Abbott Labs Receives Stern FDA Warning About Heart Devices

Abbott Laboratories recieved a FDA warning letter after failing to investigate and resolve risks related to its implanted heart devices.

In a warning letter, the FDA critiziced Abbott Laboratories for failing to resolve issues related to its  cardiovascular devices.Abbott

Battery and cybersecurity problems with the heart devices seemed to be a dominant issue.

Concerns about the safety of several implantable defibrillators and its Merlin@home monitor, which allows doctors to care remotely for patients with cardiac devices.

In February, we covered complicatipons with the HeartMate PHP catheter. During procedures to unclog blood vessels, the HeartMate PHP is inserted in the heart to keep blood flowing. The device is used inside the heart with no need for open-chest surgery.
The most recent  investigation showed that lithium batteries in the devices weredraining and that the company had “underestimated the occurrence of the hazardous situation.”

As recently as September, the device received praised from the medical community.

Now, the Lab is putting an end to the commercially successful blood pumps use in the United States and Europe after several malfunctions and a patient death.

In late 2016, there were reports that the Merlin@home transmitter used in monitoring certain (then  St. Jude Medical) implant devices could be hacked. These hacks could lead to deadly consequences for  the patient.

The devices in question are several cardiovascular devices acquired in Abbot’s $25 billion purchase of St. Jude Medical.

In an email to the FDA, the company said that it was looking into the matter.

The FDA has publicly noted that Abbott had failed to provide evidence that the actions had actually been implemented.

pAXIL

FDA Refused Update to Suicide Risk on Paxil Label

Paxil suicide risk was disclosed, according to GlaxoSmithKline.

According to the GlaxoSmithKline court filing, the FDA refused four requests to change labels on the antidepressant Paxil to update a warning label to reflect that “there was a statistically significant increase in the frequency of suicidal behavior in patients treated with paroxetine.” pAXIL

As far back as 2006 the antidepressant and its controlled-release version, Paxil CR, added a warning about suicide risk in young adults. Facts such as this are of increasing importance as GlaxoSmithKline fights a complicated lawsuit.

The suit was brought on by the widow of Stewart Dolin, a Paxil user who at the time of his suicide was taking a generic version of the drug. The $12 million suit alleges that GlaxoSmithKline was negligent in not updating the warning label to demonstrate the risk for suicide while using.

The claim insists that the labeling did not provide enough information about the risk of suicide, which as a result led to the Chicago lawyer jumping in front of a train just 6 days into using a generic form of Paxil.

Dolin’s widow’s complaint notes that certain dangerous side-effects were listed on the label, but the labeling did not properly represent the risk posed. In fact, labeling only highlighted an increase in suicidal thoughts for users under the age of 24.

She further claims that doctors were not informed about the suicide risks in adults associated with the drugs, and had that information been clear, Mr. Dolin would have been prescribed the drug.

As the trial drags on in Illinois, GlaxoSmithKline a federal jury Wednesday that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration claims that the FDA rejected a label change to Paxil four times. The updated label would have addressed the increased risk of suicide on adult patients.

If you or someone that you love has been effected by the use of Paxil, connect with an attorney at Medical Claim Legal. You could be entitled to financial compensation, find out now.

Johnson & Johnson Hip Replacement Judgments totaled over $1.5B in 2016

Hip replacement judgments in 2016 cost the global brand more than $1.5B with more judgments pending.

Hip replacement issues have left many people in pain. Johnson and Johnson lost 6 out of 7 product liability claims in 2016. The cases have been noted as the largest jury verdicts over product defect claims in America.Hip replacement

Beyond these judgments, there are tens of thousands of potential cases against the brand. Potential legal issues are related to hip replacements, pelvic mesh, and baby powder among other products.

Bloomberg outlined Johnson & Johnson’s legal failures like so:

  • Hip implant, Dallas: for $1 billion
  • Hip implant, Dallas: $502 million
  • Talc, St. Louis: $72 million
  • Risperdal, Philadelphia: $70 million
  • Talc, St. Louis: $70 million
  • Talc, St. Louis: $55 million

2017, has not left the brand in the clear, hip replacement, baby powder, and other big settlements will continue to cost the company.

If you have suffered pain or suffering due a faulty Johnson & Johnson hip replacement product, you could be entitled to compensation.

New FDA Off-Label Marketing Rule Delayed by One Year

The FDA has delayed new rule for off-label uses of pharmaceuticals.

After interferences from Pharma, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)   has delayed implementing a new rule that regulates off-label marketing. Off-label

The new rule regulates the way in which pharmaceutical manufacturers can discuss the unapproved uses of their products with health-care providers.

was delayed in an effort to recieve public comments. Device and pharma industry groups have accused the agency of ignoring proper rulemaking procedures.

The new rule would mean that drug makers must update a product label if there’s an indication that a company intends to use its medicine for an off-label or unapproved use.

Doctors sometimes prescribe drugs as a treatment for conditions outside of medications original purpose.

Companies can face criminal charges and liability if they tout their products to doctors and the public for off-label uses the FDA hasn’t specifically approved.

The FDA is pushing back the rule’s effective date to March 19, 2018.  Nearly one year after it’s original date.

Pharmco Laboratories

SkinCare Co. Pharmco Laboratories Receives Warning From FDA

Pharmco Laboratories received a warning letter from the FDA citing 4 violations.

Pharmco Laboratories received a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration. The letter to the Florida-based skincare manufacturer “summarized significant violations of current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for finished pharmaceuticals.”

In the letter posted to the agencywebsite, four specific violation were referenced.

Pharmco Laboratories was accused of presenting an allergy risk to consumers. The FDA states that there has been insufficient evidence of the proper cleaning of equipment that came in contact with major allergens. Dietary supplements, for example, containing soybeans used the same dryer as the ingreditents in skincare items.

The FDA warning letter stated that “repeated lapses demonstrate a failure of your executive management to exercise proper oversight and control over the manufacture of drugs.”

Monsanto

Monsanto Popular Weed Killer to Be Labeled a Cancer Risk

Monsanto, a major agricultural corporation, can now be required to label its popular weed-killer, as a possible cancer threat.

California can require Monsanto to label Roundup, its top-selling herbicide, as a possible cancer threat, a judge tentatively ruled Friday.

Monsanto has insisted that its product poses no risk to people. 

On Friday, a federal judge denied the corporation’s bid to overturn a 2015 state ruling to label it as a cancer risk.

The main criticism is Roundup’s main ingredient. The popular weed-killer includes Glyphosate, a chemical which was originally touted as a way to kill weeds while leaving crops and plants intact.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, says it has ‘low toxicity.’ The agency considers Glyphosate safe when used correctly.
However, under California Proposition 65 label requirements in California, businesses are required to notify Californians about significant amounts of chemicals in the products that they purchase.

Chemicals that require labeling include ingredients or additives in pesticides, common household products, food, drugs, dyes, or solvents.

California regulators are waiting for the lawsuit to be resolved before deciding whether to require warnings, said Sam Delson, a spokesman for the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

Software

Medical Device Software Vulnerabilities a Huge Concern

Software vulnerabilities of medical devices may be difficult for health sector officials and manufacturers to manage.

As we reported last week, St. Jude implemented software updates that could protect pacemakers and other medical devices from being compromised by hackers. Oxycontin

Unfortunately, new information suggested that the public is not completely in the clear.

“Software is never perfect and all systems still will have these flaws,” says Joshua Corman, director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council and an expert on medical device security. “The question is how gracefully and collaboratively and quickly and safely can we respond to these flaws.”

In late 2016, there were reports that the Merlin@home transmitter used in monitoring certain St. Jude Medical implant devices could be hacked. These hacks could lead to deadly consequences for  the patient.

MedSec, a cybersecurity firm,  initially found the problems in the St. Jude devices. After which they “tipped off”- the activist investment firm Muddy Waters, which publicized the flaws and advised clients to bet against the health care firm’s stock.

Ever since the US government and St. Jude confirmed the one flaw, the VA has been “taking steps to be sure all our patients and providers are aware of this issue and take appropriate actions to be sure that all our patients get the update for their monitor,” said Merritt Raitt, acting director of the VA National Cardiac Device Surveillance Program.

Asbestos

The Risks of Asbestos Exposure and Your Legal Rights

The more a person breathes in tiny asbestos particles, the more likely that individual will develop a large variety of lung and breathing complications.

Asbestos was introduced to the construction industry over 100 years ago.  It was widely considered the standard for strengthening building materials in the construction of buildings.

The dangers of inhaling asbestos fibers began to surface around 1980.  It does not take extreme exposure to asbestos for it to be dangerous.  Most victims of asbestos exposure and asbestosis have worked or lived in an environment where there is asbestos in the building or home.

These effects range from wheezing and shortness of breath to mesothelioma and lung cancer.  Regardless of your condition, Medical Claim Legal can help you obtain compensation.

There are a large number of lawsuits involving asbestos exposure and asbestosis.  Do not let your case get passed over.  Medical Claim Legal will connect you with a lawyer who is experienced and successful in the asbestos lawsuit field.  To get the compensation that may be owed to you, contact Medical Claim Legal today.

MedicalClaimLegal, simplifying the process for Asbestos Exposure and Asbestosis compensation

drug

Nation’s Largest Drug Distributor to Pay $150M in Settlement

Drug distributor McKesson Corporation will pay a $150 million fine.

Regulators have alleged that McKesson Corporation, a drug distributor, failed to report suspicious orders of painkillers that have been linked to the opioid addiction epidemic.drug

The company has agreed to pay a $150 million fine after they allegedly failed to detect and report suspicious orders of prescription pain pills, according to federal prosecutors. This has arguably led to the growing heroin crisis.

For example, more than 1.6 million orders for controlled substances were filled by McKesson in Colorado between June 2008 through May 2013. However,  just 16 of them from a single customer as suspicious, the Justice Department said.

In a statement from the White House last summer, federal fears related to pain killer and opioid addictions were made clear:

“President [Obama] has made [it] clear that addressing this epidemic is a priority for his Administration.  While Federal agencies have been using their authority to take every available action they can, Congress needs to take action on what is most urgently needed now – additional funding to make lifesaving treatment available to everyone who seeks it. The President has called for $1.1 billion in new funding to help Americans who want treatment get it wherever they live.”

Those addicted to opioid painkillers are most likely to form a heroin addiction according to the Centers for Disease and prevention.

McKesson, the nation’s largest drug distributor,  was accused of failing  to create an effective system to detect suspicious pharmacy orders. This was argued to be a violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

In 2008, McKesson agreed to a $13.25 million civil penalty for actions including failing to report suspicious sales of their drugs on “internet pharmacies.”

 

In a statement, McKesson said it settled “in the interest of moving beyond disagreements about whether McKesson was complying with the controlled substance regulations … and to instead focus on the company’s partnership with regulators and others to help stem the opioid epidemic in this country.”

Coca-cola

Consumer Group Suing Coca-Cola Due to Sugary Soda Risks

Lawsuit claims Coca-Cola misled consumers on sugary soda health risks.

The consumer-advocacy group, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) asserts that Coca-Cola has misled consumers about the health risks of sugary drinks such as soda. Coca-Cola

In 2015, it was revealed that the corporate giant had heavily funded and been involved in the operation of the research group Global Energy Balance Network. Coca-Cola aimed to help establish the group as a “reputable scientific source to counter “public health extremists.” The company has starkly tried to avoid claims that their products are unhealthy.

It is based on these findings that the lawsuit claims that, “for years, [the] defendants have engaged in a pattern of deception to mislead and confuse the public (and governmental entities that bear responsibility for the public health) about the scientific consensus that consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is linked to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.”

The industry group, American Beverage Association (ABA) is the co-defendant in the lawsuit. The ABA continues to argue that obesity is a “complex condition.” Further asserting that as obesity and diabetes rates continue to rise, that soda consumption is dropping.

CSPI wants the ABA and Coca-Cola to make some changes. They want marketing to disclose the health risks of sugary drinks, while stopping ads directed at children. They also want the groups to disclose file “indicating the potential health implications.” Plus, the CSPI would like for Coca-Cola and the ABA to fund a public health campaign.

The ABA said in a statement that “America’s beverage companies know we have an important role to play in addressing our nation’s health challenges. That’s why we’re engaging with health groups and community organizations to drive a reduction in the sugar and calories Americans get from beverages.”

Coca-Cola has called the suit “legally and factually meritless.”