects was still 2-3 times greater with Topamax pregnancy use.

Because of the drug makers’ decision not to disclose this important information, there are many children who have experienced birth defect problems. Compensation may be available through a Topamax cleft palate or Topamax lip lawsuit for children who were exposed to the drug before they were born.

Continue reading "Topamax & Topiramate Usage Can Cause Birth Defects" »

As a Dallas Slip and Fall Attorney, I would like provide a quick explanation and an update of Texas Slip and Fall law.

A slip and fall accident is a type of personal injury claim that occurs when a person slips and falls on another person’s property. It is based on the breach of duty that the owner of the property was negligent in failing to correct the dangerous condition that caused the slip and fall.

If you were in a public place or a private residence in Texas and hurt yourself due to a slip and fall, you may file a slip and fall lawsuit. But if the accident was your fault, or there is some other intervening circumstance that does not satisfy the slip and fall lawsuit requirement, you can expect that it would get dismissed.

You have to prove negligence on the part of the company or private citizen at whose Texas property the slip and fall injury took place. A classic example would be a wet floor. We are all familiar with businesses that mop their floors and put out bright yellow or orange caution signs and/or cones to warn people that the area is wet and not to cross it. If these signs are clearly posted and you cross into the slippery area anyway, the business has a good chance of not being liable for the fall.

The term Premises Liability is used when assigning responsibility for injuries caused by the defective design or maintenance of property, including private homes, public buildings, and anywhere a person would have a reasonable expectation of safety.

"Negligence" means failure to use ordinary care to provide a safe place and to reduce or eliminate an unreasonable risk of harm created by the condition or use of a place, equipment or procedures.

Property owners have a duty to keep their property safe. To hold the property owner responsible, one of the following three conditions must apply to the incident:

1. The owner of the property, or one of their employees, caused the worn or torn spot, the spill or the dangerous surface that resulted in the slip and fall.
2. The property owner knew about the dangerous condition but didn’t do anything about it.
3. The owner of the property should have known about the dangerous condition because a reasonable person tending to a piece of property would have detected the problem and taken steps to correct it.

To read more, click here.

Continue reading "Slip and Fall Premises Liability Update" »

As a Dallas Mesothelioma and Asbestos Attorney, I am reporting this Virgina Mesothelioma verdict against Exxon.

A jury awarded a former shipyard employee $25M in his lawsuit against Exxon for asbestos-related medical problems. The suit was filed against Exxon, the ship owner, rather than the parts supplier.

The lawsuit argued that Exxon knew about the problems with asbestos, and even developed rules to protect workers at refineries beginning in 1937, but did not warn shipyard workers or crew members.

An attorney for the worker said the case proved Exxon knew about the cancer link since the 1940s, and knew by the 1960s that it caused mesothelioma.

Asbestos is a carcinogenic fiber that causes lung cancer and mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive cancer of the lining of the body’s major organs and cavities. Asbestos was used in construction for over a century because of its versatility and heat resistance, making it an ideal insulator.

Continue reading "Exxon to Pay $25 M For Shipyard Worker Mesothelioma" »

As a Dallas Slip and Fall attorney I am writing this article to provide guidance for folks who are considering to file a slip and fall claim. You know folks, litigating slip and fall accidents in Texas is difficult because of the premises liability rules generated by our Texas Supreme Court.

In Texas, the status of the plaintiff is important; whether they are an invitee, licensee or mere trespasser. The duty of the premises owner will depend on the plaintiff's status.

“Slip and fall” or "trip and fall" accidents are the most common form of premises liability cases. Common everyday conditions or defects leading to premises liability accidents include wet slick floors, slippery surfaces, uneven floors or steps, cracked sidewalks, broken stair rails, falling objects, high-stacking merchandise, torn carpeting, poor lighting, inadequate security, dangerous conditions caused by inclement weather such as sleet, rain and ice, and failure to secure a swimming pool area etc.

Read more here.

We recently settle a slip and fall case through mediation. My client had slipped and fallen while walking through a corridor on her way to a car park. She slipped on something that was sticky, badly twisting her ankle and fracturing the fibula bone in her ankle. She had moderate medical expenses and she was self insured, so she was on the hook for the medical bills.

Luckily we had a surveillance camera video which showed my client falling and the time she was on the ground...unfortunately it did not show what she slipped on. We settled for almost twice the initial pre-mediation offer and the defendants paid for the mediation fee.

Continue reading "Slip and Fall Explaination of Texas Premises Liability Law" »

As Dallas Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella lawsuit attorney, I am providing this litigation update for folks who have either filed or contemplating filing a lawsuit against Bayer for the personal injuries they have suffered as a result of taking these medications.

This week, plaintiff attorneys who have filed a Yaz, Yasmin or Ocella lawsuit against Bayer, filed a motion in Southern Illinois federal court to extend deadlines for the discovery process.

The parties have asked that the specific discovery deadline for bellwether cases to be pushed back to April 14, 2011 and for the first trial to be pushed back from September, 2011, to January, 2012.

About 6,500 cases are currently in the federal MDL Yasmin and Yaz litigation. All of the lawsuits involve allegations that Bayer failed to adequately research their birth control pills or warn that Yaz and Yasmin may increase the risk of blood clots when compared to other birth control pills, resulting in strokes, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and gallstones.

The plaintiff attorneys say they have received over 50 million documents from Bayer to review and anticipate millions of more pages of documents that will need to be produced before trials can commence.

In October 2010, a Case Management Order (CMO) was filed in the federal MDL, scheduling three bellweather Yaz and Yasmin trials to occur in September 2011, January 2012 and April 2012. Cases are being prepared for these trial dates to help both parties test the strengths and weaknesses of cases and facilitate a Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella settlement.

According to allegations in complaints, the increased risk of Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella is linked to the use of drospirenone, a fourth generation progestin that is only found in these oral birth control pills and their generic equivalents.

Continue reading "Yaz Yasmin Ocella MDL Lawsuits March Update" »

As a Dallas Hip and Knee medical device product liability attorney I am providing this update regarding the Zimmer Durom Cup litigation involving premature hip replacement failure and the current DePuy metal on metal ASR hip replacement lawsuits.

For medical device makers, hip and knee replacements are increasing in the next few decades because of the surge in baby boomers. As a result we expect artificial hip and knees implant failures to increase.

In the Zimmer Durom Cup Product Liability Litigation, MDL NO. 2158, which is pending in the US District Court in Newark, New Jersey, the Court ordered all cases to proceed to mediation. Zimmer said they are anxious to settle for a "fair amount," which will include lost wages and medical bills and revision (or replacement) surgery as a result of failed Zimmer hip. The first mediation started in San Francisco and mediations will follow nationwide so that the Zimmer victims can meet with Zimmer representatives.

The Durom Cup was implanted in more than 12,000 patients in the US between 2006 and 2008. In July 2008, Zimmer announced that it was temporarily suspending sales of the Durom Cup in the US, but denied any "evidence of a defect with its product." The complaint alleges that the failure rate of the Durom Cup is between 20 percent and 30 percent and likely will climb much higher in the next few years.

Now we have litigation that has commenced with the DePuy metal on metal ASR hip replacements. These Johnson and Johnson metal on metal ASR hips also fail at an unacceptable rate. These cases have been consolidated in the Northern District of Ohio federal court MDL.

Continue reading "DePuy Hip and Knee Replacement Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Medical Malpractice attorney and licensed medical doctor, I am providing this article regarding an Indiana surgeon who has been a fugitive on the run for many medical malpractice claims.

An Indiana surgeon who was on the run for over five years faces a wrongful death negligence lawsuit claiming he caused the death of a woman in 2004 after failing to diagnose her with lung cancer.

The lawsuit alleges that the woman went to see the doctor in 2004 with a sore throat, that she received unnecessary surgery and delayed treatment, and died after lung cancer was not treated.

The surgeon was captured in Italy in 2009 and faces more than 350 medical malpractice suits.

Continue reading "Fugitive Medical Doctor Faces 350 Medical Malpractice Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Topamax Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate attorney I am providing this update regarding Topamax and Topiramate Lawsuits.

Was your child born with a cleft palate or cleft lip after the use of Topamax (topiramate) while pregnant? If so, you should know that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has increased its warning of these birth defects caused by Topamax. The FDA announced that "there is positive evidence of human fetal risk" and warned that taking this medication during pregnancy created a higher risk that the baby would develop a cleft lip or cleft palate.

Medical providers who treat migraine headaches are warning women of childbearing age about the pregnancy risks with Topamax, and warn that contraceptives should be used to avoid getting pregnant while on the medication.

Use of the epilepsy and migraine medication during the first trimester of pregnancy, could cause babies to born with the serious malformations from side effects of Topamax.

Topamax (topiramate) was first approved for treatment of epilepsy, and in 2004, the FDA approved Topamax for use of treating migraines. Generic forms of the drug began to appear in 2006.

The FDA estimates that approximately 32.3 million prescriptions for Topamax or a generic equivalent were issued from January 2007 through December 2010.

According to data from the North American Antiepileptic Drug Pregnancy Registry, children born to mothers who took Topamax while pregnant had an oral cleft birth defect about three times more often than infants born to women who took other antiepileptic drugs. When compared to children born to women without epilepsy or treatment with other antiepileptic drugs, the Topamax pregnancy risk was associated with a 20 times greater prevalence of cleft palate or cleft lip.

Continue reading "Topamax Topiramate Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Fosamax Femur Fracture attorney I am reporting the following update regarding the Fosamax Long Bone Lawsuits.

The long-term use of Fosamax is linked to an increased risk of femur fractures. We are reviewing and accepting Fosamax lawsuits nationwide. Women throughout the United States have reported suffering spontaneous femur fractures while on Fosamax, Merck’s osteoporosis drug.

The femur, or thigh bone, is one of the strongest bones in the human body. Side effects of Fosamax may weaken the ability of the bone to repair itself from microdamage, increasing the risk of a bone fracture over time.

Merck has failed to adequately research their osteoporosis drug or warn about this potential Fosamax problem. A Fosamax femur fracture lawsuit, may result in financial compensation for users who have suffered broken bones.

Fosamax (alendronate sodium) has been prescribed to millions of people in the United States since it was approved in 1995 for treatment of osteoporosis and Pagets disease of the bone.

While Fosamax is prescribed to treat osteoporosis and reduce the risk of hip fractures and long bone fractures, the mechanism of action, which prevents bone turn-over, could make some users vulnerable to certain types of fractures.

Merck faces about 1,000 lawsuits over Fosamax jaw bone problems which can cause deterioration or decay of the jaw; a condition known as osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). The federal Fosamax ONJ lawsuits have been consolidated and centralized into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

If you, a friend or family member experienced a broken thigh bone on Fosamax, request a free consultation and claim evaluation to review your rights with one of our Fosamax lawyers.

Continue reading "Fosamax Long Bone Femur Fracture Lawsuits" »

As a Dallas Toxic Tort attorney I am providing this environmental pollution story.
Conroe Texas is ground zero in a battle between this Houston city, and EPA regulators against Texas environmental officials who approved an underground landfill. In Conroe, the fear is of contaminated water that could cause permanent harm to the only water source for the half-million residents in Montgomery County. And that aquifer feeds additional underground streams that provide water to millions of people in 54 counties.

"Once your water is dirty, you'll never get it clean again," said Rebecca Kaiser, a Conroe resident.

TexCom Gulf Disposal LLC, wants to inject liquid commercial waste into a well underground, that could include cancer-causing benzene and other toxic chemicals. This injection well is less than a mile from hundreds of homes and several schools.

The proposed waste site in Conroe is an oil field with hundreds of abandoned wells. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is concerned that these wells could act as a pathway for the waste to travel to aquifers, and contaminate the drinking water.

There have been many similar problems in Texas, for example in Winona — an East Texas town where a company was forced to close its injection well in 1997 because of spills that residents alleged increased cancer rates and birth defects.

Also in 2005 in Chico, a North Texas town, where waste from an injection well bubbled up through other wells. Finally radioactivity forced the shutdown of municipal water wells.

Continue reading "Conroe, Texas Toxic Landfill Could Contaminate Drinking Water" »

As a DePuy ASR Hip Recall attorney, I would to update the recipients of faulty DePuy ASR hip implants not to preserve their legal rights as Johnson & Johnson offers an early hip replacement settlement.

Before you accept this early hip replacement settlement offer, please seek a second opinion from a knowledgeable and experienced DePuy attorney.

DePuy considers certain minor medical expenses reasonable for patients that experience DePuy hip side effects. But a DePuy hip lawsuit is necessary to get compensation for past, present and future medical therapies, lost wages, pain and suffering.

A second implant surgery is necessary for some patients because of a high failure rate for two of their devices. The DePuy Hip Recall includes the DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing system and the ASR XL Acetabular Cup system.

Medical reports suggest that one in eight patients will require a revision surgery within five years of their first implant.

This DePuy hip recall litigation suggests that patients will be observed closely for any side effects in the foreseeable future, including continued pain, inflammation, metallosis, difficulty walking or other DePuy ASR hip replacement side effects.

Continue reading "DePuy ASR Recall And Replacement Update" »

As a Fort Worth Accutane Inflammatory bowel disease attorney, I am writing about the upcoming trial in New Jersey state court. These trials have been anticipated for a long time and will inject Hollywood into the proceedings, as one of the plaintiffs is a film actor.

Trial will began this week in New Jersey state court, for three plaintiffs who allege that they suffered severe bowel disease from Accutane.

Roche faces 3,000 Accutane bowel lawsuits, which all involve allegations that the drug maker failed to adequately warn users about the potential risk of injury associated with the acne medication. The plaintiffs claim there is an increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) from Accutane (isotretinoin), which could lead to ulcerative colitis, and Crohn’s disease.

Roche has lost all six Accutane trials that have previously reached a jury.

The number of Accutane complaints filed in New Jersey continues to increase as former users discover that there may be a connection between their bowel problems and Accutane.

The next Accutane trial is scheduled in May 2011, and involves a case filed by Kamie Kendall. The earlier verdict was reversed on appeal because Roche was denied introducing evidence about the number of individuals who have used the acne medication over the years.

Continue reading "Roche Accutane Inflammatory Bowel Disease Trials" »

As a Dallas car accident attorney, I am writing to inform folks about the dangers to automobiles and drivers from highway construction zones.

Construction sites and highway construction zones are adversely impacted by poor communication, a work force in a hurry, third party contractors, a mind set of profits before people and safety and negligence.

The first rule of safety is to eliminate the danger; if that is not possible, then the second rule of safety is to barricade the danger and if that is not possible then you communicate the danger and warn. The trouble is how can you communicate with somebody who does not understand or speak English.

Safety violations can occur; by breaking and ignoring local, municipal, city, county, state or federal regulations, for example when equipment is left too close to the side of the road, or when proper safety policies and procedures are not followed, construction companies and employers can be held financially liable.

Highway and road construction zones are the most dangerous road conditions in Texas. In the Dallas/Fort Worth area major highways and thoroughfares are always under construction, leaving drivers to deal with improperly marked roads, obstacles, and other hazardous road conditions. In our Metroplex, we have over 6,000 miles of highways and roads. Hundreds of drivers and passengers of cars, semi-trucks, buses and motorcycles are injured or killed every year in construction zone accidents that could have been easily prevented and avoided.

If you or a family member has been injured in a highway or construction zone car accident, there may be more than one party that can be held responsible and required to compensate you for your injuries. Road maintenance crews, highway design engineers, and other drivers are often held legally accountable for their negligence Contractors, subcontractors or government agencies in charge of construction zones may also be held liable if they were negligent in their duties.

The following is a list of some factors that may lead to an auto accident in a construction zone:

Substandard road maintenance
Unmarked or unfixed potholes
Dangerous gravel on the road or road resurfacing
Slippery road surfaces due to spills especially chemicals or oil
Substandard or defective marked construction zones
Dangerous unmarked changes in road conditions
Defective or missing Guardrails
Substandard marked intersections
Negligently or reckless designed roadways, bridges, and rights-of-way

Continue reading "Personal Injury, Wrongful Death and Car Accidents" »

As a Fort Worth Bus Accident attorney, I am reporting this bus crash lawsuit, which was just filed in Fort Worth district court.

A lawsuit was filed against a Fort Worth-based bus company on behalf of Denton church members who were injured in a Colorado bus crash in December.

The defendants are the bus driver, Fred Kornegay of Grand Prairie, and the bus company, Gotta Go Express Trailways Inc. in Fort Worth.

The members of Trinity United Methodist Church in Denton were injured during a ski trip to Crested Butte, Colo. There were 46 people on the bus, including the driver.

The group was on Highway 114 outside of Gunnison, Colo., when the bus went out of control, collided with a post and rolled down an embankment striking a tree.

Colorado investigators determined that Kornegay was driving at high speeds before the crash, including passing as many as three vehicles at a time on a two-lane road -- despite dangerous icy conditions and decreased visibility.

Kornegay was issued a citation by Colorado authorities for careless driving in the crash.

Continue reading "Colorado Bus Crash Law Suit Against Texas Bus Company" »

As a Fort Worth Darvon, Darvocet and Propoxyphene recall attorney I am providing this update regarding the upcoming MDL hearing, presently set for late March in California.

There is going to be a hearing that will decide whether all Darvon and Darvocet lawsuits should be consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation in federal court.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on MDL (JPML)has set a hearing for March 30th in San Diego, where they will consider the proposed consolidation of the Darvon and Darvocet litigation.

There are currently at least four different lawsuits over Darvocet that have been filed against Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals in three different federal district courts.

All of the suits contain allegations that the manufacturer failed to adequately research the side effects of Darvocet and Darvon and failed to warn doctors and patients that propoxyphene-based drugs caused heart rhythm problems that could sometimes be fatal.

A Darvon and Darvocet recall was issued on November 19, 2010, after the FDA determined that propoxyphene-based painkillers may increase the risk of heart rhythm abnormalities, including heart arrhythmias or sudden heart-related death.

Multidistrict litigation, and centralization is common in complex product liability claims involving a large number of lawsuits over injuries associated with a particular product. The process is designed to avoid duplicate discovery, prevent inconsistent rulings by different judges and to promote the efficient litigation of the cases.

Xanodyne has opposed consolidation of the Darvocet litigation, stating that much of the evidence and discovery in the cases will focus on the individual health of each plaintiff. The company also stated that some plaintiffs took versions of Darvon or Darvocet that were not made by Xanodyne, and so arguing that the Xanodyne could not be held liable in these cases.

Furthermore, Xanodyne argues that the cases should be centralized in the Eastern District of Kentucky, where the drug maker is headquartered.

Continue reading "Darvocet, Darvon, and Propoxyphene MDL March Hearing" »

As a Fort Worth Sexual Abuse attorney I am writing about a recent sexual abuse Federal lawsuit involving the armed forces.

A federal lawsuit alleges the Department of Defense of allowing a military culture that fails to prevent rape and sexual assault, and of mishandling cases that were brought to its attention, therefore violating the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.

The suit — brought by 2 men and 15 women, both veterans and active-duty service members — specifically claims that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and his predecessor, Donald H. Rumsfeld, “ran institutions in which perpetrators were promoted and where military personnel openly mocked and flouted the modest Congressionally mandated institutional reforms.”

The suit, which was filed in Federal District Court in Virginia, seeks monetary damages, and those involved with the case said their goal was an overhaul of the military’s judicial system regarding rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment.

Continue reading "Federal Lawsuit Claims Military Fails to Prevent Sexual Abuse" »

As a Fort Worth Fosamax osteonecrosis attorney I am reporting this 3rd win by Merck.

Merck & Co. won a lawsuit brought by a patient who said the company's osteoporosis drug Fosamax caused dental and jaw problems.

A jury in the Superior Court for Atlantic County, N.J., found that Fosamax did not cause the patient's dental and jaw problems.

The patient used Fosamax from 1999 to 2006, and suffered jaw problems after having a tooth removed in December 2005. Merck said the woman's history of dental problems and use of steroid medications contributed to those problems.

Merck has more than a thousand lawsuits brought by patients who say they developed jaw and dental problems including osteonecrosis of the jaw — or rotting of the jawbone — after using Fosamax. Merck has now won three of the four lawsuits that have gone to trial.

Continue reading "Merck Wins 3rd Fosamax Osteonecrosis Lawsuit " »

As a Dallas Benzene Cancer attorney I am providing this information blog because I have recently talked to some potential plaintiffs who believe that they may have been exposed to Benzene and that their cancers may be related to this industrial exposure.

Benzene is an aromatic hydrocarbon that is produced by the burning of natural products. It is a component of products derived from coal and petroleum and is found in gasoline and other fuels. Benzene is used in the manufacture of plastics, detergents, pesticides, and other chemicals. Research has shown benzene to be a carcinogen (cancer-causing). With exposures from less than five years to more than 30 years, individuals have developed, and died from, leukemia. Long-term exposure may affect bone marrow and blood production. Short-term exposure to high levels of benzene can cause drowsiness, dizziness, unconsciousness, and death.

Benzene is addressed in specific standards for the general industry, shipyard employment, and the construction industry.

Individuals employed in industries that make or use benzene may be exposed to the highest levels of benzene. These industries include benzene production (petrochemicals, petroleum refining, and coke and coal chemical manufacturing), rubber tire manufacturing, and storage or transport of benzene and petroleum products containing benzene. Other workers who may be exposed to benzene because of their occupations include steel workers, printers, rubber workers, shoe makers, laboratory technicians, firefighters, and gas station employees.

Continue reading "Benzene Cancer Update" »

Mesothelioma is a deadly disease that is caused by exposure to asbestos, which is a naturally occurring silicate mineral that exists, in a fibrous state composed of microscopic crystals. Asbestos was used in a variety of building applications, as a heat insulator, electrical resistant insulator, and as a composite material in joint compound and concrete.

Mesothelioma litigation represents the longest running Mass Tort in the history of America. Every year, 10,000 people die from mesothelioma, and 800,000 claimants have sought compensation against approximately 8,400 defendants.

Most people who develop mesothelioma have worked on jobs where they inhaled asbestos and glass particles, or they have been exposed to asbestos dust and fiber in other ways. It has also been suggested that washing the clothes of a family member who worked with asbestos or glass can put a person at risk for developing mesothelioma. Unlike lung cancer, there is no association between mesothelioma and smoking, but smoking greatly increases the risk of other asbestos-induced cancers

Mesothelioma is a type of cancer that attacks the thin layer of cells that line the body's internal organs, known as mesothelium.

Mesothelioma disease exists in three forms. The most common type is pleural mesothelioma, and this disease accounts for approximately 70% of all mesothelioma cases. Pleural mesothelioma occurs in the lining of the lungs, known as pleura.

The second variety of mesothelioma, pericardial mesothelioma, occurs in the lining of the heart, known as the pericardium.

The third form, peritoneal mesothelioma occurs in the lining of the abdominal cavity, known as peritoneum.

Continue reading "Asbestos Mesothelioma Update" »

As a Dallas DePuy ASR Recall attorney I am providing this important update regarding the recent MDL hearing in Florida.

Johnson & Johnson and plaintiff attorneys are negotiating a procedure for preserving and handling company’s recalled hip implant devices after patients get them replaced through surgeries. J&J’s DePuy Orthopaedics unit recalled the implants on Aug. 26, after researchers found a second operation, or “revision surgery,” was needed after five years at rates higher than the company expected. Doctors had implanted 37,000 ASR XL Acetabular System devices.

The implants and tissue removed are important evidence in the individual lawsuits by DePuy patients. The protocol for handling and analyzing the explants, will help document excessive metal wear of the device and the destructive tissue damage caused by the debris.

The devices, known as metal-on-metal implants, had defective designs that caused cobalt and chromium debris resulting in tissue death, fractures, and other injuries known as metalosis.

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed in federal court and state courts in California and New Jersey. Federal cases filed around the country are being transferred to Toledo.

J&J was “negligent in marketing and selling ASR implants despite knowing that the joints would more likely than not fail prematurely as compared to other prosthetic hip implants and expose patients to unreasonably high risk of serious bodily injury,” according to a recent complaint.

The case is In re: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. ASR Hip Implant Products, 10-md-2197, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio (Toledo).

As a Fort Worth Avandia Product Recall Attorney, I am providing this latest Avandia lawsuit information.

GlaxoSmithKline Plc has settled a lawsuit alleging its Avandia diabetes drug caused a North Carolina man to die of a heart attack, thus avoiding a jury determination over risks associated with the medicine.

The U.K.’s biggest drugmaker resolved the suit by the family of James Burford, an Avandia user who died in 2006.

The lawsuit, scheduled for trial this week in Philadelphia federal court, was the first of 2,000 heading to court alleging Glaxo hid Avandia’s health risks.

Glaxo announced Jan. 17 that it is taking a $3.5 billion charge to cover expenses linked to investigations and suits over Avandia. The reserve brings to $6.4 billion the amount the drugmaker has set aside in the past 12 months for legal costs tied to Avandia.

The latest settlement resulted from Glaxo’s move to resolve all Avandia cases brought by plaintiffs' attorneys in Philadelphia of more than 1,600 cases consolidated there.

The company still faces at least 1,600 cases filed in Philadelphia and another 400 in state courts across the U.S., lawyers for Avandia users and the company said last week.

Lawyers for Burford’s family alleged that Glaxo refused to take Avandia off the market, even though studies concluded it increased risks of heart attacks and strokes. They also claimed Glaxo officials withheld studies by regulators showing the increased risk tied to the drug.

The case is Deborah A. Burford v. SmithklineBeecham Corp., 07-CV-05360, U.S. District Court for the District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)

Continue reading "Dallas Avandia Heart Attack Death Update 817-717-1772" »

As a Fort Worth Traumatic Brain Injury, Wrongful Death and Truck Accident attorney I am providing this jury verdict out of California. Count this as a win for the good guys, but unfortunately no amount of money can turn back the clock and fully compensate the victims of this tragic and needless accident.

A California jury has awarded $49 million in a lawsuit stemming from a highway accident in 2007 that left one man dead and a police officer paralyzed.

Officer Pedeferri had pulled over motorist Andres Parra on U.S. Highway 101 north of Ventura when a man driving a truck slammed into them, killing Parra, and rendering the police officer a quadriplegic.

Jurors awarded Parra's parents $10.2 million for the loss of their son.

The truck driver pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated and transporting marijuana. He was sentenced in 2008 to 15 years in prison.

Continue reading "$49 M Awarded in Wrongful Death Drunk Driving Truck Accident" »

As a Fosamax Product Liability Osteonecrosis attorney I am providing this update of the current status of Fosamax MDL Litigation.

A Fosamax jury trial began last week in the Superior Court for Atlantic County, New Jersey. Merck states that the evidence will show that FOSAMAX did not cause the plaintiff to develop dental and jaw related problems and that Merck provided appropriate and timely information about FOSAMAX to the medical, scientific and regulatory communities.

In Rosenberg v. Merck, the plaintiff alleges she used FOSAMAX from 1999 to 2006. The plaintiff further claimed she suffered various jaw problems and complications following a tooth extraction in December 2005.

FOSAMAX was approved as a safe and effective medication by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in September 1995 and is still on the market today and approved for multiple indications, including the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

This is the fourth FOSAMAX case to go to trial. The first three trials were conducted as part of the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings before Judge John F. Keenan in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The first case to be tried to a verdict, Maley v. Merck, resulted in a defense verdict for Merck in May 2010. The second case to be tried to a verdict, Boles v. Merck, initially resulted in a mistrial in September 2009 after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. A retrial of that case in June 2010 resulted in a plaintiff verdict, which has since been reduced by Judge Keenan and which Merck is appealing. The third case to be tried to a verdict, Graves v. Merck, resulted in a defense verdict for Merck in November 2010. As of September 30, 2010, approximately 1,180 cases, which include approximately 1,560 plaintiff groups, had been filed and were pending against Merck in either federal or state court.

Continue reading "Fosamax Side Effect Lawsuit Update " »

As a Fort Worth Toxic Tort Groundwater contamination attorney I am providing this update on the Camp Lejeune litigation.
A former Marine has filed a $16 million lawsuit against the federal government, claiming that contaminated water at Camp Lejeune caused him to contract a rare form of breast cancer.

It is the latest damage claim in a long-running dispute between former residents and the Marine Corps over the polluted water.

Wells at the base were contaminated by fuel leaks and other sources of pollution before being closed two decades ago. Health officials think as many as 1 million people may have been exposed to tainted water.

Continue reading "Marine Files Lawsuit Over Toxic Camp Lejeune Water" »

As a Fort Worth DARVON Product Liability Attorney I am providing this Darvon, Darvocet Update.

Since Dec. 3, seven lawsuits have been filed in federal court alleging that Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals Inc., the manufacturer of Darvocet and Darvon, knew of the risks but failed to warn doctors and the general public that the medications could contribute to heart disease.

The recalled pain pills Darvocet, Darvon, or the generic propoxyphene are some of the most dangerous drugs ever sold in the United States, and we are urging folks to stop taking Darvocet, Darvon, or the generic version propoxyphene pain pills immediately.

Many people we have talked with, who took Darvocet, or Darvon, developed severe heart rhythm issues including sudden death, and now are either medicated to control their heart beat, or they have a pacemaker or an implantable defibrillator.

The suits, some them class actions, were filed on behalf of people who suffered from heart problems or died after taking the drugs. Plaintiffs' lawyers already have moved to consolidate the cases into multidistrict litigation.

Continue reading "Darvocet Wrongful Death Product Liabilty Lawsuits" »

As a Fort Worth Taser Lawsuit Attorney, I am reporting this Dallas Texas story.

A Dallas police officer has filed a lawsuit in which he alleges that jolts of electricity received during Taser training caused fractured backs and other severe injuries.

Dallas police Officer Andrew Butler’s lawsuit, filed Jan. 6 against Taser International, is thought to be the first of its kind in Texas. He alleges Taser did not fully disclose the risks associated with being shot with the device in the academy to his police trainers.

In Dallas, the deaths of at least two drug-fueled suspects who were stunned during arrests have been connected to shocks from the devices.

Recently, police officers around the country have begun filing lawsuits claiming they were hurt when taking a Taser shot.

Several dozen lawsuits by police officers have been filed, but only one has gone to trial. Taser prevailed in that 2005 Arizona case because the officer had a pre-existing back condition.

The company has sold 514,000 devices to more than 15,800 law enforcement and military agencies. Half of the about 2.3 million times that Tasers have been used were in training environments and other voluntary situations, according to the company.

In Dallas, being stunned is optional, but peer pressure in the hyper macho environment of police training often leaves few bystanders, people familiar with the training say.

Dallas police Assistant Chief Floyd Simpson, who supervises training, said that he was unaware of cases in which officers around the country had alleged they were hurt by Tasers. He said he would review information in Butler’s case, but had no immediate plans to stop officers from taking voluntary zaps in training.

He and others in the class signed waivers before they were shocked with the device. Butler and his attorney say he later had to have surgery to repair fractured vertebrae that were crushed when his back muscles contorted from the Taser shock.

Continue reading "Dallas Police Officer Files lawsuit Against Taser" »

As a Fort Worth Car Accident Attorney, this story takes the biscuit as far as crazy things to do while you are driving.

According to police, a van that caught on fire in a Seattle suburb was caused by the passengers filling up the van with gas while driving.

According to one of the victims, she and her two friends had bought gas at a gas station. She said they didn't have a gas can, so they filled an open bucket with two gallons of gas and put it in the van.

The engine cowling, a piece of metal that covered the engine had been removed. The passengers used a water bottle to transfer gas from the bucket directly into the carburetor in order to keep the engine running.

The van was filled with gas fumes, then the van stalled and as the driver tried to restart the van, it exploded.

According to Witnesses, the woman jumped out of the back of the van and fell to the ground, on fire, and that the van rolled over her leg. All three people were on fire and "desperately trying to put it out," investigators said.

Continue reading "Victims In Car Fire Were Filling Gas While Driving" »

As a Fort Worth Car Accident Attorney, I am reporting this crazy case of road rage, which took place in my back yard of Grapevine, Texas.

A Dallas man, James D. Wilson, tried to escape after assaulting another driver in a road-rage incident here in Grapevine.

According to the Grapevine police, Wilson is expected to be charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, endangering a child and criminal mischief. The incident occurred on westbound Texas 114, which is being rebuilt as part of the DFW Connector project.

The other driver, was with his wife, his 9-year-old daughter and their dog in their BMW when he was cut off by a pickup.

The pickup pulled up beside the BMW and then the pickup driver and his passenger got out and yelled at the BMW driver.

The pickup driver got into his truck, leaving the door open, and backed into the BMW and the driver with the door.

The BMW driver got up after being hit, and was dragged about 100 feet while hanging on the door. The BMW driver eventually let go of the door and rolled onto the roadway.

Luckily the incident was witnessed by an off duty police officer and the arrest took place. The man who performed the criminal attack should have his license revoked, pay a hefty fine and go to jail. These kind of assaults/road rage cannot be tolerated in a civilized society...zero tolerance.

Continue reading "Car Accident and Road Rage in Grapevine Texas" »

As a Fort Worth Medical Malpractice attorney, I am providing the jury verdict and a win for the good guys.

Jurors awarded $10.1 million in damages to the family of an overdose victim, hoping the verdict strikes fear into other "pill mills" that have turned Houston into a national center for prescription drug abuse.

"Our verdict shows how much our community is against these pill mills and wants things to change," said juror Lauren Simmons, after finding gross negligence led to the overdose death of Michael Skorpenske of Conroe.

Skorpenske, 54, died July 7, 2007, two days after his only visit to the Family Medi Clinic in The Woodlands where he received a prescription for three potent drugs: hydrocodone, xanax and soma.

He had sought help there for chronic pain he suffered from a motorcycle injury and a fall at a petrochemical plant.

According to records, the clinic's director, Dr. Maurice Conte, had prescribed this same drug combo at least 3,800 times between 2006 and 2007 at more than 17 pain area clinics that he supervised. Dr. Maurice Conte, was forced to surrender his license to the Texas Medical Board after Skorpenske died.

Conte, who repeatedly pleaded the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination during the four-day trial, was found grossly negligent and slapped with the stiffest penalty: $9.05 million.

Continue reading "Houston Doctor and Clinic Busted for Wrongful Death" »

The law is always changing when it comes to accidents, and as a Fort Worth Car Accident attorney I read with interest this car accident case which is now in front of the Texas Supreme Court.

Seven years ago, near Fredericksburg, Courtney Foreman of Cedar Park drowned after construction work left a 15-foot gap in a bridge guardrail room enough for her car, sliding on wet dirt and gravel, to hit the Pedernales River.

She was 18. But a lawsuit against the construction company that followed those plans was thrown out, only to be reinstated on appeal.

Now the case is before the Texas Supreme Court, which will determine whether the Allen Keller Co. had a duty to protect drivers like Foreman from a potentially dangerous situation. The answer could have repercussions for Texas contractors, construction firms and accident victims.

Continue reading "Texas Supreme Court to Answer: Is Builder Liable for Bridge's Guardrail Gap?" »

As a Fort Worth Product Liability and Defective drug attorney I am reporting this latest warning from the FDA involving the drug, Multaq.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said that it has received several reports of liver damage with Multaq tablets, including two cases in which patients had to have their livers removed.

Both female patients were 70 years old, and they had been taking the drug for 4.5 months and six months, respectively.

The FDA said it would add a new warning about the risk for liver damage to the label of Multaq. Multaq already carries a black box warning, the most severe type, stating the drug can cause severe complications, including death, in people with recent severe heart failure and should not be used in those patients.

Sanofi-Aventis SA, the manufacturer of the medication, will send a letter to US doctors telling them that two patients taking the Multaq (dronedarone) medication have suffered liver failure.

Multaq, cleared for sale in 2009, treats atrial fibrillation, a rapid and irregular beating in the heart's upper chambers affecting an estimated two million people in the US, according to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute.

According to the FDA, patients taking the drug should call their doctor if they experience symptoms such as itching, yellow eyes or skin, dark urine, loss of appetite, or light-colored stools,

Continue reading "FDA Multaq Dronedarone: Risk of Severe Liver Injury" »

As a Fort Worth DePuy Hip Recall and Injury Attorney I am providing this DePuy Litigation update.

The DePuy Product Liability Attorneys involved with the DePuy Recall and class action lawsuits are scheduled to meet with the federal judge that is presiding over the multi-district litigation (MDL) on January 20th.

In December, a U.S. Judicial Panel ruled to consolidate all federal DePuy hip recall lawsuits in the Northern District of Ohio. The meeting scheduled for January will allow the Judge to select which attorneys will serve in leadership roles for the plaintiffs and the defendants.

Over 100 DePuy hip recall lawsuits have already been transferred to the MDL Court, and thousands more are expected to be filed or transferred in the coming months.

The claims are being consolidated in an effort to reduce the burden on the court system. All of the cases that have been and will be filed under the MDL will have similar allegations against a common defendant, DePuy Orthopedics and its parent company Johnson & Johnson. Many claims will be seeking similar damages resulting from similar injuries and much of the same discovery will be applicable to a majority of the claims.

DePuy ASR hip implants were recalled by DePuy last year after it was discovered that the metal on metal implants had an extremely high rate of failure, but most of damage had already been done. Over 90,000 people world wide were implanted with the defective devices between the 2005 launch and the recall some five years later. It is estimated that about 35,000 defective DePuy hips were implanted in the United States alone.

Patients implanted with a recalled DePuy hip implant may still be at risk for problems related to the release of small particles from the metal-on-metal devices, even if they have not experienced pain or other symptoms. Therefore, if you have received an implant involved in the DePuy hip replacement recall, do not wait until you experience symptoms of DePuy hip problems to learn your legal rights.

Continue reading "DePuy Hip Recall Lawyers and MDL Court Meeting in January" »

As a Dallas Product Liability attorney and Bard Recovery and G2 IVC Filter lawyer, I am writing an update about this latest FDA warning regarding the Inferior Vena Cava filters.As I wrote previously in my blog, there are serious and fatal complications of the widely used Bard inferior vena cava (IVC) filters.

G2TM IVC Filter Lawsuits

G2™ Filter System Lawsuits allege that the G2TM Filter System possesses manufacturing and design defects which resulted in device failure. The injured plaintiffs experienced fracture and migration of the G2TM Filter.

In 2005, Bard Peripheral Vascular began selling its G2TM IVC filter. This replaced the RecoveryTM IVC filter. Despite the "enhanced fracture resistance" and "enhanced migration resistance" advertisements by Bard Peripheral Vascular, the device has still been shown to fracture, fail and migrate.

RecoveryTM IVC Filter Lawsuits

The RecoveryTM IVC filter was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2002. It was placed on the market for use in 2003. Its manufacturer, Bard Peripheral Vascular withdrew the RecoveryTM IVC filter from the market in 2005 and replaced it with the G2TM IVC filter. The G2TM IVC filter is the "second generation" of the RecoveryTM IVC filter.

A recent medical report has found that 25% of all Bard Recovery IVC filters and 12% of Bard G2 IVC filters fractured. These fractured filters have the potential become dislodged and cause serious and fatal injury. 71% of the broken pieces migrated through the veins of the patient to the heart. The FDA has received more than 900 reports of adverse events, including:

* Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)

* Filter Fracture, Migration or Embolization, leading to Injury to the Heart, Lung or Vena Cava

* Cardiac or Pericardial Tamponade

* Severe Persistent Chest Pain

* Shortness of Breath

* Death

Continue reading "Dallas Bard Recovery and G2 IVC Filter Lawsuits" »

As a Fort Worth Product Liability attorney and Bard IVC Filter lawyer, I am writing about this latest FDA warning regarding the Inferior Vena Cava filters.

Patients who suffer from the threat of pulmonary embolism and are contraindicated for anticoagulation therapy may find themselves receiving an Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter to prevent pulmonary embolism.

Inferior vena cava filters are an alternative treatment for patients at risk for a pulmonary embolism. They are often used when an anticoagulant is contraindicated or if such medications have not been effective. They contain a number of legs or struts that extend out like a spider to catch blood clots that may break free elsewhere in the body, such as the deep veins of the legs. But, if there is an IVC filter strut fracture, small pieces of the filter may travel to other parts of the body, such as the heart or lungs.

Since 2005, the FDA has received 921 device adverse event reports involving IVC filters, of which 328 involved device migration, 146 involved embolizations (detachment of device components), 70 involved perforation of the IVC, and 56 involved filter fracture.

These types of events may be related to a retrievable filter remaining in the body for long periods of time, beyond the time when the risk of pulmonary embolism (PE) has subsided.

RECOMMENDATION: FDA recommends that implanting physicians and clinicians responsible for the ongoing care of patients with retrievable IVC filters consider removing the filter as soon as protection from PE is no longer needed.

Healthcare professionals and patients are encouraged to report adverse events or side effects related to the use of these products to the FDA's MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program:

* Complete and submit the report Online: www.fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm
* Download form or call 1-800-332-1088 to request a reporting form, then complete and return to the address on the pre-addressed form, or submit by fax to 1-800-FDA-0178

Read more here about the IVC Filters.

These IVC Filter devices have recently come under investigation due to a high number of Bard IVC filter fractures which can cause pieces of the devices to travel through the body and damage the heart, lungs and other organs, causing embolisms and possibly death.

In a study published in November in the Archives of Internal Medicine, two Bard IVC filters were found to have a particularly high rate of problems. According to Dr. Rita Redberg in an editorial published by the Archives of Internal Medicine, both of those filters, the Bard G2 and Bard Recovery, were approved with virtually no real clinical data showing they were safe or effective.

Redberg said that researchers suggest that the number of Bard G2 filter fractures is likely to increase as they stay on the market and have been in patients’ bodies longer. She said that data indicates about 62,000 people have received the implants, and as many as 7,000 can expect to experience a Bard IVC filter fracture.

A number of Bard IVC filter lawsuits have been filed against C.R. Bard over the last year alleging that serious injuries or deaths were caused by design defects associated with these filters.

Continue reading "FDA Warns Against Inferior Vena Cava Filters " »

As a Fort Worth Car Accident and Wrongful Death Attorney, I have the following accident to report.

According to the police, a 33-year-old Denton woman died after being ran over by a moving trailer.

Police said a group of people were helping friends move out of an apartment complex, when Andrea Noecker sat down on the tongue and hitch connected to a trailer. One in the group was moving a pickup truck to the street when Noecker fell off in the parking lot and was run over by the trailer.

Noecker was flown to Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Fort Worth where she died from her injuries.

My thoughts and prayers are with her family in their time of need.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Attorney, I am providing, what is in my opinion one of the most outrageous civil rights, medical malpractice and personal injury claims involving Taser usage.

A confused post-surgical patient at Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Hurst-Euless-Bedford was tasered. Bedford police said that on December 14, an off-duty police officer working at the hospital responded to a report of a "violent situation."

According to the police, when the officer arrived, "there had been two hospital employees that had been assaulted" by the patient, and the officer "used his Taser to restrain the subject."

This is so outrageous and unprecedented, another example of the out of control Fort Worth police department. There should be a full independent investigation. Criminal and civil right violations, medical malpractice and personal injury claims should be filed against the police officer and the hospital.

The hospital is responsible for the actions of its employees for excessive use of force and civil right violations.

This year, Fort Worth paid a $2 million settlement to the family of a man who died after police Tasered him. Obviously the City of Fort Worth did not learn its lesson and put in place corrective actions. We have trigger happy police running amok in our city. Get ready to shell out more money.

What ever happened to human rights and patient bill of rights? In all my 27 years as a medical doctor, I have not seen a more egregious example of hospital brutality, abuse and patient rights violation involving hospital security.

It is fairly routine and expected that patients can suffer from delirium, agitation and confusion following anesthesia, but it is easily managed. If a patient becomes agitated, sedatives can be administered through IV access and the patient is restrained and observed to ensure that they do not harm themselves or others.

Many doctors and nurses have done this, this is routine hospital practice, used on a daily basis.

More than 150 people nationally have died because of Taser devices since 2001, according to Amnesty International.

In Florida, a man under police supervision refused to give a urine sample for a drug test. The man was both handcuffed and restrained by leather straps, and an officer kneeled on his chest while the patient thrashed to prevent the insertion of a catheter. The officer then used his Taser in drive stun mode twice before the man gave in.

Federal and state health officials later cited the hospital for violating the patient's rights.

The manufacturer warns that the Taser can cause changes in blood pressure, electrolytes, heart rate and rhythm, and respiration.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a medical malpractice, truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth Dog Bite Attorney I am providing this Christmas dog bite story.

According to City of Fort Worth officials, a Fort Worth man is accused of owning a pit bull that is involved in an attack on an elderly man in July. Steven Woods, could owe thousands in outstanding tickets stemming from incidents between April and June.

"There are four incidents with Mr. Woods and his dogs," said Brandon Bennett, the city's director of code compliance. "Over a three-month period, his dogs terrorized a neighborhood."

In November, a municipal court judge ruled that Woods' dog Mimi was a dangerous dog, a case arising from an attack on an 84-year-old man in July.

According to a police report in April, Woods was issued nine tickets for three pit bulls that were running loose in his southeast Fort Worth neighborhood,

A June incident was far more serious. A 64-year-old woman was attacked by four pit bulls, including one that bit her repeatedly. The woman, who was seriously injured, said that Woods came outside and kicked one of the dogs to stop the attack.

The city's Animal Care and Control division said Woods refused to cooperate with demands to quarantine the dogs.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth Personal Injury and Premises Liability Attorney I am providing this news story.

A New York jury has rendered a premises liability negligence verdict for a Buffalo woman. The verdict awarded was $66 million for injuries she suffered on a Cybex weight machine.

The plaintiff, a physical therapist, had her vertebra crushed when the 500-pound machine fell on her in 2004. The injuries were so severe as to render her a quadriplegic.

The jury verdict in New York state Supreme Court was one of the largest personal injury awards ever in Erie County,

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth Medical Malpractice attorney I am providing this Texas medical malpractice update.

Texas lawmakers passed legislative changes in 2003, which made it more difficult for patients to be awarded damages in any health care medical malpractice setting.

The tort reform state lawmakers passed in 2003, the toughest in the country, capped medical liability for non economic damages at $250,000 per health care provider, with a maximum award of $750,000.

This is particularly true in emergency rooms medical malpractice claims, where plaintiffs must prove doctors acted with "willful and wanton" negligence. This standard means that they not only put the patient in extreme risk but knew they were doing it. Plaintiffs must prove that ER doctors acted with conscious indifference, or gross negligence, rather than simple negligence.

Tort reform advocates say the law is needed to protect ER doctors operating in volatile environments.

Medical malpractice attorneys argue the threshold is nearly impossible to cross, the “willful and wanton” rule means ER care in Texas is some of the most dangerous in the country, because no one can be held accountable for failure to diagnose, failure to treat or wrong care.

Unfortunately Texans are unaware that their Legislature has mandated a very low standard of care — almost no care, and heaven forbid they or a loved one gets injured by the negligence of an ER doctor, then they find out, the hard way, that they have no legal recourse.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click Here for Map

As a Fort Worth DePuy ASR Hip Recall attorney I am providing this latest update information involving the recent DePuy Class Action lawsuits.

The DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) hip, is failing at high rates, even though the device was designed to last for at least 15 years.

According to medical critics the failure of the ASR hip demonstrates a broken piecemeal medical implant system.

Medical implants can be sold without testing if a device, like an artificial hip, resembles an implant already approved. This is different from new drugs, which have go through a series of rigorous clinical trials before receiving approval from the Food and Drug Administration.

Until summer of 2010, DePuy Orthopaedics, stated that the A.S.R. was performing similarly toother hip devices. But doctors indicated that DePuy received repeated warnings that the implant was failing at an alarming rate.

Read full story here at the New York Times

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth DePuy Class Action Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a DePuy Hip Implant, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney I am very proud of the recent verdict announced this week against a major tobacco company.

Cigarettes in my humble opinion should be banned; they serve no purpose and are extremely dangerous substances in its present manufactured form. As medical studies have demonstrated, they are nicotine delivery systems, surely there are less dangerous ways to deliver nicotine. People get addicted and the immense cost to human life is clearly palpable and with the resultant medical care and untold pain and suffering.

A Massachusetts jury has ordered cigarette maker Lorillard Inc. to pay $81 million in punitive damages to the estate of Marie Evans, who suffered a deadly addiction to Newport cigarettes.

The punitive damages came on top of $71 million awarded last week in compensatory damages.

Evans's estate was awarded $50 million in compensatory damages, and her son, was awarded $21 million. Only the estate of Marie Evans, the person directly injured by the company's actions, was eligible to collect punitive damages.

The lawsuit alleged that the tobacco company’s marketing plans induced Evans to start smoking as a child. She died in 2002 from lung cancer.

According to the defendants, the company no longer passes out samples of Newport cigarettes, it no longer advertises cigarettes on radio or television, and the company agrees that cigarettes cause cancer and other diseases.

The jury had already that found the company seduced Evans into smoking when she was just 13 by handing out Newport samples.

The free samples was part of the marketing strategy to reach out to youngsters in black neighborhoods, where menthol brands are popular. The jury found that Lorillard acted with negligence, breach of trust, and in a manner that was wanton and reckless.

Finally Big Tobacco is having to pay the price for its negligent activities, but it is too little too late for the victims.

Now Big Tobacco has set its sights on the Third World masses with their free samples, unfiltered cigarettes and lack of any governmental oversights to breed a new crop of addicts.

Talk of putting profits before people. The moral outrage, continues dear friends, we are slowly winning, the flame of justice just burned a little brighter this week with the announcements of these jury verdicts.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

Virginia Jury Verdict: $10.5 Million in Wrongful Death

A Virginia jury has awarded $10.5 million to the family of a woman who died in 2007 after a concrete mixer truck fell onto her car.

The wrongful death victim was aged 25, and she died after eight days in hospital. The victim's husband survived the horrific accident. Their car was crushed as they drove on State Route 53 and were hit by a truck driven by William Sprouse, working for Allied Concrete Co. Sprouse later pleaded guilty to manslaughter and served 30 days in jail.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

As a Fort Worth car accident attorney I am proud to relay this Texas jury verdict involving a bus accident.

An El Paso jury ordered a local Texas bus company to pay more than $132 million to the victims of a 2005 Colorado deadly crash.

The jury found that the van had bald tires and no safety belts. Two people died, and several others were severely injured in the crash. After a four-day trial, the judgment was reached against Los Paisanos bus lines and its owner, Uriel Chavira.

According to the plaintiff attorneys, and the lawsuit, the Los Paisanos bus company treated these victims like cattle, and the van, without seat belts, was driven over 188,000 miles in two years in an illegal interstate operation to move Mexican citizens across state lines.

33 people from El Paso and Juárez boarded a Los Paisanos bus in El Paso and headed for Denver.

According to witness testimony, the van was on a highway just outside Denver when the driver, Heriberto Flores-Garcia, began speeding and eating at the same time. He lost control of the van, which went over an embankment and rolled.

Read Article: El Paso Times

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas toll free at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a truck accident, car crash or bus accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

The US Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether generic-drug makers can be sued for not warning patients about the risk of dangerous side effects.

The Court has agreed to hear the lawsuits involving Mylan Inc. and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. These lawsuits by two women allege that they contracted a severe neurological disorder, tardive dyskinesia, as a result of long-term use of metoclopramide.

A federal appeals court let both suits proceed, noting that a 2009 Supreme Court ruling that permitted failure-to-warn suits against brand-name drugmakers.

The drug companies argue that the 2009 ruling shouldn’t apply to them because federal law requires generic drugs to include the same packaging insert as the one used by the brand-name drug company that produces the medicine.

Trial courts across the country have rejected that argument.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a Defective Drug, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Wrongful Death Attorney and Car Accident Attorney I am providing this latest update regarding the on going Toyota Product Liability Lawsuits.

The California federal judge said that he is inclined to let personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits against Toyota Motor Corp. move forward.

U.S. District Judge James V. Selna issued a preliminary opinion denying the automaker's motion to dismiss key causes of action in 51 lawsuits.

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed since the Japanese automaker starting recalling millions of vehicles because of sudden-acceleration problems in several models and brake defects with the Prius hybrid.

If the order is finalized, Selna's order would be a victory for plaintiffs suing Toyota for negligence, design defects, failure to warn and fraudulent concealment.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a car accident, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Levaquin Tendon Rupture Attorney I am pleased to report the jury verdict of the first Levaquin Bell Weather trial that was recently announced.

A Minneapolis, Minnesota federal court jury announced that Johnson & Johnson must pay $1.1 million in punitive damages to an 82-year-old man who claimed that it failed to properly warn of the risks of Levaquin linked tendon damage.

The jury awarded compensatory damages of $700,000 to John Schedin, who sued J&J and its Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals unit in 2008. Schedin, alleged that he ruptured both Achilles tendons after taking Levaquin, and that the companies failed to warn doctors and patients of the antibiotic drug’s association with tendon damage.

The trial was the first on more than 2,600 claims in U.S. courts alleging that Levaquin caused tendon damage in patients and that New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&J failed to disclose the risk adequately. The jury, in ordering punitive damages, found the company acted with deliberate disregard for the safety of others.

In 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration required J&J and makers of related drugs in the class of antibiotics called fluoroquinolones to include warnings on the risk of tendon ruptures. The risk was higher in patients older than 60, those taking steroids, and recipients of kidney, heart or lung transplants, according to the FDA.

The plaintiffs claim the label warning should have been improved earlier and remains inadequate. They also say J&J and Ortho-McNeil-Janssen boosted sales by downplaying risks.

The drug has been prescribed more than 430 million times worldwide. Sales of the drug through the first nine months of the year totaled $957 million, the company said in an Oct. 19 statement.

Ortho-McNeil-Janssen didn’t send doctors letters about Levaquin’s risks before the 2008 label change.

Schedin was prescribed Levaquin and a steroid for an upper respiratory infection in 2005, according to his complaint.

His doctor would have prescribed another antibiotic had he known “about the risks associated with Levaquin, especially when taken together with steroids,” Schedin said in court papers.

The case is Schedin v. Johnson & Johnson, 08-cv-05743, combined for trial in In re Levaquin Products Liability Litigation, 08-md-01943, U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a Levaquin Tendon Rupture, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

Click here for Map and location.

Wrongful Death Lawsuit Settled Over Chewing Tobacco Death

The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm is currently accepting and evaluating potential Smokeless Tobacco Wrongful Death claims.

A chewing tobacco manufacturer has agreed to a $5 million settlement with the family of a man who died from cancer, allegedly caused by the product. The man began chewing tobacco at age 13 and died of tongue cancer at age 43. The lawsuit and settlement is the first of its kind related to chewing tobacco.

Read Article: The Hartford Courant

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth DePuy Hip Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a defective DePuy Hip, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation regarding your defective product liability claim. Click here for Map and location.

A judicial panel has decided that all pretrial proceedings in federal lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson over recalled hip-replacement devices will be overseen by the Federal Court in Ohio. Once pretrial proceedings are completed, the individual cases are sent back for trial in the courts where they were first filed.

U.S. District Judge Katz in Toledo, Ohio, will supervise evidence-gathering efforts in cases over the ASR XL Acetabular System.

DePuy recalled both the ASR XL Acetabular System, a total hip-replacement product approved by U.S. Food and Drug Administration in August 2005, and the DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System.

New Brunswick, New Jersey-based J&J, and Warsaw, Indiana-based DePuy said they recalled the devices after researchers found many patients needed “revision surgery” after five years because of design defects.

Researchers in the U.K. found that, 13 percent of patients with complete hip replacements and 12 percent with resurfacing devices needed a second operation.

Other medical-device makers have faced costly product-liability cases in the past over hip-replacement systems.

Sulzer AG agreed in 2001 to a $1 billion settlement of suits alleging hip and knee implants made by its former Sulzer Medica unit were defective.

In the DePuy litigation, there are allegations of toxic exposure to trace elements, chromium and cobalt. A DePuy victim's damages include revision surgery to get the metal-on-metal implant out, systemic reaction to the excessive metal load in their body, bone loss around the implant, metal debris and metal ions in their tissues causing necrosis of the tissue, chromium and cobalt poisoning, non-malignant tumors, and increased risk of cancer.

Serious allegations indeed.

As a Fort Worth Car Accident Attorney I am providing this update on drunk driving related car accidents and fatalities. These incredible statistics reveal why drunk driving is a major public policy issue.

According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving MADD, these are the statistics for 2010 for the State of Texas.

Rank: 45

3 time offenders: 124,662

5 time offenders: 18,271

DUI Fatalities: 1,235

% of total traffic deaths DUI related 40%

% of change in DUI fatalities from previous to current year: -6

State subsidy of drunk driving fatalities: $5.8 Billion

Summary:

The Legislature rejected lifesaving interlock legislation and sobriety checkpoint legislation in 2009; MADD is working toward the 2011 session.

Alcohol use in past month among persons aged 12 to 20: 26%

Binge alcohol use in past month among persons aged 12 to 20: 17%

Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2007 and 2008.

We are following closely this local story involving a drunk Fort Worth police officer and the tragic car accident that he was involved in. Read full Fort Worth Star Telegram story here.

An accident investigator said a former Fort Worth police officer's alcohol intoxication is to blame for a fatal car crash.

Jesus Cisneros, a former undercover narcotics officer, is charged with intoxication manslaughter in the wrongful death of a 27-year-old mother.

Sonia Baker died in December when a Fort Worth issued SUV driven by Cisneros crashed into her. The SUV apparently was speeding at 76 mph in a busy residential area when it collided with Baker's car. Baker could not have been able to avoid the accident, according to the investigators.

According to State Prosecutors, the crash came after Cisneros attended a birthday party for a fellow officer at a Fort Worth bar. Video that was recorded at the party show him drinking heavily.

Click here for Map

As a DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuit - Hip Recall Lawyer, I updating this information involving 2 Class action lawsuits that were filed recently in Canada against the manufacturers of the recalled defective hip replacement systems.

One of the complaints, was filed against DePuy Orthopaedics and this DePuy ASR lawsuit is seeking to represent all Canadians who received the recalled metal-on-metal hip replacement system.

The other hip replacement lawsuit was filed in Calgary, Halifax and Montreal against DePuy, Zimmer and Stryker. This complaint alleges that these manufacturing companies released the recalled defective hip replacement systems.

The DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System, the DePuy ASR XL Acetabular Hip System, the Zimmer Durom Cup, the Stryker Trident Acetabular PSL Cup and the Stryker Trident Hemispherical Cup are all being targeted.

The DePuy ASR hip failures appear to be linked to a defective design of the acetabular cup, which is shallower than acetabular cups made by other companies.

The Zimmer Durom Cup hip implant was supposedly designed as a more advanced form of a hip resurfacing system.

But after Zimmer introduced the Durom Cup in the United States, many concerns emerged about a high number of hip replacement failures involving the hip implant. Claims made in Zimmer Durom Cup lawsuits suggests that the artificial hip failure rate is between 20% and 30%.

The U.S. federal Zimmer Durom Cup recall litigation has been consolidated in the District of New Jersey as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

The Stryker Trident Cup is a ceramic-on-ceramic hip replacement system. A Stryker Trident recall was issued in January 2008, after it was discovered that manufacturing problems may have resulted in some parts not meeting the proper standards for sterility.

As a Fort Worth Darvon, Darvocet, Propoxyphene Recall Attorney, I have special knowledge because of my cardiology background. Darvon, Darvocet and Propoxyphene can affect your heart electrical activity and rhythm.

If you have suffered from cardiac blackouts, ventricular fibrillation, Torsade De Pointes, cardiac arrest, required CPR or defibrillation, and are taking these medications, your medical condition may be linked to the toxic side effects.

This following information is available from the FDA.

Propoxyphene is an opioid medication that was first approved by FDA in 1957. It has been marketed in the United States since 1976 as a Schedule IV Controlled Substances used as either a single ingredient (e.g., Darvon) or in combination with acetaminophen (e.g., Darvocet) to treat mild to moderate pain.

In January 2009, the FDA held an advisory committee meeting to address the efficacy and safety of propoxyphene.

In July 2009, the FDA decided to permit continued marketing of propoxyphene with a new boxed warning added to the drug label alerting patients and health care professionals to the risk of a fatal overdose.

Recently Xanodyne (Pharmaceutical manufacturer) conducted a study in healthy volunteers to determine an appropriate dose that could be used in the definitive cardiac study. Data from that study demonstrated that even when propoxyphene was taken at recommended doses, there were significant changes to the electrical activity of the heart including prolonged PR interval, widened QRS complex and prolonged QT interval.

FDA is now recommending that propoxyphene products be removed from the US market.

FDA Questions and Answers here.

If you or a family member has been personally injured because of the fault of someone else: by the use of dangerous and defective drugs, bad products, or toxic injury etc then please contact the Dallas Texas Darvon Darvocet Propoxyphene Recall Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik. For a no obligation, free case analysis, please call 817-900-8439, 888-210-9693 or Contact Me Online.

The Dr. Shezad Malik Law Firm is currently evaluating and accepting Darvon, Darvocet and Propoxyphene cardiac arrest or wrongful death cases.

The first of many hearings on the DePuy ASR XL hip implants lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson was held in Durham, North Carolina on November 18, 2010.

The U.S. Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation, JPML, heard arguments from defense lawyers for Johnson and Johnson and the plaintiffs attorneys for the affected and injured consumers.

This hearing will determine where the lawsuits should be coordinated for pretrial management, and which judge should be assigned to handle the cases.

The most significant health risk from the metallic hip is the exposure to patients of high levels of chromium and cobalt metal debris from the implants. The faulty and defective design of the ASR XL prosthetic hip leads to excessive pressure on the edges of the cup, causing extensive wear and tear and this leads to the release of ionic metal debris into the patients hip.

According to the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Metallosis is usually defined as aseptic fibrosis, local necrosis, or loosening of a device secondary to metallic corrosion and release of wear debris.

Chromium and cobalt are natural trace elements which the body requires for healthy function. The chromium and cobalt ions released by the DePuy ASR metal on metal grinding joint, are toxic to the tissues in the hip.

Chromium and cobalt exposures in industrial settings have been demonstrated by medical studies, and that these metals are highly toxic to the liver, kidneys, and brain tissue.

Information and commentary is provided by Dallas and Fort Worth DePuy ASR Hip Recall Attorney Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be reached in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you have questions about a DePuy ASR Hip Recall, please fill out our contact online for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Texas Dilantin Stevens Johnson Syndrome SJS attorney, we are providing this update.

Dilantin (Generic: Phenytoin) is an antiepileptic drug prescribed to manage seizures. A major side effect of Dilantin is a severe skin reaction called Stevens Johnson Syndrome (SJS).

Stevens Johnson Syndrome involves the skin and the mucous membranes and is a serious systemic disorder with the potential for severe illness and even death.

With Stevens Johnson Syndrome, a patient develops blistering of mucous membranes, usually in the mouth, eyes, and genitals. Nearly all cases are caused by a drug reaction, most commonly sulfa antibiotics, barbiturates, anti-seizure medication such as Dilantin and certain non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The disorder occurs in all age groups but is more common in older people and people of African American descent.

Information and commentary is provided by Dallas and Fort Worth Dilantin Stevens Johnson Syndrome Attorney Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be reached in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you have questions about drug induced Stevens Johnson Syndrome, please fill out our contact for online for a free consultation.

Continue reading "Dilantin Stevens Johnson Syndrome SJS Attorney" »

As a Fort Worth Darvon Darvocet Product Recall Attorney we are providing this update. The FDA announced that it has requested manufacturers of propoxyphene, brand name Darvon, Darvocet and its generic equivalents, be withdrawn from the market due to serious and fatal heart risks.

Recent clinical data has shown that patients who take propoxyphene are at risk of fatal heart arrhythmia. This study showed that, even when taken at recommended doses, propoxyphene causes significant changes to the electrical activity of the heart visible on an electrocardiogram (EKG). These changes in electrical activity can increase the risk for abnormal heart rhythms linke

Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals Inc, the maker of brand name Darvon and Darvocet, has agreed to withdraw the drug from the U.S. market and the FDA has notified manufacturers of generic propoxyphene products of Xanodyne’s decision, requesting they do the same.

Stand Alone Propoxyphene

* Darvon
* Darvon-N
* PP-Cap

Propoxyphene Combination Products

* Balacet (containing Acetaminophen and Propoxyphene)
* Darvocet A500 (containing Acetaminophen and Propoxyphene)
* Darvocet-N (containing Acetaminophen and Propoxyphene)
* Darvon Compound 32 (containing Aspirin, Caffeine, and Propoxyphene)
* Darvon Compound-65 (containing Aspirin, Caffeine, and Propoxyphene)
* PC-CAP (containing Aspirin, Caffeine, and Propoxyphene)
* Propacet (containing Acetaminophen and Propoxyphene)
* Propoxyphene Compound 65 (containing Aspirin, Caffeine, and Propoxyphene)
* Wygesic (containing Acetaminophen and Propoxyphene)

If you or a family member has been personally injured because of the fault of someone else: by the use of dangerous and defective drugs, bad products, or toxic injury etc then please contact the Fort Worth Texas Darvon Darvocet Product Liability Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik. For a no obligation, free case analysis, please call 888-210-9693, 817-900-8439 or Contact Me Online.

As a Fort Worth Dilantin Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Syndrome Attorney, we are providing an update on Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Syndrome (TENS).

Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN), is a more severe form of Stevens Johnson Syndrome (SJS) with death and illness rates that are much higher than SJS.

Like SJS, TEN Syndrome are an immune complex-mediated hypersensitivity complex that involves the skin and mucous membranes. There is significant involvement of oral, nasal, eye, vaginal, urethral, GI, and lower respiratory tract mucous membranes.

Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TENS) is a very serious, and life threatening disease. In these cases lead to mucosal scarring and loss of function of the involved organ system leaving the patient blind and unable to breathe, eat or speak on their own.

Information and commentary is provided by Dallas and Fort Worth Dilantin Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Attorney Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be reached in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you have questions about Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis or Stevens Johnson Syndrome, please fill out our contact for online for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Truck accident attorney, I would to share my thoughts about the causes of truck accidents and injuries.

There are many causes of Trucking Accidents, most common include Driver Fatigue, and Mechanical Failure involving the cars and trucks.

Deadly Trucking accidents can result from driver fatigue, inclement weather or road conditions, and vehicle failure.

Usually there is no contest between a fully loaded 100,000 lbs 18 wheeler truck and a 5,000 lbs automobile. And usually death or catastrophic injuries are the invariable outcome.

Across the United States, trucking accidents are caused by the dangerous and negligent actions of truck drivers. Speeding at unsafe speeds, not observing the traffic signals and rules, failure to yield and failing to follow rules of the road result in thousands of traffic accidents each year.

As an internal medicine resident, ER physician and practicing physician, I have encountered and treated some mild cases of Stevens Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, TENS, medical conditions.

Now as a Fort Worth Steven Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis lawyer, we are providing this update.

Dilantin, Depakote, Levaquin and Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory drugs are among some of the drugs that may cause Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS).

Dilantin and Depakote are anti-epileptic and anti-convulsion drugs which can cause Stevens-Johnson Syndrome.

These drugs – Dilantin, Depakote, Levaquin and Motrin have serious side effects, among them aching, headaches, and fever followed by a red rash and blisters. This could be a sign of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, a rare but fatal skin disorder. Stevens Johnson Syndrome is a life-threatening skin disease that can cause rashes, skin peeling, and blisters on the body's mucous membranes.

Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) are two versions of the same disease, distinguished from each other by severity. Both are hypersensitive life-threatening skin reactions.

Information and commentary is provided by Dallas and Fort Worth Steven Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis lawyer, Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be reached in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you have questions about Steven Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, please fill out our contact for online for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Wrongful Death Attorney and DUI Car Accident Attorney I am providing this latest update regarding the dangers of driving under the influence of alcohol and car accidents.

An Indiana judge has awarded $15 million to the family of a man who was killed in a 2005 crash caused by a drunk driver.

The crash, which occurred on the Indiana Toll Road, killed four people in all, but Stanislaw Gil, the man responsible, was unharmed.

The truck driver had also been driving longer than federal regulations allow and his employer, Net Trucking, had doctored their logs to conceal this fact, an investigation discovered. Gil has been sentenced to 14 years in prison and 10 years probation.

Information and commentary provided by Dallas Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Dr Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be contacted in Dallas at 888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you or a loved one has been injured from a hit and run, please fill out our contact card for a free consultation.

MDL Panel Hearing For Texas DePuy Hip Replacement Litigation

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is meeting on November 18 in Durham, North Carolina.to centralize all federal DePuy ASR recall lawsuits.

The DePuy metal-on-metal hip was recalled after medical data suggested that about one out of every 8 people, if not more, who received the artificial hip may have their DePuy ASR hip fail within five years.

Some plaintiffs are seeking to have the cases consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey under Judge Susan D. Wigenton, where many of the cases are currently pending.

The DePuy ASR hip failures appear to be linked to a defective design of the acetabular cup, making it prone to problems.

The benefits of a MDL include a reduction in duplicative discovery among thousands of similar cases, avoid conflicting rulings from judges in different districts.

As a Texas Benzene Cancer Exposure Attorney, I frequently write articles about this new scourge of the 21st century.

I firmly believe, based on my medical knowledge, that all this drilling and fracking for oil and gas is setting us up for a new wave of benzene induced cancers, particularly leukemias.

Earlier this year, there was a huge gas leakage at BP’s Texas City refinery, which led to the company having to flare gases. As the company worked to fix the leakage, approximately 530,000 pounds of noxious pollutants were released into the Texas City air. This included 17,000 pounds of benzene, a known carcinogen.

BP never informed the public about this leak that was spread out over 40 days.

Many thousands of Texas City residents have complained about the effects of that exposure to benzene, including respiratory difficulties, sinus infections, as well as headaches and nosebleeds. These are acute benzene exposure symptoms.

But the real danger may not manifest itself for years down the road, when folks would have forgotten about this benzene leakage into the environment. Benzene-induced leukemia has a usual latency period of 5 to 15 years and, in many cases, is preceded by aplastic anemia.

Folks, we are talking about acute and chronic leukemias, which will kill you.

As a Fort Worth Benzene Toxic Spill attorney, I read with interest the following article regarding BP's petroleum operations in Alaska. The last pristine wild-life area in the world is at great risk for an environmental disaster of immense proportions. This another in a series of articles that I am writing regarding the toxic exposure we are experiencing.

The huge pipeline system that moves oil, gas and waste throughout BP's petroleum operations in Alaska, has severe corrosion, according to an internal report.

The report states that 148 BP pipelines on Alaska's North Slope have received an "F-rank' from the company.

Most of those lines carry toxic or flammable substances, and many of the metal walls of the F-ranked pipes are worn to within a few thousandths of an inch of bursting, according to the document, risking an explosion or spills.

Read Article: The Washington Post

As a Fort Worth Medical Malpractice attorney, I read with interest this Texas medical malpractice case.

A Texas jury awarded $4 million to a man who had a surgical sponge left inside him after a cholecystectomy surgery in 2008.

Several months later, he returned to the hospital with severe stomach pain, according to the law suit. Upon further testing including abdominal ct scan,, it was discovered that a sponge had been accidentally left inside his abdomen.

Damage Breakdown:
$100 k: Physical and mental anguish suffered in the past

$30 k: Physical and mental anguish expected in the future

$200 k: Loss of earning capacity in the past

$300 k: Loss of earning capacity expected in the future

$150 k: Physical impairment sustained in the past

$300 k: Medical expenses incurred in the past

$3 million: Medical care and expenses expected in the future

Read Article: Victoria Advocate

As a Dallas Depuy Hip Recall Attorney, I am fielding many calls from concerned plaintiffs regarding their implanted DePuy ASR Metal on Metal Hip prosthesis.

Many plaintiffs are understandably concerned, about what to do next once they receive a certified letter from their orthopedic doctor, allegedly ghost written by DePuy.

Many folks are asked to get a blood test and are asked to sign over their hip surgery medical records. Patients with the metal hip devices have suffered pain and inflammation from device malfunction, and have endured metallosis when the grinding of metal parts in the hip implants releases cobalt and chromium into their bloodstream.

Folks you are not alone, you need to preserve your legal rights and have your case evaluated by an experienced product liability attorney.

I had one just call today, from a man who is suffering terribly from his 2 year old hip surgery. He had never sued anybody and did not know what to next.

He had received the correspondence from his doctors and a request for a blood test. He was confused and upset because he knows that he will have to undergo another painful hip surgery, and he knows he will have a long road to recovery, pain and suffering and finally may lose his job.

He is the only bread winner in his family and knows if he loses his job, he will have no health insurance to pay for the new hip, which can cost up $150,000.

As a Fort Worth Benzene Lawsuit Attorney, I have been writing over the past month a series of stories on the Environment and Toxicity.

According to a new study, mothers who live in Texas neighborhoods with higher levels of benzene, a pollutant from refineries and tailpipes, are more likely to have babies with a serious neurological defects.

Texas leads the nation in benzene releases, accounting for more than 34% of emissions.

This study for the first time, links benzene to a neurological birth defect and demonstrates that air pollution can harm a fetus.

Researchers from the UT School of Public Health and Texas Dept of State Health Services conducted the study, which appeared in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
Houston Chronicle 10/28/2010

Read Article: Houston Chronicle

As a Dallas DePuy Recall attorney I am concern about the risks of Cobalt and Chromium poisoning, resulting from the metal on metal grinding of the DePuy ASR Prosthetic Hips.

In August of this year, DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., recalled the ASR metal-on-metal hip replacement system, admitting that about one out of every eight patients who receives the hip implant may experience early hip failure within five years. The actual ratio of defective hips may be as high as one out of five or 20%, or even higher.

Structeral design and manufacturing problems with the DePuy metal-on-metal hip replacement system allow the toxic release of chromium and cobalt to be absorbed into the blood-stream.

Tests have demonstrated that levels of chromium and cobalt can be 100 times higher than normal, and the patients have had soft tissue and muscle inflammation and benign tumors develop, called pseudo-tumors.

Chromium and Cobalt toxicity has been linked to cancer, and other severe medical conditions associated with heavy metal toxicity.

Many individual and 2 class action law suits have been filed, the most recent in Northern District of Ohio Federal Court, on September 30.

In September, a motion was filed with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate and centralize the DePuy ASR recall litigation. The panel will hear arguments on the motion in early November.

If an MDL is formed, all federal cases filed in different districts throughout the United States will be transferred to one judge for coordinated handling during pretrial litigation.

Tags: Class Action, DePuy, DePuy ASR, Depuy ASR Hip, Hip Implant, Johnson & Johnson, Metal-on-Metal Hip, Product Liability, Texas DePuy Recall.

As a Fort Worth DePuy Hip Product Liability attorney I took an interesting potential client inquiry. The woman had hip replacement and she has noticed that her hair is falling out in clumps, suggesting toxic metal ion poisoning., which is described below.

DePuy XL ASR Prosthetic Hips are unique, in that they involve metal on metal grinding during a patient's ambulation. While the metal design may have have sounded good in theory, they have turned out horribly bad in clinical practice.

Patients then develop 2 types of problems. The repetitive grinding motion, leads to microscopic wearing down of the articular surfaces and the release of metallic ions, particularly cobalt and chromium, into the tissues surrounding the hip. The metal becomes fatigued and leads to early failure.

Also there is the resultant loosening and dislocation of the device resulting in the need for early hip revision surgery and/or the release of metal debris causing tissue damage.

This absorption of metallic ions in the tissues, leads to an inflammatory reaction, resulting in pain, swelling and immobility. The absorption of metallic ions into the bloodstream leads to cobalt and chromium toxicity. Polyneuropathy is caused by cobalt–chromium metallosis after total hip replacement. Read the article here.

artificial hip joint; biopsy; metal intoxication; polyneuropathy; toxic neuropathy

Continue reading "DePuy Hip ASR And Metallosis" »

Today as a Fort Worth DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuit attorney, I took in a case for DePuy ASR product liability lawsuits that we are filing.

Johnson and Johnson acknowledged in August, with the withdrawal from the market their artificial hips, that there are problems with high failure rates, metal on metal grinding and release of metal ions into the joints.

Now class actions lawsuits are being filed across the nation.

Approximately 30,000 DePuy hips have been implanted in the US alone. There is a Fort Worth orthopedic group that has implanted 800, over the past 6 years.

DePuy is paying orthopedic doctors $50 to hand over their patients medical records and grabbing the artificial joints when they get removed. Both of these acts should be resisted at all costs. This is unethical, and you risk the loss of key evidence of a defective product. We are storing our clients DePuy artificial hips in storage bottled containing formalin.

I would encourage all patients who have had a DePuy hip implanted to seek legal advice, and to safeguard their legal rights. If you have one of the DePuy ASR hip systems, you have the potential of a legal claim. Potential recoveries include compensation for your medical bills, lost wages and your pain and suffering.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Artificial Hip With DePuy ASR Replacement?" »

Not a day goes by when one reads of a story of an accidental oil and gas spillage or leakage into the ground, our water ways or the ocean. The BP Oil Spill is one major example. All over the United States, on a daily basis there are folks who are getting exposed to toxic chemicals.

As a Fort Worth Benzene Lawsuit attorney, my job is to provide to the public education, knowledge and help to help folks who have been exposed to these toxic chemicals. I hope to write a series of blog articles to highlight the various poisons that we are releasing, knowingly or accidentally into our environment.

The first is on Benzene Toxic Exposure.

Benzene is a known carcinogen in humans and causes cancer. Breathing benzene vapors can cause immediate death and chronic exposure to Benzene causes various forms of leukemia, especially Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML).

Dr Shezad Malik law firm has expertise in occupational and environmental Benzene exposure litigation.

If you or a loved one have been exposed to Benzene and developed leukemia, you should contact us immediately. You may be entitled to compensation and we can help.

Benzene is a highly flammable colorless liquid, and Benzene occurs naturally in crude oil, gasoline, and a component in many industrial and consumer products.

Benzene is commonly found in: asphalts, charcoal lighter fluid, cigarette lighter fluid, gasoline, glues, kerosene, hydraulic fluids, inks and ink markers, lacquer thinner, rubber cement, solvents, and vinyl thinners among others.

Many industrial workers are at risk for occupational exposure to this carcinogen. These include benzene production (petrochemicals, petroleum refining, and coke/coal chemical manufacturing), tire manufacturing, the printing industry, and storage or transport of benzene and petroleum products containing benzene to name some examples.

Other industrial workers at risk for exposure include those in the rubber industry, pesticides production, solvent production, paint/varnish production, waste management, oil refineries, chemical plants, leather manufacturers, petroleum processing industries, printers, and gas station employees.As you can see from these lists, Benzene is widely used in many industrial processes and frequent occupational exposure can occur.

There have been many instances of Environmental Exposure including Industrial discharge, disposal of products containing benzene, and gasoline leaks from underground storage tanks that have released benzene into our soil and water supplies.

There are Acute (short-term) and Chronic (long-term) side effects to a person being exposed to the chemical. Benzene has been linked to:

* Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML)
* Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
* Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
* Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS)
* Myelofibrosis and Myeloid Metaplasia
* Aplastic Anemia
* Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL)
* Hairy Cell Leukemia
* Multiple Myeloma
* Thrombocytopenic Purpura
* Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (CML)
* Hematologic Cancers

The Dr Shezad Malik law firm focuses on the representation of plaintiffs in Benzene lawsuits. We are handling individual and group litigation nationwide and currently accepting new Benzene cases in all 50 states.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Texas Benzene Lawsuit Attorney" »

We are the Fort Worth Texas Fosamax Product Liability Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik.
The FDA found that in some cases two types of drugs that were supposed to be preventing serious medical problems were, in fact, causing them.

Bisphosphonates like Fosamax, Actonel and Boniva, will now have to carry labels saying they can lead to rare fractures of the thigh bone, a discovery that came after another finding that they can cause a rare degeneration of the jawbone called osteonecrosis.

The other is Avandia, a blockbuster drug which was prescribed for diabetics. Diabetics are at high risk because of the disease process, for heart attacks and heart failure. Now the F.D.A. and drug regulators in Europe are restricting Avandia’s use because it appears to increase heart risks, according to research studies. Talk about a double whammy.

In both cases, the respective drug companies continue to deny any liability to the disease processes associated with the usage of their drugs.

Read Article: The New York Times

Continue reading "When Dangerous Drugs Happen to Good People: Drug Product Liability Attorney" »

Medtronic said it is resolving claims that wires connecting implantable Sprint Fidelis defibrillators to patients' hearts were defective. In 2009, the company estimated that at least 13 people may have died because of the problem.

Medtronic said it has agreed to pay $268 million to settle U.S. lawsuits and claims related to its Sprint Fidelis family of defibrillation leads which it recalled three years ago.

The settlement "will provide an average payout of more than $33,000 to patients who have defibrillators with wires that have broken or are considered likely to break." Company officials estimate "that 170,000 people worldwide still have defibrillators with the Sprint Fidelis leads inside them." Read full story Bloomberg News.

Continue reading "Medtronic to Pay $268 M to Settle Law Suits Over Defibrillator Wire Defects" »

The first Yasmin and Yaz Product Liability Federal lawsuit trials are underway according to the recent MDL Southern District of Illinois Court Order. Our Fort Worth Yaz Injury Lawyer law firm is currently handling many cases in the Federal Yaz MDL which is consolidated in Southern District of Illinois, based in East St Louis.

These Federal MDL product liability cases involve allegations that women who took the oral contraceptive birth control pills suffered serious medical problems. 10% of the injury cases are strokes, 40% are venous thromboembolism (VTE), which include deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) and the remainder are gallbladder injuries.

Bell Weather Trial Case Selection and Process

In Complex Class action or MDL litigation, bell-weather trials allow the parties to evaluate how jurors respond to evidence that will be presented in the upcoming individual litigation.

The Court's order calls for the parties to each choose 25 cases. All of the injury cases will be either gallbladder injuries or VTE. Yaz and Yasmin stroke lawsuits will not be part of the bell-weather trials because of their low percentage of personal injuries.

After case-specific discovery on the 50 chosen cases, the list of cases will be reduced to 24. The parties will select four PE cases, four gallbladder cases and four other VTE lawsuits. Each party will be allowed to veto one of the other side’s cases from each injury group. The Court will then choose one case from each group to serve as the bell-weather trial. The two other cases are backups in the event the first case cannot be tried for some reason.

The Yaz bell-weather trials will begin with a pulmonary embolism lawsuit on September 12, 2011, followed by a gallbladder injury lawsuit that has been set for trial January 9, 2012 and another VTE case that has been set for trial to begin April 2, 2012.

Continue reading "Yaz Lawsuit Update: Plaintiff Mini Trials to Start Fall 2011" »

Patients who received a DePuy ASR hip replacement made by a unit of Johnson and Johnson, face a high risk of hip failure or other complications due to problems with the design of the metal-on-metal hip implant.

DEPUY ASR LAWSUIT UPDATE: A recall for the hip implant was issued in August 2010, nearly a year-and-a-half after the first lawsuit over DePuy ASR hip problems was filed. The DePuy ASR Hip System is a metal-on-metal hip replacement device. Read the company's information here for patients.

The DePuy ASR hip failure rate at five years is between 12% and 13% (one out of every 8 patients), and may be even higher among women and those who received a device with a smaller head (under 50mm).

DEPUY ASR HIP REPLACEMENT PROBLEMS: According to FDA Adverse Event Reports, more than 400 reports involving DePuy ASR hip problems have been received by the federal regulatory agency since the start of 2008.

The signs of a problem with the DePuy ASR Hip, are loosening of the hip implant, fracture of the bone around the implant, or dislocation of the two parts of the hip implant that move against each other.

Problems with metal-on-metal hip implants like the DePuy ASR have been associated with metal particles that could shed into the body as the hip implants wear down.The metallic debris could damage the tissue and bone surrounding the hip implant, potentially causing a loosening of the hip.

DEPUY ASR RECALL: On August 26, 2010, DePuy Orthopaedics announced the recall of DePuy ASR XL Acetabular Hip System and DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System implants, after confirming that they have an unreasonably high failure rate.

DePuy Orthopaedics did not acknowledge until March 2010 that there was a higher-than-expected failure rate with DePuy ASR hip implants, and did not recall DePuy ASR hip replacement implants until August 2010.

Continue reading "Dallas Fort Worth Texas DePuy Hip Implant Recall Lawyer" »

A CA man has been awarded $6.4 million in a lawsuit against the city of Roseville, Calif. and a Metro bus company for a brain injury he suffered while getting on one of the company buses in 2008.

The quadriplegic man was being lifted up into one of the buses when his wheelchair rolled back off the platform, causing his head to strike the pavement, according to the suit.

The man suffered severe brain injuries as a result. Read Article: The Washington Post

This man was already severely compromised as a result of his underlying medical condition involving quadriplegia. Now adding the insult to injury of traumatic brain damage, it looks like this man could not catch any breaks. All of the damage award will go to pay for his medical condition and increased medical needs.

Continue reading "$6.4 M Awarded to Brain Injury Caused by CA MetroBus" »

As a Fort Worth Texas Depuy Hip Recall law firm, we have begun evaluating and accepting Depuy Hip Product Liability claims for patients nationwide who are affected by the Depuy hip recall. The DePuy ASR hip replacements have been found to fail at a high rate and this results in the patient needing to have the device removed and replaced in a revision surgery.

Our investigation of the DePuy ASR Hip has revealed that the device causes high levels of metal ion release into patients implanted with the device.

Patients who have had a hip replacement since 2003 and are experiencing pain are urged to contact their orthopedic surgeons or the hospital where their hip surgery took place to find out if the DePuy ASR Hip was used in their hip replacement surgery.

DePuy Orthopaedics, made a voluntary recall for their ASR XL Acetabular System which was sold in the U.S. The recall was promted by the discovery that 12-13% of patient's metal-on-metal implants failed within just five years time, prompting a painful revision surgery.

DePuy sent a letter to orthopaedic hip surgeons to alert them of the recall and in addition, they provided an informational packet and medical release form to be passed out to patients.

We at the Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm strongly advise anyone with a DePuy hip to not sign that release. You do not want to give DePuy the right to review at all your confidential medical records and to take possession of the defective implant after revision surgery.

DePuy pays surgeons $50 for each medical release they convince their patients to sign. Depuy will use that medical information against the patient during litigation. The defective hip implant is the most critical piece of evidence that a patient has in their claim

Continue reading "DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuit - Hip Recall Lawyer" »

As a Fort Worth Defective Drug Product Liability Attorney I am providing this update regarding the status of class actions lawsuits involving Prempro.

According to Bloomberg News, "Pfizer Inc.'s Wyeth unit properly warned a Virginia woman's doctors about the risks of its Prempro menopause drug, the jury ruled in rejecting her claim for damages."

Jurors found that "Georgia Torkie-Tork couldn't show that Wyeth officials downplayed the breast-cancer risks associated with Prempro, a hormone-replacement drug.

The decision was Wyeth's fourth straight victory in a Prempro suit weighed by a jury."

Over "6 million women took Prempro and related menopause drugs to treat symptoms such as hot flashes and mood swings before a 2002 study highlighted their links to cancer."

DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.,a unit of Johnson and Johnson, recently announced the recall of its ASR Hip Replacement Systems. It is estimated that there are 93,000 implants worldwide. This recall came about as a result of a higher rate of failure requiring another hip replacement within 5 years.

If you have a DePuy ASR XL Acetabular or DePuy ASR Hip Resurfacing System should receive a letter informing you of the recall. The first step is to consult your doctor.

If you or a family member has been personally injured because of the fault of someone else: by the use of dangerous and defective drugs, bad products, or toxic injury etc then please contact the Dallas Fort Worth DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Product Liability Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik. For a no obligation, free case analysis, please call 888-210-9693, 817-900-8439 or Contact Me Online.

The Dr. Shezad Malik Law Firm is currently evaluating and accepting Dallas DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuit cases.

You or a loved one may be entitled to financial compensation if problems occurred after a hip surgery using the DePuy hip replacement system. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm offers a free DePuy Hip Recall lawsuit review. There are never any legal fees unless you receive compensation.

As a Fort Worth Product Liability attorney I read with interest this new FDA Meridia warning and recall.

The F.D.A. has announced a recall of the diet drug Meridia due to its link to increased risk of heart attacks and strokes.

Abbott Laboratories has agreed to voluntarily withdraw its obesity drug Meridia (sibutramine) from the U.S. market because of clinical trial data indicating an increased risk of heart attack and stroke, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

A recent study showed that people who take Meridia experience a 16 percent increase in the risk of serious heart problems, including non-fatal heart attacks, non-fatal strokes. Read Article: The Washington Post

Continue reading "FDA Recalls Meridia Due To Heart Problems" »

As a Fort Worth DePuy ASR class action attorney and law firm, we have been following closely the events surrounding the DePuy artificial hip replacement and the lawsuits that have followed.

The negligent actions by DePuy Orthopaedics have led to multiple DePuy ASR Class Action Lawsuits involving patients from the world. The main negligence allegations are that the company knew about the high failure rate of its hip devices for years before taking action to fix the device or remove it.

On August 19, 2010 the FDA sent a warning letter to the manufacturers of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement, DePuy Orthopaedics, regarding other orthopedic devices.

Read here the DePuy Recall Guide for patients.

If you or a family member has been personally injured because of the fault of someone else: by the use of dangerous and defective drugs, bad products, or toxic injury etc then please contact the Fort Worth Texas DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Product Liability Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik. For a no obligation, free case analysis, please call 888-210-9693, 817-900-8439 or Contact Me Online.

The Dr. Shezad Malik Law Firm is currently evaluating and accepting DePuy ASR Hip Replacement cases.

Continue reading "Fort Worth DePuy ASR Class Action Lawsuits " »

As a Dallas Benzene Leukemia Attorney I have followed the news surrounding the oil and gas extraction from the Barnett Shale.

The gas companies are releasing untold amounts of Benzene into the atmosphere and polluting the ground water.

Folks, wake up and smell the roses. We have only one Texas and one World. If you crap this up, we have no where to go. Raise your hands those of you who want to live in a sewer.

Benzene is a volatile hydrocarbon, a product from the Petroleum Industry.

Trouble is, Benzene it is a known carcinogen and very toxic. Many blood cancers occur as a result of exposure to this chemical.

Continue reading "Dallas Benzene Leukemia Attorney" »

As a Fort Worth Personal Injury attorney, I represent a lot of clients who have suffered personal injuries following a slip and fall accident.

Earlier in the week I defended a slip and fall deposition involving my client. The client is a 55 year old engineer who slipped and fell while walking to the bathroom at a sushi restaurant.

He slipped on something greasy that was left on the slick tiled floor and went down so hard that he was knocked out and had to be transported to the hospital and placed on the ventilator until he could recover.

The defense is making the argument that he fell off his stool at the bar but they could not explain how he happened to be found by the bathroom. Obviously they are making the argument that he could be in 2 places at once! They are making the claim that the law of physics do not apply in their restaurant...they are not familiar it would appear with Einstein's theory of Relativity..

I will continue to update this story.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Slip and Fall Accident and Injuries" »

As a Southlake car accident and car wreck attorney I frequently provide updates to my readers.
If you are involved in a car accident, car wreck, hit and run, fender bender or any other terms you that may use for a car collision, you should be familiar with the Texas driving rules of the road.

As a Fort Worth Car Wreck attorney, I am involved with many of the similar types of car accident cases as I read about this weekend.

Dallas taxi broadsides SUV, leads to critical injuries of a stranded driver. Read full story here. A taxicab carrying seven passengers broadsided a Buick at a downtown Dallas intersection Saturday morning, sending the SUV crashing into a man as he filled his dead vehicle with gas.

Obviously the taxi cab driver did not keep a proper lookout and went through a busy intersection, causing the accident and causing significant brain trauma to a pedestrian.

In Texas, all drivers have to keep a “proper lookout”and observe the speed, traffic signals/signs and traffic conditions for that particular stretch of road. It is the law in Texas to wear a seat belt and so buckle up. That means that the driver has to pay continuous attention to the road as well as other drivers and failure to observe this could result in a Texas car accident because of negligence.

Every driver in Texas- whether you live in Southlake, or any other area- has a responsibility to be careful when driving. Remember a Texas driver license is a privilege and not an automatic right to use the road.

Information and commentary is provided by Dallas and Fort Worth Car Accident Attorney Shezad Malik. The Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm can be reached in Dallas at http://www.shezadmalik.com/http://www.shezadmalik.com/http://www.shezadmalik.com/http://www.shezadmalik.com/http://www.shezadmalik.com/888-210-9693 or in Fort Worth at 817-900-8439. If you have questions about a car accident, please fill out our contact for online for a free consultation.

As a Fort Worth Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice attorney, I read with interest this Texas medical malpractice story. The Texas Medical Board accuses Dr. Rahul Nath of performing unjustified surgery after taking MRIs and diagnosing shoulder injuries that "cannot possibly be seen," and to charging excessive fees.

Now a Harris County judge has ordered him to pay $726,000 to Texas Children's Hospital for the hospital's legal fees. Read the full story here.

I have a similar medical malpractice case where a doctor charged my client for medical surgical procedures, even though she had insurance which would have covered the routine surgery cost. She was conned into paying several thousand dollars and was told it was a cosmetic procedure not covered by insurance.

Continue reading "Texas Doctor Fined For Filing Abusive Lawsuit" »

The personal injury sage continues. As a Fort Worth Personal Injury attorney I am writing this blog to hopefully provide insight to my readers, about the law works with its byzantine rules and regulations.

The Law and its practical applications are murky at best and we as lawyers have developed our own rituals and our own special language. Because if we spoke in plain English, then it would not be special anymore.

In my last missive I detailed the week before an actual trial that we were getting ready to do on our slip and fall case. The case got continued. Now we are using this opportunity to continue in our siege of the defendants castle. We continue to press our charge and are unrelenting in our skirmishes.

The defendants strategy in every personal injury case, irrespective of the claim, is to first deny the claim, then to deflect the claim ie somebody elses fault and then finally to delay the case going to trial. They hope with this strategy with wear out the plaintiff and make the cost of litigation prohibitively expensive to continue.

This standard strategy is designed to sap the will of the opponent, to make the risk reward ratio tilt in their favor. This tactic may have traction in some quarters especially in the claim is weak or ill founded, but to us it is like waving a red flag to a bull. We are only spurred on, and I have a natural dislike for bullies, and that is what the defense are; bullies by any other name are still bullies, with their repeated denials and rejections of liability and fault.

In this particular instance, we have been at it for over 3 years. The defense is a stubborn lot, mangy and dogged in their delay tactics. We shall prevail, Justice will triumph in the end and the dark forces crushed.

Ultimately the defendants insurance is going to rein them in especially when they have spent more in defending this case than they could have settled it for. They are consumed by over reaching hubris and a lack of common sense. They will ultimately lose this account.

As a Fort Worth Dog Attack and Dog Bite attorney, I read with interest this unusual dog bite wrongful death case. Usually human bites are more infective than dog bites.

The death of a Washington state man from a dog bite has prompted a lawsuit by the man's family against the dog's owner. Kenneth Bock developed an infection from a bacteria contracted through the dog's saliva and died of a blood clot 10 days after being bitten, the suit states. The family claims the incident was not the first time the dog had bitten someone and that its owner. Nicole Tsong, Seattle Times 09/09/2010
Read Article: Seattle Times

As a Fort Worth Wrongful Death Lawyer I read with sadness the story excerpted below. Currently my law firm is actively handling 5 Wrongful Death cases, including 3 from medical malpractice, 1 from a pedestrian-car accident and 1 from a death at a gym. Any time there is a loss of life, it is tragic all concerned, especially if somebody else is to blame or be liable.

An Austin family has reached a $500,000 settlement with a group of fraternity members at California Polytechnic State University over the death of their son in 2008. The suit alleged Carson Starkey died of alcohol poisoning during a hazing-related incident with members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity. Staff Report, Austin American Statesman 09/12/2010
Read Article: Austin American Statesman

Here there is a senseless and tragic loss of a college student. I hope the fraternity learn their lesson and hopefully other fraternities will get the message.

"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war."

And so it begins, twenty four hours from now, with a drop of the hammer and a cry of "Order, Court now in session," the battle banners would have unfurled with the sounds of trumpets.

As a Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney, I would like to offer the following insights. As I mentioned in my last posting from the battlefront, we were due in court tomorrow to argue our slip and fall case which just got canceled and set for a new date.

The foul air would have been filled with the clanging of steel, the clashing of shields, the stench of panic and fear permeating the air to be supplemented with whiffs of gunpowder. My friends, this was no ordinary skirmish, but the accumulation of 3 years hard labor. But it was not to be...

My friends that is what a court room feels and sounds like, all shrouded in the fog of war and at the end of the day, one victor and the vanquished. Carnage and havoc for both.
Trials are no easy things and the plaintiffs all want their day in court. It is hard to then explain to them when you get a worse deal at trial that in settlement talks a year earlier.

In this particular battle, the decision to go to war was easy, we had no offers to settle or offers through mediation. Here, if we had failed to press our charge and we lost, what did we lose? We came with nothing and left with nothing. Then the next time the defense would know we spared no quarter, we yielded no ground, and we fought to the last man. Each man died a hero, with sword in hand, a bloody battle indeed.

In this battle dear readers, there are no prisoners.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney Who Will Fight For You 817-900-8439" »

Like the knights and warriors of old, I was preparing this week for all out pitched battle. Is there no captain of Gondor who can come to our aid? Sadly not, we were alone in our campaign for justice.There was going to be a winner and a loser; a victor and vanquished.

A steady drum beat of war filled the air as each night I was hunched over the computer, being warmed by the pallid sickly glow of the screen, while I plotted and schemed our strategy. I reviewed the battle plans with my trusty squire (read associate) and we played out all the competing scenarios. We had been planning our siege and attack for the past 3 months. The defense was well funded, well armed and had countless minions to throw into battle.

Our slip and fall personal injury law suit was filed 3 years ago, and after all the twists and turns had finally come to trial. My 68 year old client had tripped and fallen while crossing a construction site that the company had done when they tore up her drive way. Her house and yard was surrounded by a chain link fence, which was not taken down. The construction site was not barricaded in, taped down or any caution cones placed around the site.

The defense resisted hard, denied all liability and offered no settlement, nothing at mediation and were trying to make us go the long distance. My client had incurred $450,000 in medical bills and had to undergo lumbar sacral surgery and extensive rehab.

My client had a doctor's appointment go to that morning when she fell. She had no alternative entrance or exit from her place. She had to cross the construction site, which was a drop off of 4-6 inches surrounded by wooden forms getting ready for concrete pouring. She tripped and she went down like a lead balloon, or a tree in the forest, depending on your penchant for metaphors.

We had survived 3 knock out/death sentence motions for summary judgment and countless other motions.

This week, we were poring over the trial exhibits, photographs, reading all the depositions and reviewed all the evidence. Earlier in the week we met the plaintiff and key witnesses for the final time, going over the trial and trial strategy. We had gathered and reviewed the multiple medical records and medical billing business affidavits.

The defense launched a fiercesome attack on our encampments, starting on the dawn of Monday morning. A lengthy volley of 3 motions by defense trebuchets came crashing down to instill fear and panic among the camp. We scrambled during the week to our return volley of opposing motions. We had 7 pre-trial motions to argue about on this Monday morning prior to choosing and seating the jury.

Then Thursday afternoon, a call from the court coordinator, our case was going to be canceled and rescheduled for February 2011, because the judge had a conference to go to...

So now, the pitch battle and storming of the castle will have to wait, but we shall persist and continue in the siege. We now will address and set up the 7 motions and force the defense to skirmishes.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Personal Injury Attorney 817-900-8439" »

Today I settled one of my trucking-car accident cases through mediation. Mediation for those of you who are not familiar with the process, is an alternative dispute resolution process that I frequently employ with good results. As a Dallas Wrongful Death Attorney, I use mediation as a settlement instrument in 80-90% of my personal injury cases.

Usually after the lawsuit is filed, initial discovery is shared and the first round of depositions have taken place, both sides of the dispute will have a good idea of the strength and weaknesses of their respective case. No one case is perfect on all counts.

That is when I usually approach the opposition and ask them to consider and participate in the mediation process. Today we had such a meeting, which was held at a neutral place, the office of the neutral attorney mediator. It is the job of the mediator to listen over a period of several hours to both sides of the conflict and urge both sides to come to a settlement.

Sometimes the mediation process fails and the case goes to trial, this usually happens when the parties are too far apart. That happened to me at the last mediation, 2 weeks ago on a dog bite case. We go to trial in October.

In the present mediation, my client had significant soft tissue injuries after she was rear ended by a 18 wheeler truck. She developed chronic pain and had to have significant medical therapy. The outcome could have been much worse, she could have died as a result of the accident. In this case both vehicles had become locked as a result of the accident and the truck driver did not realize that he was in an accident as he continued to drive. It came to his attention when another truck driver called him on the radio that he was pushing a car up the hill.

I am glad to report that the case settled for a confidential amount and the truck driver/company accepted liability.

Continue reading "Dallas Wrongful Death Attorney 817-900-8439" »

This weekend I am in a contemplative mood. I was thinking about one of the medical malpractice cases I am handling. As a Fort Worth Medical Malpractice Attorney and licensed medical doctor, I receive up to 100 telephone calls and email inquiries per month. After talking and carefully screening all of these possible inquiries, I end up selecting only 4-5 cases per year to litigate and to take to the next level.

This case concerns a middle aged woman who comes into a major North Texas hospital for treatment of a fractured hip. She is appropriately evaluated and scheduled for hip replacement under spinal anesthesia.

Then tragedy strikes, there is an accident during the administration of the anesthesia. My client stops breathing and has full cardiac arrest while in the OR. These events were not immediately recognized or treated by the attending anesthesiologist or nurse anesthetist who were responsible for the care of the patient.

After much delay, the patient was resuscitated, but she had developed severe irreversible anoxic brain damage from the lack of oxygen.

The client lingered on in a profound vegetative state for 3 months and then ultimately died.

You would guess that the doctors and nurses would do the right thing and accept liability in this tragic medical malpractice case. You guessed right...they deny liability and we have a fight on our hands.

I have a very good friend, Spencer Aronfeld, Aronfeld Law Firm in Miami Florida who also handles wrongful death and catastrophic personal injury cases. I told him about this case...he was shocked and dismayed. Then he regaled me with similar cases of his own.

Folks every day is a battle to get people justice in this world, please note we are doing it street by street, house by house and city by city. The work for justice never ends and Injustice never sleeps.

Continue reading "Fort Worth Medical Malpractice Attorney 817-900-8439" »

Folks I am a man of simple tastes. When I woke up this morning I sat down with a steaming cup of java and opened up my lap top. I looked out over the back yard, the temperature was cool for Texas (70 F) and the sky was a deep blue...

Is it great to have a contemplative 3 days with the Labor Day Weekend? A great weekend for shopping and getting out and about and then as a result, more slip and falls.

As Dallas Fort Worth Slip and Fall attorney, I review and screen many slip and fall and trip and fall accident/personal injury claims. That reminds me, we have a case currently against a large and well known grocery store. My client is a 75 year old sprightly woman in otherwise good health. She went to the store to do her shopping but did not get very far. She tripped up on the entrance on the floor mats which were not taped down as per the store's policy and procedures.

Instead the mats were allowed to get buckled and frayed and my client tripped up, falling, breaking her hip and shoulder.

You know the rest of the story...the store will not do right by her, she had to retain an attorney and we are in litigation. She had a long hospital stay and extensive rehab and is now finally back on her feet.

We will keep you posted, dear readers of the progress in this case. The defendants have stated that they want to settle and mediate this case...

Continue reading "Dallas Fort Worth Slip and Fall Attorney 817-900-8439" »

Folks I am a man of simple tastes. When I woke up this morning I sat down with a steaming cup of java and opened up my lap top. I looked out over the back yard, the temperature was cool for Texas and the sky was a deep blue...

Is it great to have a contemplative 3 days with the Labor Day Weekend. A great weekend for shopping and then as a result more slip and falls.

That reminds me, we have a case currently against a large and well known grocery store. My client is a 75 year old sprightly woman in otherwise good health. She went to the store to do her shopping burt did not get very far, she tripped on the enterance over the floor mats which were not taped down as per the store's policy and procedures.

Instead they were allowed to get buckled and frayed and my client tiripped up, falling, breaking her hip and shoulder.

You know the rest of the story...the store will not do right by her, she has to retain an attorney and we are in litigation. She has had a long hospital stay and extensive rehab and is now finally back on her feet.

We will keep you posted dear readers of the progress in this case. The denfendants have stated that they want to settle and mediate this case...

Continue reading "Dallas Fort Worth Slip and Fall Attorney 817-900-8439" »