[Marxism] Prozac: The Class Action Suits Begin!!

[davidquarter@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

from atracyphd2@xxxxxxx:


Today the first Prozac class action lawsuit was filed in Montreal, Canada.
The following quote from the press release on this suit explains the basis for
the suit that was filed:

"Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker completely vindicated the
British Medical Journal, which it had charged earlier this week with misleading 
its
readers, when it posted a document on its website called Annotations. Eli
Lilly had been invited on numerous occasions to answer whether a document called
Summary of a preliminary analysis of clusters of adverse events based on
pooling data from multiple studies was authentic and whether it had been 
released
to health authorities around the world.

"Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly admitted
that it had never been released to health authorities, including the FDA, or
anyone else."

Of course few of us on this e-newsletter would be surprised to learn that
this information about Lilly is true. When someone is knowingly putting a drug
out that causes suicide, homicide and the host of other horrors it produces, why
would we expect them to be honest and upright? Now I use the term "knowingly"
because there is no way that anyone who read the previous research on
serotonin could not have known that impairing the metabolism of serotonin with 
any
chemical would produce the adverse effects we just listed.

The only thing that does worry me about this press release is this statement:

"The lead plaintiff is seeking $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for
herself and each member of the group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the
safety of its drug."

Considering how little is gained for victims in class action suits such as
this where they are only being sued for misrepresenting the safety of Prozac, it
would almost make me wonder if Eli Lilly is the one who initiated this suit.

Why? Because it is yet to be determined that if someone joins a suit like
this, when they actually have cause to file a more serious damage suit, such as
death, mania/psychosis, diabetes, cancer, serious debilitating withdrawal,
etc., and they sign off on the suit, will they be able to file against the 
company
again for the more serious damages? Most likely not. So, those of you with
more serious damage PLEASE keep this in mind and do not allow this to happen in
your case. Doing so could save Eli Lilly millions in damage claims. And since
lawsuits are the only recourse we have against the pharmaceutical industry
when they kill us with a pill instead of a bullet, we need to make sure that
process works with the utmost efficiency. :-)


Ann Blake Tracy, Ph.D.,
Executive Director, International Coalition For Drug Awareness
Website: www.drugawareness.org

Author of "the Bible" on SSRI antidepressants: "Prozac:
Panacea or Pandora? - Our Serotonin Nightmare"
& audio tape on safe withdrawal: "Help! I Can't Get
Off My Antidepressant!"

Order Number: 800-280-0730


http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2005/14/c3130.html

Attention News Editors:

Prozac: A class action lawsuit is filed in Montreal

    MONTREAL, Jan. 14 /CNW Telbec/ - A class action lawsuit was filed before
the Superior Court in Montreal this morning. Giant drug maker Eli Lilly is
alleged to have withheld vital information on the safety of Prozac, its
flagship drug for years. Yesterday, the Indianapolis based drug maker
completely vindicated the British Medical Journal, which it had charged
earlier this week with misleading its readers, when it posted a document on
its website called Annotations. Eli Lilly had been invited on numerous
occasions to answer whether a document called Summary of a preliminary
analysis of clusters of adverse events based on pooling data from multiple
studies was authentic and whether it had been released to health authorities
around the world.

    Eli Lilly confirmed the authenticity of the document and implicitly
admitted that it had never been released to health authorities, including the
FDA, or anyone else. The document consisted of data stemming from numerous
studies conducted by Eli Lilly and that showed that Prozac caused activation in
38% of its users compared with 19% with placebo and 4% for Tricyclic, a then
well known drug in the treatment of depression.

    When Eli Lilly representatives attended the FDA hearings on the safety of
Prozac in 1991, they had known the existence of the study for years but
failed to disclose it to the FDA, in the word of the lead plaintiff's attorney,
"lest it should warrant a much stringent warning on the label of the drug with
regard to its safety, thereby seriously hampering Eli Lilly's efforts to
market its new drug as effective and safe." In the words of Serge Petit of
the
law firm Petit Desjardins based in Montreal, Canada, that represents the lead
plaintiff "such a likelihood was looming large since Eli Lilly knew that if
doctors had been made aware that Prozac, back then being introduced as the
new kid on the block, caused activation in 38% of its users compared with 19% of
patients taking a placebo and 4% of those taking a drug then well known to
doctors, Tricyclic, they would certainly have hesitated before prescribing
Prozac. It was nearly a ten folds increase in activation compared with the other
drug they could prescribe."

    The lead plaintiff contends that the reason why Eli Lilly failed to
disclose the document to Health authorities was that it would have placed
another study, that consisted of a pooling of what is called spontaneous
reports and showed alarming increases in suicide attempts and other violent
acts in patient using Prozac as compared with four other drugs, in a totally
new perspective and prevent it from being dismissed by FDA and Eli Lilly as
inconclusive. To Serge Petit "had the study on activation and the one on
spontaneous reports been put side by side before the FDA, Eli Lilly would
have faced an uphill battle as to the safety of its drug".

    The class action contends that Eli Lilly misled health authorities around
the world and therefore the millions of users of its drug Prozac around the
world as to the safety of its drug by failing to disclose the said document.
To Serge Petit, "the passage of time cannot condone Eli Lilly's behavior and
it must be held accountable for circumventing the safeguards that have been
put in place to protect the public health." The lead plaintiff is seeking
 $10,000 in punitive damages and $5 000 for herself and each member of the
group from Eli Lilly for misrepresenting the safety of its drug.


For further information: Serge Petit, 514-842-5880, spetit@xxxxxxxxxxxx







_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism