I just saw this post and it makes me feel ashamed of our medical ...

I just saw this post and it makes me feel ashamed of our medical system which includes everybody. about 12 hours ago on Apr 14, 2008 by jerseymomma, #7220 My boss has been in contact with all of the top law firms in the NJ & PA area. We want to make sure that we give you info thats actually going to help and not send you to some bloodsucker. When you file an injury suit, there is no money out of pocket. The lawyers only get paid if you win your trial or the case settles (so if you loose-- u dont loose anything either). And as a heads up, if this is something that can be proven to a jury, the suits take fooorrrrever. I think that is the worst part for the families that I personally have dealt with regarding liability suits-- u want closure and you want answers but it takes so long to get them! Let talks about the "everybody knows category" of the pharmaceutical industry. 1. Everybody knows that: There are many compounds that never go to market for various reasons. Even back then, no pharmaceutical company wanted to spend money on a drug that was not as chemically "reliable" (I chose that word to encompass many things) as possible in all of the known interactions that could be expected in clinical use. The categories are also "everybody knows." 2. Everybody knows that: Merck did a lot of testing for "reliability" on Singulair. But Merck also did a lot of testing on Vioxx. No conclusions can be drawn from this per se. 3. Everybody knows that: Even back then, important decisions were being made as to whether to market a drug that related to how body enzymes metabolized that drug (meaning utilize the drug and then break it down so that the body could eliminate the waste products.) Genetics differences between different people were a factor that were also put into the decision making process. 4. Everybody knows that: clinical variations in efficacy and side effects can be a result of different factors. Some might include 1. genetic differences 2. drug-drug interactions 3. improper use 4. diet - take the grapefruit juice example. Those are just some. What we don't seem to do in this country is adequately monitor post marketing complaints? Why did it take five years to find out about Vioxx? If we did monitor more carefully, could we identify some thing that was overlooked or the technology has changed so that it is easier to identify what is wrong? When there is a problem, there is no way that we should go back to the same company for an explanation of the problem. Everybody knows that many companies work on the same category of drugs. Sometimes those companies encountered some road blocks and they abandoned the drug category. The FDA ought to require everything from everybody to get to the bottom of the problem. And also hire independent evaluators. The next part of what I have to say is just a hypothetical - a FICTION like a WHAT IF. This is just to make a point. What if another group got different results for the metabolism studies? What if another group decided that the drug was not reliable because a hydrogen bond at a certain location could be influenced by too many different factors to be able to accurately predict what would happen? So why do people have to hire lawyers, when the FDA should be doing it's job? There are many specialities of law just like the doctors. Does getting to the bottom of this problem require the lawyer-chemists? Why is it their job?