US Supreme Court: You Can't Sue Big Pharma Anymore

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

In a 5 to 4 vote, the US Supreme Court has absolved pharmaceutical companies, and over 80 percent of all drugs prescribed in the US, of legal liability for a long list of ill deeds including fraud, mislabeling, side effects and accidental death.

This decision happened as a response to a lower court’s ruling concerning a victim who took a pharmaceutical drug and had a severely adverse reaction that caused the patient to be completely disfigured when the drug caused a flesh-eating side effect. The side effect was known by the drug maker and yet, was not labeled. The lower court ruled that the drug maker would have to label all future drugs with this side effect but the Supreme Court left the corporations who make these drugs completely exempt from future lawsuits, and said the victim ‘had no legal grounds to sue.’

Karen Bartlett tried to sue Mutual Pharmaceutical Company after taking an anti-inflammatory drug called Sulindac due to a sore shoulder. It was this drug that caused ‘toxic epidermal necrolysis’ just three weeks after taking the pharmaceutical. Her flesh began to peel off so badly it resembled a third degree burn.

How is it that pharmaceutical companies can continue to put people’s health in jeopardy in such atrocious ways without being culpable?

When Bartlett sued in a New Hampshire state court, including the fact that there was no warning about the possible flesh-eating side effect, she won the case and was awarded $21 million in damages. The FDA then went on to force both Mutual Pharma and Merck & Co. to include warnings on drug labels going forward, but nine years later, the Supreme Court has overturned that ruling. The higher court stated as reason for their verdict, ‘all generic drugs and their manufacturers [over 80% of all drugs prescribed in the US] are exempt from liability for side effects.’ The court has essentially given the FDA ultimate authority over pharmaceutical use in the US.

One critic, Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, as reported by Reuters, stated, “Today’s court decision provides a disincentive for generic makers of drugs to monitor safety of their products and to make sure that they have a surveillance system in place to detect adverse events that pose a threat to patients.”

I dare say this is not nearly a harsh enough criticism. Considering Big Pharma and Big Agriculture are being given carte blanche to determine what is good for people’s health and the FDA is bought and paid for by special interest groups, we should be more than ‘surveying’ the damage. Here is an obvious listing of conflicts of interest when it comes to public health matters, and the incestuous relationship between Big Pharma/Big Agriculture corporations and the FDA:

• Larry Combest (Chairman of the House Agricultural Committee) and former Attorney General John Ashcroft were the congressmen receiving the most donations from Monsanto during the last election (Source: Dairy Education Board)
• Prior to being appointed to the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas (who put GW Bush into office) was a lawyer for Monsanto.
• Anne Veneman was on the Board of Directors of Monsanto’s Calgene Corporation, and is now the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.
• Former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld was on the Board of Directors for Monsanto’s Searle pharmaceuticals.
• The governor of Wisconsin, and the U.S. Secretary of Health, Tommy Thompson, received $50,000 in donations from Monsanto while running for his gubernatorial office.

“Agricultural biotechnology will find a supporter occupying the White House next year, regardless of which candidate wins the election in November.” - Monsanto In-house Newsletter, 2000

This Supreme Court ruling will effectively absolve Monsanto and all other companies, Syngenta, Merck, Dow, Bayer, etc. from any lawsuits that would hold them accountable for the damage they are doing to public health. We are all being poisoned with an endless loop of toxic foods which cause cancer, inflammation, reproductive issues, organ failure and more, and then ‘medicines’ that address the very issues caused by toxic food and a toxic environment. It’s a sick, tortuous plan. Unless we find a way to stop these corporate entities from controlling our governments, like India has with its recent refusal to patent Monsanto maize, we will have signed our own death certificates.

http://livefreelivenatural.com/supreme-court-rules-drug-companies-exempt-lawsuits-5-4-vote/

 

Immediately upon the Supreme Court’s ruling, both drug manufacturers and Wall Street investors were celebrating. As one financial analyst pointed out, drug company profits should skyrocket going forward. Not only do the pharmaceutical companies no longer have to worry about safety or side effects, they are exempt from the multi-million dollar court-imposed settlements awarded to victims of their drugs.

 

One industry critic was quoted by Reuters after the verdict. "Today's court decision provides a disincentive for generic makers of drugs to monitor safety of their products and to make sure that they have a surveillance system in place to detect adverse events that pose a threat to patients," Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group told the news outlet.

 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) was quick to react to the ruling by writing a stern letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, "A consumer should not have her rights foreclosed simply because she takes the generic version of a prescription drug.”

 

But an attorney for the drug companies, Jay P. Lefkowitz, took the opposing position saying, “It makes much more sense to rely on the judgments of the scientific and medical experts at the FDA, who look at drug issues for the nation at large, than those of a single state court jury that only has in front of it the terribly unfortunate circumstances of an adverse drug reaction."

 

In other words, if the FDA says something is safe, it doesn’t matter if that decision is wrong or the result of lies, fraud or deception on the part of the world’s pharmaceutical companies. And there’s no way to sue the FDA for being wrong and costing millions of unsuspecting Americans their lives. That result leaves 240 million Americans unprotected from an industry responsible for more preventable deaths in the US than any other cause.

 

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

 

[Sledgstone 8,672]

So basically, a pharmaceutical company can make a generic of a product, sell it to people and then have no liability for it. wtf.. and I don't see how anyone could sue the original name brand drug considering they were taking the generic version.. and people can't sue the FDA.. Companies will make all the profits they want, have no liability for their product.. all the stock holders will get more money and the poor people that can't afford the name brand drugs can just go die somewhere. I wish I was rich. I'm looking forward to my asthma inhalers to become available as generics so I don't have to keep paying the ridiculous prices I'm paying for them now. One of my inhalers is up for a generic, but the company keeps filing lawsuit after lawsuit to prevent it from happening because they make half a billion dollars a year in sales off it. Its been going on for over a year even:

 

http://origin-www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-06/teva-sues-perrigo-over-patents-for-proair-asthma-inhaler.html

 

At least now I know that with a cheaper generic I'll have to be careful to watch out for side effects considering I'll be shit out of luck if something horrible happens to me.

 

Thats some bullshit.

 

It doesn't even make common sense.. This would be like me buying a jar of Walmart's "Great Value" peanut butter instead of Jiffs.. then I get salmonella from the peanut butter and I can't sue anyone for my hospital bill. I wonder how long it will be before the supreme court gives generic food products immunity.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

this court is corrupt

[Sledgstone 8,672]

It doesn't even make common sense.. This would be like me buying a jar of Walmart's "Great Value" peanut butter instead of Jiffs.. then I get salmonella from the peanut butter and I can't sue anyone for my hospital bill. I wonder how long it will be before the supreme court gives generic food products immunity.

 

I just read this again a day later.. I'm way off on this example. lol.

 

A better example would be drinking a bunch of Great Value soda, which results in me having a heart attack because of the caffeine. Walmart can say that the increased heart rate is a side effect of the caffeine in the product.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

I guess we wont see as much or any of those commercials that go: "Have you suffered from (insert horrible health problems) after taking (insert drug that claimed to solve a problem 2-3 years ago)? Call this number for your free consultation. You might be entitled to a cash settlement."

[Sledgstone 8,672]

I think we'll still see those but probably on a lower scale.. and once a drug becomes generic I doubt we'll see any commercial regarding those. With this ruling it sounds like anyone taking the generic versions will be ineligible for any lawsuits. All the large companies charging $380 for an inhaler will easily have the cash to fight and win any lawsuit, while the generic companies can keep peddling the drugs out cheap with no worries about liability. Once the drugs are available in generic, they become much more widely used.. thats when the more severe unknown side effects are discovered.. and at that point, nobody will be able to sue the drug companies once a loved one dies unexpectedly after taking a blood pressure medicine.