General Discussion

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

19. ...

Reply to Fantastic Anarchist (Original post)

Tue Jul 9, 2013, 01:48 PM

Jul 2013

http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/q32013/supreme-court-rules-drug-companies-exempt-from-lawsuits/

Karen Bartlett sued Mutual Pharma in New Hampshire state court, arguing that the drug company included no warning about the possible side effect. A court agreed and awarded her $21 million. The FDA went on to force both Mutual, as well as the original drug manufacturer Merck & Co., to include the side effect on the two drugs’ warning labels going forward.

Now, nine years after the tragedy began, the US Supreme Court overturned the state court’s verdict and award. Justices cited the fact that all generic drugs and their manufacturers, some 80% of all drugs consumed in the United States, are exempt from liability for side effects, mislabeling or virtually any other negative reactions caused by their drugs. In short, the Court ruled that the FDA has ultimate authority over pharmaceuticals in the US. And if the FDA says a drug is safe, that takes precedent over actual facts, real victims and any and all adverse reactions.

And Republicans want to put corporations do their own FDA testing? What could possibly go wrong?

Bush stacked the FDA with corporate shills. I have to ask: Did Obama clean house?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/84

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

77 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Holy Shit! New Law: Drug Companies exempt from Lawsuits -Supreme Court Ruling [View all] Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 OP

I feel something tightening around my neck. factsarenotfair Jul 2013 #1

Our necks. Tell me again why who is President doesn't really matter? nt kelliekat44 Jul 2013 #62

It's the generic vs name brand distinction. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #2

Either way, generic vs name brand, the warning should be there. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #5

The solution is for Congress to write a better law. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #7

I work for a CRO ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #11

And that's the rub--the warning for both is exactly the same. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #18

Which is confusing because ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #21

The original manufacturer is the only one who can change the language. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #23

Okay, I have some more information. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #25

Except that the generic company doesn't choose its warning label. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #27

I don't understand why the labeling requirements would have to be the same ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #29

Oh, we agree that the law is all screwed up. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #30

Generic must show bioequivalence and must have exact labeling as innovator. godai Jul 2013 #32

Thank you for the information. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #33

It's a very broad range. StrayKat Jul 2013 #36

And thank you, too, for more information. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #37

No, that's an old argument made by innovators. (Responding to#36) godai Jul 2013 #39

Read the article. StrayKat Jul 2013 #54

Here you go...(response to #54) godai Jul 2013 #58

Access Denied. StrayKat Jul 2013 #71

No restrictions on the link. godai Jul 2013 #73

You're last paragraph is a very interesting point. nt Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #59

"it helps the original manufacturer by imposing extra costs on the generic competition." HiPointDem Jul 2013 #65

Look at this optimum phrase: Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #3

Would it bother you to know that the line you cite at the top of your post does not appear anywhere onenote Jul 2013 #43

No, it wouldn't bother me to know. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #52

Why is it a strange question? onenote Jul 2013 #63

It's strange to ask if I'd be bothered by new information. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #74

Another reason Andy823 Jul 2013 #4

I certainly don't want any right-wingers in government ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #6

Another ignorant "news" website that should be banned from DU.. snooper2 Jul 2013 #8

I tried to link to that site. It came up with an error message. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #10

Ok here is the article from a "liberal" site.. SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #24

That site was the only one that had the full article ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #26

If anyone was napping, not realizing ours is a wholly-owned corporatist government, this ruling indepat Jul 2013 #9

Sue the doctors if,,,, kentuck Jul 2013 #12

Not sure how it would be the doctor's fault ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #13

Link to the Supreme Court decision DeschutesRiver Jul 2013 #14

Thank you. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #16

personal bank acc'ts of justices need to be audited to see where the money's coming from!.... dmosh42 Jul 2013 #15

I'm totally supportive of that. Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #17

Ya think? But it doesn't matter, they are absolutely above the law mountain grammy Jul 2013 #46

Supreme Court Justices are required to file financial disclosure forms onenote Jul 2013 #68

yes they are and Thomas's were brought up a few years ago mountain grammy Jul 2013 #76

... Scuba Jul 2013 #19

One of the first things Walker and his crew did here in EC Jul 2013 #20

Unbelievable. nt Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #22

At what point will they figure out that Ilsa Jul 2013 #28

At least it wasn't acupuncture or homeopathy TM99 Jul 2013 #31

This is for GENERIC drug companies only. godai Jul 2013 #34

Big Pharma imports cheap drugs made in China, now with impunity! What a sick country we live in. reformist2 Jul 2013 #35

weird how the OP says one thing and the story is 180 degrees off nt friendlyFRIEND Jul 2013 #38

Thanks. Discussed yesterday. elleng Jul 2013 #40

Thanks for the clarification. At first glance I was like, WTF. That makes more sense. nt Incitatus Jul 2013 #44

Glad you appreciate it. elleng Jul 2013 #45

Thanks for the information ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #53

"I love the smell of fascism in the morning!" AAO Jul 2013 #41

hyperbole much? ellennelle Jul 2013 #42

THANK YOU and HI, ellennelle! elleng Jul 2013 #47

thx ellennelle Jul 2013 #50

I'm quitting this thread too, I think; elleng Jul 2013 #51

I'm at work ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #55

A few here want there to be a common enemy we can all rally around Rex Jul 2013 #61

Yeah, I guess so it goes, eh? Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #75

I'm at a loss...something somewhere is freezing over. BornLooser Jul 2013 #48

I listened to Mike Papantonio talk about this last week. mountain grammy Jul 2013 #49

The crux of the argument makes sense as Elleng pointed out ... Fantastic Anarchist Jul 2013 #56

Just say NO to medications HockeyMom Jul 2013 #57

Okay. As you request. Now, how do I deal with this pesky HIV thing I have? Liberal Veteran Jul 2013 #64

I worked for years helping develop antiretrovirals. Avalux Jul 2013 #72

Holy Shit! This OP is sensationalistic crap. Avalux Jul 2013 #60

Somewhere in between zipplewrath Jul 2013 #66

Correct. Avalux Jul 2013 #69

the ruling doesn't make any generalized principle such as you claim. it's specific to this HiPointDem Jul 2013 #67

Ugly, Inc. Berlum Jul 2013 #70

Another great decision from Ralph Nader's US Supreme Court. Thanks Ralph! NT graham4anything Jul 2013 #77