result #111634 - SHOULD DRUG COMPANIES BE SUED TO MAKE THEM DISCLOSE SERIOUS SIDE-EFFECTS?

search this site: search the web:

Whatever this banner said, was also contributed by the users!

result #111634 - SHOULD DRUG COMPANIES BE SUED TO MAKE THEM DISCLOSE SERIOUS SIDE-EFFECTS?

user ballots

Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes

Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz

TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase

Discussion
Bug Report

SHOULD DRUG COMPANIES BE SUED TO MAKE THEM DISCLOSE SERIOUS SIDE-EFFECTS?

[+] serious ballot by Mithrandir
ACTIVE Jan 27,2007 - Sun Jan 27, 08

Bayer Corp. will pay $8 million to 30 states as part of a settlement requiring the company to fully disclose when drugs pose risks for patients with specific health conditions. The company had a turnover of $US 35.5 billion in 2005.

The settlement states that the company failed to adequately warn physicians, pharmacies and patients of clinical studies revealing serious consequences (potentially fatal) of taking Baycol, a "statin" cholesterol-lowering drug. The FDA had approved the drug in 1997. The company pulled the drug from the market in August 2001 due to its muscle-weakening side effects. While patients who take statin drugs frequently experience muscle-weakening side effects, Bayer failed to disclose that its product posed significantly greater risks than did statins produced by other drug companies.

No, drug companies should be legally mandated to disclose serious side effects of their drugs	12
No, should it not be the FDA's job to regulate drug companies (and protect the public health)?	4
Other (please comment)	2
Yes, how else do you expect drug companies to keep on making profits?	0

Ballot #111634: has 18 total votes.
invite people to vote on this ballot!

Comment:

content @ BESTANDWORST.COM

smile bank:

if you don't see an image, click here.

email this ballot link to friends

You can also reach this ballot at :
http://BestAndWorst.com/v/111634.htm

similiar ballots:
4491. Why do the American drug companies force HIV sufferers in Africa to pay stupidly high prices for a drug that prolongs life?
130960. Unlimited Money : Are there any side effects?
49616. Don't you wish the actors/actresses in commercials advertising prescription medicine would talk about the side effects?
68291. Drug Manufacturers / Companies
5368. Are drug companies ripping off america's elderly?
75191. Americans: Should drug companies charge U.S. citizens reasonable prices?
131245. should website be sued for comments that visitors make?
94686. Should restaurants have to disclose every single ingredient of every item on the menu?
90584. Dell set to double number of employees in India. Shouldn't they disclose how much they pay them per hour?
115429. Netherlands sued over Srebrenica

COMMENTS:
I don't understand why Bayer had to be sued? Is it not against the law for a drug company to put the public health at risk?

by Mithrandir on Sat Jan 27, 07 9:08am [+]

It is, but (to them) not if no one finds out.

The FDA has alot to answer for also.

by Grumpy_Person on Sat Jan 27, 07 10:19am [+]

Voted : No, drug companies should be legally mandated to disclose serious side effects of their drugs
But it's good to have the option when they don't.

by thc2883 on Sat Jan 27, 07 2:32pm [+]

Voted : Other (please comment)
The FDA and lawsuits are needed to let people know what the risks are. Alowing this information to be covered up amounts to fraud.

by skylab on Sat Jan 27, 07 3:00pm [+]

Voted : No, drug companies should be legally mandated to disclose serious side effects of their drugs
And *then* they should be sued, on general principles.

by Truthseeker013 on Sat Jan 27, 07 4:22pm [+]

About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy |