Since the recall, Merck has been named in numerous lawsuits throughout the United States , and the State of New York sued the company on December 1, 2004. The lawsuits allege Vioxx caused serious injuries, including heart attack and stroke, and that the manufacturer aggressively promoted Vioxx without fully informing the public of dangerous and potentially deadly side effects. According to the drug maker, Vioxx had 20 million users. U.S. Food and Drug Administration scientist David Graham estimated during U.S. Senate hearings on Nov. 18 that the drug hurt or killed between 88,000 and 139,000 people. Graham previously linked the drug to 27,785 heart attacks and deaths.
One filed case involves Keith Stubblefield who used Merck & Co.'s Vioxx drug for pain six weeks before he had a fatal heart attack while washing his car. His widow has sued Merck, claiming Vioxx caused his death and that the company hid the drug's risks. Merck has denied Vioxx caused Stubblefield's death. Merck has argued in court papers that Stubblefield, 37, was an overweight smoker with high blood pressure and heart disease. According to Bloomberg News reports, “ The tactics Merck is using in the Stubblefield suit, including a refusal to settle, are typical of those it is using in hundreds of Vioxx cases to limit its liability, court papers show." Merrill Lynch & Co. estimates Merck's liability could reach $18 billion. Merck, which sold $2.5 billion in Vioxx last year, has lost $38 billion in market value since the drug's recall.
The Stubblefield lawsuit was filed in 2002 and is set for trial in May 2005, making the case one of the first Vioxx cases to reach a jury. Jurors will determine whether Stubblefield's death was a result of lifestyle factors or his use of Vioxx.
In a New Jersey case, Merck has argued that every Vioxx plaintiff must prove that Vioxx, not something else, was the cause of injury or death. Nearly 200 lawsuits are pending before Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee in Atlantic City , New Jersey. In November 2004, the court determined that the people suing ``have to present expert testimony of causation of injury to prove their allegations in each case…'' The court stated ``this testimony must be based on scientific evidence…the core battle in cases such as this is in the battle of the opinions of highly qualified scientific experts.''
Merck has said in court papers filed in defense of the suits that no drug is completely safe, that the FDA got all of the company's safety data on Vioxx and that clinical trials failed to prove it harmed patients. In a news conference, Merck General Counsel Kenneth Frazier said there was no ``reliable way'' to estimate actual Vioxx use in the population and the actual number of cardiovascular problems caused by Vioxx. Frazier argued, "Because heart attacks and strokes occur in the general population, in any particular case, one cannot say that if one had a cardiovascular event while taking Vioxx that Vioxx caused it.'' In defending against injury cases, Merck argues that every plaintiff must prove that the drug, not something else, caused the alleged injury or death. |
