Subject: ANOTHER (ALLEGED) MAJOR PROBLEM WITH VIOXX – LAWSUIT FILED
VIOXX – (allegedly) more than breaking hearts… make no bones about it!
Merck may need to look behind its shoulder… a lawsuit may be the FIRST lawsuit of its kind – alleging that Vioxx inhibits, delays, and even PREVENTS bone/spine healing. Allegedly Merck both ignored warnings and it should have been suspicious regardless. There could, perhaps be several thousand more lawsuits based on the following information! The statute of limitations is (mostly) ending by the end of September. Several thousand individuals likely don’t have a clue… Also, another Cox-2 inhibitor (Celebrex) still exists! Current (Cox-2 inhibitor) users must also become aware of this alleged (Cox-2 inhibitor) issue(s).
The Plaintiff alleges to have been severely damaged by inadequate bone/spine healing from a Cox-2 inhibitor drug (Vioxx). There is seemingly overwhelming evidence that Cox-2 inhibitor drugs inhibit or prevent adequate bone repair. In addition to his lawsuit, he is attempting to get the public to understand the issue(s) as there is still time for those in the past to submit a valid claim, and there are perhaps thousands (and thousands?) of people possibly under the same type of (alleged) risk, who use Celebrex today. Just some example excerpts from virtually hundreds of articles: February 02, 2005 – HSS Physicians Review Literature on the Safety of COX-2 Inhibitors…COX-2 inhibitors effect fracture healing and spine fusion… should never be used in spinal fusion…
December 23, 2002 – Bone Fractures…Cox-2 Inhibitors interfere with bone growth and, healing… Researchers at Stanford University Medical Center…COX-2 inhibitors also impede the new bone growth that normally helps heal a fracture or stabilize a joint implant…
May 21, 2002 – Journal of Bone and Mineral Research – COX-2 Decreases Bone Healing? … mechanical testing revealed that COX-2 inhibitors…reduce bone strength…expression of COX-2 is critical for bone healing…essential for fracture healing…the inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis stops normal fracture healing.
Cox-2: Where are we in 2003? – The role of cyclooxygenase-2 in bone repair – Einhorn TA.Professor and Chairman, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, both non-specific and specific inhibitors of cyclooxygenases impair fracture healing – but that this is due to the inhibition of Cox-2 and not COX-1!… Vioxx is a Cox-2 inhibitor. “It’s time to tell the public,” concludes Dr. Thomas Einhorn.
Journal of Bone Mineral Research 1999 Jun;14(6):969-79…initial immune response is crucial to fracture healing… Reprinted from: www.usatoday.com/news/ … “It’s time to tell the public,” concludes Dr. Thomas Einhorn, Boston University’s orthopedic surgery chairman. New research suggests some of the most widely used painkillers may delay healing of a broken bone… “If it were my fracture … to me every day counts,” he says. Vioxx and Celebrex are among the culprits….the makers of Vioxx and Celebrex deny any link.
The Plaintiff alleges that Merck skillfully, artfully, and successfully planned and created a “veil of safety” perception and allegedly physicians and consumers were skillfully lulled into a false sense of security. Further, he alleges that one cannot help but wonder about the concurrent use of Cox-2 inhibitors (such as Vioxx, Celebrex) and bio-phosphates (like Fosamax). BOTH interfere with essential natural functions – natural healing (Vioxx) or regeneration (Fosamax). Fosamax lawsuits, by themselves even (the dreaded “Dead Jaw” syndrome) are accelerating.
My bone/spine healing issue lawsuit started with a broken leg (right femur) – a slip on the ice that was extremely painful, but that was considered a relatively routine operation. However, as the “routine” repair turned into hospital and nursing home long term stays, (after almost 8 months it was no longer was “routine”). Besides the broken leg which is alleged in the lawsuit, there was a failed major Lumbar spine operation that was allegedly ruined by inadequate bone repair (via Vioxx) – though not in this lawsuit for reasons of location and timing). There are many independent studies convincingly supporting this (Cox-2 inhibitors inhibiting or preventing bone/spine healing) to be the case. These studies go back to at the least the year 2000. There was also general industry “wariness” before that. Virtually all of the studies concluding that Cox-2 inhibiting drugs (such as Vioxx) inhibit or prevent proper spine/bone repair. Furthermore, if it seems that if a bone or spine has healed, it is often much weaker than it should be.
In short, the Cox-2 enzyme, and the inflammation it brings on is a natural reaction that starts the process of bone healing. Inhibiting the formation of this Cox-2 enzyme can be very effective at reducing pain (Vioxx’s mode of action), however it can carry with it severe consequences by preventing the natural process of bone healing!
As in the heart issues and the many thousands of pending lawsuits, the allegations that are made in this (bone/spine healing issues) lawsuit are so, so similar it makes one wonder if a pattern is now becoming evident. Consequently, there were probably a few thousand people across the U.S. taking Vioxx right through their bone/spine operations that did not gain the proper recovery. They suffered, and even may continue to suffer, severe consequences. Furthermore and allegedly, there may be significant number of individuals thinking that their critical (perhaps life saving) operations were successful, but their continued “success” rides squarely on inadequate (not strong enough) bone healing that could allegedly “snap” at some time. It is easy to see that quite possibly these thousands don’t even know that they may recuperate at least some of their damages as Merck “limps” through the first two years of withdrawing the product and the statute of limitations disqualify so many otherwise proper claims. One might wonder if that is one of the reasons of initiating voluntary withdrawal – i.e. to get the statute of limitations clock “ticking” and thus less time for individuals to discover what happened to them. Furthermore and allegedly, thousands of people may be suffering today – as there is still a Cox-2 inhibiting drug on the market – Celebex.
Going a step further, you may have read or heard that there are a number of lawsuits against Merck regarding FOSAMAX, and the “dead jaw” issue that is allegedly surfacing. This may even have more implications than one would first think. Both Cox-2 inhibiting drugs AND Fosamax work by interfering with the natural response to bone/spine repair (Cox-2 inhibitors) or interfering with the natural response of bone regeneration (Fosamax). One should readily wonder if there may be other, significant issue(s) with the concurrent usage of these drugs. Thus, shouldn’t there be public concern with ALL of the following – let it be stressed “alleged concerns”:
1 - Past use of a Cox-2 inhibitor (such as Vioxx or Celebrex) and the need to heal fractured bone/spine.
2 - Current use of Celebrex and the need to heal fractured bone/spine NOW!
3 - FOSAMAX as the “Dead Jaw” issue continues to accelerate – NOW!
4 - Past: concurrent use of Vioxx (or Celebrex) and FOSAMAX and if it has any impact – NOW!
5 - Today: concurrent use of Celebrex and FOSAMAX – NOW!
6 - Since FOSAMAX allegedly can stay in the bones for 10-15 years, what might be other issues?
Not addressing these issues, and in fact even not having addressed them in the past (allegedly) smells of short term profits being the guiding light, with public safety and long term viability a secondary issue. This is actually quite prevalent in many of today’s corporations, though in this case we are not talking about physical products or services, we are referring to real people’s lives and those of their loved ones, etc.!
With either this BLOG (preferably) or either of the two emails below, please provide your history and
thoughts if you or some-one you know, had had a similar experience. if it is relevant and/or questions about my experience or thoughts. I have a wealth of information concerning studies of this issue, and I will over the next couple of week post some of the main ones. If you have some information that you would like me to know, but that you don’t want on the WEB, please email one of the two “bone emails”.