Individuals may look at testosterone therapy as a Godsend however, it not is beneficial for everyone, and some individuals who were receiving testosterone therapy actually were harmed from the treatment and they sought to get compensation through a lawsuit. Testosterone has been prescribed to men to jump start their libido, and increase their muscle mass that has been lost due to aging.
However, in many cases testosterone was over prescribed and caused harmful effects to the individuals in question. Heart attacks or other side effects of the therapy have happened. In fact, there have been so many testosterone lawsuits that Testosterone Therapy Lawsuits have been consolidated into an MDL or a multi district lawsuit. Individual who have had this therapy prescribed tot hem int he past and have had ill effects may want to look at compensation under the law to see if they will be eligible for the lawsuit.
In the years from 2005 to 2008 many men were prescribed testosterone supplements to help with the so called effects of low T. In the last few years testosterone lawsuits grew into a multi billion dollar industry. The number of men age 60 or better who are taking medication for Low T more than doubled from 208 to 432 million in 4 years. Much of this demand can be traced back to consumer marketing aimed at men to cure low T. A medical journal article published in January of 2014 showed that the risk of heart attack was more than doubled in men 65 years of age and older and tripled in men that were over 75 years of age. In those who had a prior history of heart disease the incidence of heart attack more than tripled. Numerous other studies conducted with veterans and those with and without prior existing heart disease with similar incidences with testosterone products.
Testosterone Therapy lawsuits are numerous. In fact there have been so many negative repercussions over the use of testosterone related products that these lawsuits have been consolidated into one major case being heard in the court of the US District of Illinois. The US Federal district court ordered all of the cases involving the use of testosterone related products like Androgel and other related product are to be tried in Federal District court in Chicago under Judge Matthew Kennelly. This was a way to consolidate the number of testosterone Therapy lawsuits. Federal statutes have also stated that other lawsuits against the makers of testosterone products like Eli Lily the makers of Axrion, and Watson labs the makers of Androderm will be consolidated.
The original claims stated that that Abbott and Abbie the original makers of Androgel hid the dangers from consumers. 3 out of 5 of the original consumers in court cases stated they had a heart attack after using the product, one had a stroke and another claimed to have suffered a mini stoke or TIA. With the numbers of these lawsuits, if you are a man who has suffered damage attributed to a testosterone related product getting onboard with a MDL lawsuit may be the way to have your case settled quickly.
The jury’s final decision in the case Allen et al v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals (TP) et al. was released in April of 2014. The jury determined that Takeda Pharmaceuticals would pay $6 billion in punitive damages and that their partner Eli Lilly would pay $3 billion in punitive damages, and both companies would split the cost of the $1.5 million in compensatory damages. Punitive damages differ from compensatory damages in that, while compensatory damages are meant to make up for a loss caused by someone else punitive damages are meant to punish for something especially unethical.
The pharm. company first gathered evidence on a clinical connection between their drug Actos and bladder cancer in the early 2000’s and decided not to release the information. Meanwhile a man in America started taking the diabetes medication in 2004 until 2011 when he was diagnosed with bladder cancer. That same year TP started to warn physicians and patients that the drug Actos might cause bladder cancer.
It didn’t take long after the evidence was released for many others to bring suit against the Japanese company and the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multi-District-Litigation voted to consolidate the cases and transfer them the District Court in Louisiana. The MDL suit started in December of 2011. Then the first MDL bellwether case Allen v Takeda Pharmaceuticals. began in October of 2013. The findings of these two cases applies to all of the people that are filing lawsuits for being affected with bladder cancer. Not long into the case it is discovered that the evidence of bladder cancer had been hidden. The plaintiffs moved for a summary judgment against TP but it was dismissed so that the evidence could go to the jury.
Then it was discovered that Ron Hoven, and employee and executive at Eli Lilly, the American partner to the Japanese company had knowledge of the hidden evidence and the plaintiffs moved for sanctions against Eli Lilly on the basis of perjury and destruction of evidence but the judge dismissed this motion as well. However, he did conclude that Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Eli Lilly had hidden evidence and that it was highly unethical and in bad faith. He passed this statement along to the jury and gave them a short seminar about the laws regarding preservation of evidence so that they could make an educated decision.
The jury decided that TP and Eli Lilly made a substantial profit from selling the drug for so many years and they decided to calculate that revenue into their punitive damages and really hit both companies hard. After the verdict Eli Lilly tried to fight it. There is a lot of discussion in the news about whether or not the penalty was too high and unrealistic but only time will tell if it holds up. Some people are extremely satisfied with the verdict and think that it shows other nations that they can’t sell a product overseas in America that harms people and expect to get away with it. The high punitive damages enforced are exactly the kind of punishment to teach unethical corporations, like Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd., a lesson.
There has been widespread reporting of an alleged Data Breach last month in various locations at P.F. Chang’s Bistro’s. It’s alleged that the crime involves stolen credit and debit card data from a number of restaurants from a number of states. There is scanty information on the total number of customers affected and how the crime may have occurred and much will be released when the police get the information. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc. has a number of restaurants and has engaged the United States Secret Service and independent forensic experts on it following these reports.
This information was revealed by Brian Krebs who has a cyber-security blog and has previously revealed such crimes mostly targeting retails stores. Customer data stolen from the lots of customers’ credit and debit cards used on these restaurants were being sold by an underground store that has been known to be doing so for long. They normally gather tens of thousands of data from their victims’ cards then sell them. There have been lots of affected companies in the recent years, losing lots of money to the fraudsters in the process. On his website, Krebs added that this data breach cases appeared to have been on those cards used on the restaurants in Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Nevada and North Carolina last month. He said that he did however contact banking sources and thus confirmed that the cards had been used at the restaurants last month.
It’s not the first case however as there have been lots of companies including Target Corp. that suffered data breach in December last year. They reported that 40 million debit and credit cards which prompted them to sack the chief executive and the chief information officer while 11 Dave & Buster’s units way back in 2009 had its 81005 cards also victimized. The criminals just authoritatively enter the retail center’s money register to steal the data. They then use malicious software that will record all mag stripe data as the card is swiped through the machine.
That is not enough as they will then use the data on their fake cards to shop for those expensive goods that they will again re-sell for profits. They thus hacked into the retail system of these restaurants last month and stole this information plunging the company into losses. It cannot be ascertained however as investigations on these data breach reports are on-going. Victims of the P.F. Chang’s data breach may be eligible for file a P.F. Chang’s Lawsuit if they used a debit card and have real damage to account for.
Meanwhile the company opted into the manual system of in printing these credit cards following the incident. Customers also receive information via a website, pfchangs.com/security where they seek answers to their queries as they try to sort out the mess. The company’s head Rick Federico has called on all of their clients to be extra vigilant on their cards and bank statements and when they suspect anything fishy, to report it at once to their card company. He was regretting the inconvenience it had caused on their chains as well as their clients.
Meanwhile as this news on Data Breach continue to flow, more and more companies are easy targets for these criminals and there is need for them to be extra careful in future.
Having to take anticoagulants may come at the price of adverse side-effects. That was the case with Warfarin (the traditional medicine prescribed by doctors around the world for roughly 50 years). From 2010 onward, that price increased. In October of that year, Boehringer Ingelheim, one of the world’s biggest pharmaceutical companies, released their alternative to Warfarin. Named Pradaxa or Dabigatran, the new anticoagulant was supposed to be more efficient.
Warfarin has always been a fickle drug to take. It has many shortcomings even besides side-effects like hemorrhage (the most common) and osteoporosis, calcification of veins and necrosis (that happen in rare instances). Its main drawback stands in its high level of interaction with other medicine and foods. Dosing it is a difficult process and it requires monitoring. In accordance with the presence of certain vitamins in the patient’s body, the dosage is changed.
Pradaxa on the other hand, does not interact with food and has a very limited interaction with other drugs. Also, when placed next to Warfarin, tests have shown that Pradaxa is indeed more efficient in the prevention of strokes for patients with atrial fibrillation (one of its main uses). The reduced interaction meant that the new drug did not require the same level of monitoring, making it a preferred choice.
The new medicine did very well in sales, both due to being more convenient for both patients and doctors, but also because of a very well funded marketing campaign as the German based company spent a bit short of 500 million dollars on that alone. By 2012 almost 4 million patients used Pradaxa in the United States.
While Pradaxa is proven to be a more effective anticoagulant than Warfarin, the latter has an antidote, something that the German company’s product did not have for roughly 4 years. Lacking this crucial fail-safe, patients were in danger to bleed to death and many did just that. The figures vary. Some sources place the number of Pradaxa-related death to 500 in the U.S. while others state that the number is larger.
The Boehringer pharmaceutical company proceeded to declare that the drug is still safe, that they are searching for an antidote and then blamed doctors for prescribing their drug too freely, without subjecting their patients to clinical testing. Faced with many lawsuit threats, the company settled thousands of claims, losing over 600 million dollars in the process, far less than they have earned however.
The Antidote Idarucizumab is the name of the long-awaited antidote that can reverse the anticoagulant effect of Pradaxa. In development since 2012, the antibody’s effect reversal is stated to be immediate and to apply to other new anticoagulants as well (such as the ones produced by the Bayer company).
Although Boehringer Ingelheim continued to declare their trust in the safety of Pradaxa with every occasion they had, the company also requested an accelerated approval for the antidote to the FDA and on June 26 of 2014 they announced that the FDA granted Idarucizumab the breakthrough therapy designation which will greatly help with eventually making it available to patients.