St. Cloud Personal Injury Lawyer - preemption

Now The U S Chamber Is Attacking TV Ads

Mike Bryant — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:23:00 GMT

What do you think that members of the US Chamber spend each year on TV? I would guess it's billions and billions looking at the annual TV advertising numbers. Well apparently, like the courthouses , they want the airways to only be for them.

Proof is the recent study they are touting, which shows that ads are up for medical malpractice in the country. So what? The claim is that it's creating more claims? If you define "creating" by informing people of their rights , then maybe. But, their implication is that these claims are simply made up or sprung from the lawyer's mind.

With the number of deaths that have been reported in American hospitals and the amount of people who come out sicker than they went in, it seems that more people need to know they have a claim. This is just a ridiculous example of how they love to bash lawyers.

But, lets get serious about their claim for a moment. How about a ban on all advertising? Or maybe a limit on the number of ads that anyone can run about anything? I bet their members might get a little concerned about that. I bet they would even say something about the First Amendment.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Great Website For Information About Our Food

Mike Bryant — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 16:21:00 GMT

If you spend some time looking around the Injuryboard website, you will find hundreds of articles about various issues with food. The peanut butter salmonella issue was covered from a number of angles. If you look under the toxic substances tab, you will see the many different issues we specifically have looked at from the Minnesota perspective. Usually, there is death or serious illness involved with the stories.

But, today it is great to be looking at a great website that hopefully will help cut down on the need for future stories. Yet another example of what a difference an administration makes with the way the FDA is handled. We are seeing signs of actual action on food from overseas, forcing companies to pay for hurting people, and information that helps the consumer, instead of taking rights away.

The site has email alerts and an RSS feeder, which will make it easier for people to get information. Hopefully, more and more people will find the site and use it for vital health information.

If you suffer from food poisoning, you need to get immediate medical care. If it continues or there are long term affects, you should contact an attorney concerning the problem. Early investigation can include the collection of samples, checking for health alerts, and the proper notifying of those who caused the problem.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Pharmaceutical Company Writing Good Stuff About Their Product

Mike Bryant — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 09:19:00 GMT

Usually when pharmaceutical companies are writing good stuff about themselves they are called advertisements. But, when they write it about themselves, except do so in ghostwritten "scientific papers", it should be called fraud. I guess it was a way to save money from just paying doctors to make up test results.

This past week, the New York Times reported the recently released court documents show that Wyeth Pharmaceuticals produced 26 scientific papers backing the use of hormone replacement therapy in women. They hired a medical communications firm to publish their papers in medical journals between 1998 and 2005.

Addressing the hormone drugs Premarin (conjugated estrogens) and Prempro (conjugated estrogens/medroxyprogesterone acetate), the papers emphasized the benefits and de-emphasized the risks of taking hormones to protect against maladies like aging skin, heart disease and dementia. At the same time, Wyeth saw sales rise to nearly $2 billion in 2001.

These were companies that until recently were protected by federal preemption from many lawsuits. Companies that paid defense lawyers millions of dollars to question the honesty and integrity of injured plaintiffs. It's to bad none of this evidence was available before too uncover the lies so many of these cases were based on.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

The U S Chambers Doublespeak Is Always Frivolous

Mike Bryant — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:00:00 GMT

It's amazing what the U S Chamber will do or say. They are for free enterprise and against governmental interference while they beg for government hand outs. They claim to represent all businesses, while regularly being the voice of big business. They support business lawsuits as protected litigation, while attacking the rights of the consumers all out.

But we may have found the winner of doublespeak. When opposing a bill which would allow plaintiff attorneys to deduct costs when they are spent, they come out with the following statement:

Those who practice plaintiffs’ lawyer work learn quickly that it is a business similar to other capital businesses. Capital is placed at risk and a judgment is made whether or not it will bring a profit. Today the costs of litigation act as a curb against marginal and frivolous litigation.

Well isn't that interesting:

1) First it's not true that other businesses are forced to wait to deduct their costs. They get to deduct them at the time they are spent.

2) Nice to see that they are finally admitting that we are businesses.

3) The last two lines are exactly what we have been saying for years. You don't make money off of frivolous cases. It will be interesting how their next video of extreme claims against lawyers will forget that they ever said these words.

The tax change would be nice. Now we have to wait until the end of a case to deduct the costs no matter how many years before the costs were incurred. But, it's been like this for years and it's not going to really change what cases we take. I wonder if this is the first tax change the U S Chamber has ever opposed.

The thing is that the U S Chamber really isn't against frivolous suits. They just don't want their Big Business welfare recipients to be sued. They want to take away the rights of the consumer. They will say and do anything to achieve these plans. Hopefully, people will stop believing it.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Medtronic Paid Surgeon May Have A Different Definition Of Full Disclosure

Mike Bryant — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:40:00 GMT

There have been a number of stories about doctors who have been paid big money by Medtronic at the time they were doing studies or prescribing the use of Medtronic products. One of those researchers has been under scrutiny about whether he really did the tests. The reasoning behind the University of Minnesota requirement for their doctors to disclose links to outside companies was to make sure patents get full disclosure.

Despite these changes, a Senate committee is claiming that Dr. David Polly, head surgeon of the University of Minnesota Department of Orthopedic Surgery:

1) Testified before a Senate committee without disclosing that he was being paid by Medtronic.

2) Told Medtronic about the progress of government-sponsored research.

3) May have given inaccurate information to a university ethics committee.

All at the same time that the doctor was receiving $1.2 million in consulting fees, honoraria, and expenses from Fridley-based Medtronic between 2003 and 2007. The response has been that there was proper disclosure, which you would think would be able to be confirmed.

Medtronic needs to continue to disclose their payments to doctors. Hopefully, the investigation of what happened here will continue. It is vital that patients get the right information about the products that are being used.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Congress Reaffirms And Finances A Better FDA

Mike Bryant — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:33:00 GMT

Search "Food Safety" here at the Injuryboard site and you will find all sorts of alerts. Search "FDA" and you will find the list of failures by the organization over the last eight years. It's been an underfunded arm of the government that has been asked to look the other way from what has been happening. To actually write laws that make the world less safe for the consumer.

This past week, changes in congress hopefully signals a new direction. The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved legislation that would give the Food and Drug Administration significantly more funding and power to police food safety.

The legislation would give the FDA authority to order food recalls, impose new civil penalties and require companies to follow food-safety standards. It also would require the agency to inspect so-called high-risk food facilities at least once a year and make companies keep detailed records to help the FDA more quickly trace the distribution of tainted foods and track the course of the contamination.

To help fund the work, the bill would require some 378,000 food facilities, including 223,000 overseas, to pay an annual registration fee of $500. The legislation exempts farms that raise meat and poultry and other facilities regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture

This is great news for the consumer and will hopefully get the FDA back to what it's supposed to be doing. Less food problems and quick effective response when something does happen will make a big difference.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

800,000 Dollars Paid To One Doctor For What?????

Mike Bryant — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:27:00 GMT

This past week, Medtronic confirmed that they paid $800,000 to Timothy Kuklo, an army doctor who consulted on a Medtronic's bone morphogenic protein called Infuse, which induces the formation of bone. The "doctor" is not accused of fabricating those results.

Medtronic spokeswoman Marybeth Thorsgaard said the company put Kuklo on "inactive status" in May after the Army said the study was based on false information, and that Kuklo had forged signatures of purported co-authors of the study.

Kuklo trained doctors and provided educational services to Medtronic starting in 2001. He became a paid consultant in 2006.

She said payments were compensation for Kuklo's work developing products for the company, training doctors and speaking at company events.

Payments were not connected to the study and Medtronic was not involved in any way with the report, Thorsgaard said.

She said none of the data in Kuklo's study was used to win regulatory approval for the Infuse product.

The product has been used as a way to help people with broken bones quickly heal. I've understood it as electric simulation that stimulates the area and leads to a better fusion. But, was Dr. Timothy Kuklo paid to just make this stuff up?

Earlier this year Medronic announced that they would be disclosing their payments to doctors. Hopefully, there will also be an investigation of what happened here. It is vital that patients get the right information about the products that are being used.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

The U S Chamber And The Campaign For Free Enterprise

Mike Bryant — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:30:00 GMT

Off and on, various members of the Injuryboard have been addressing the interesting ways that the U S Chamber has been attacking the right of individuals to bring claims to court. The continued attacks to duck responsibility with half truths and frivolous inaccurate stories.

Now they have a new effort. It's called the Campaign for Free Enterprise. Isn't their vision of free enterprise what got us into this mess? Aren't they the ones begging the government for bailouts? Maybe they missed what the country looked like a year ago when they had control of the White House.

This was my favorite quote:

"It is built on a system of incentives that offers opportunity and rewards for those who work hard and take risks."

What is the risk they want to take when the ask for preemption and tort reform to protect them from their wrong doing? Is it a reward to get government handouts? Don't be taken in by the misuse of the word "FREE". Just replace the F and add the money letters G D to to both ends.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Consumer Victory: Obama Issues Clear Statement Against Preemption

Mike Bryant — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:38:00 GMT

For a long time here at the Injuryboard, many of us have looked at the issues surrounding preemption. Basically, the use of the federal government to override state laws. The Bush administration made it a practice to change administrative rules to preempt consumer protection laws of individual states.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court gave the consumer significant relief by ruling that the laws of Vermont weren't preempted in the pharmaceutical lawsuit of Wyeth v. Levine . The same issue is being addressed by congress concerning product liability.

This past week, President Obama gave the consumer another lift with the following statement:

Throughout our history, State and local governments have frequently protected health, safety, and the environment more aggressively than has the national Government… The purpose of this memorandum is to state the general policy of my Administration that preemption of State law by executive departments and agencies should be undertaken only with full consideration of the legitimate prerogatives of the States and with a sufficient legal basis for preemption… As Justice Brandeis explained more than 70 years ago, “[i]t is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.

This is a clear sign that states are free to protect their citizens as they see fit.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant

Hydroxycut Recall Is Another Example Of The FDA's Problems

Mike Bryant — Sat, 16 May 2009 12:40:00 GMT

At the Injuryboard, many of the writers have discussed the horrid state of the FDA during the Bush Administration. The reality seems to be that there was either no oversight of products or there was work to continue to weaken consumer protections and to allow free wheeling for the pharmaceutical companies.

This recall is of particular interest because the report of death and many of the injuries have been reported for some time. Why didn't the FDA do something earlier? Also, there is a jurisdictional issue of if the FDA has authority to regulate the dietary supplement industry.

Presently, dietary supplements do not need FDA sanction to go on sale. Hopefully, a review of what happened in these cases and the importance of protecting the consumer will get Congress to look at adding the power.

If you or a family member is injured by a product, you need to get immediate medical care. If there is a significant affect or injury, you should contact an attorney concerning the problem. Early investigation can include the collection of product, checking recall alerts, and the proper notifying of those who caused the problem.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Bryant