Home     Law Advice     Insurance Advice     Community    
Dangerous or Defective Products : Click here for useful articles and FAQs for the following drug and medical device hot topics - Fosamax, Seroquel, Trasylol, NuvaRing, Medtronic Sprint Fidelis leads, Stryker Howmedica Hip Implants, Shoulder Pain Pumps
Go Back   FreeAdvice Legal Forum > ACCIDENT AND INJURY LAW > Dangerous or Defective Products

Powered by Attorney Pages


  Find An Attorney In Your Area    
 

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-07-2008, 03:22 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1

Fosamax (Merck)


CT law
My mother, age 85, was in very good health until she started taking Fosamax to prevent osteoporosis. She started taking it in June but by August she was wheezing and short of breath. In Sept she was hospitalized for blot clods in her lungs, and now she is on a respirator. Documentation has recently shown that Fosamax is the direct cause.
Fosamax has been the subject of a class-action suit, I believe. Any CT lawyers specializing in this type of case?
  #2  
Old 10-07-2008, 03:33 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Heart o' Dixie
Posts: 3,168
I am not seeing that listed as a side effect for Fosamax. Here is what I've found listed:
Post-Marketing Experience
Quote:
The following adverse reactions have been reported in post-marketing use:

Body as a Whole: hypersensitivity reactions including urticaria and rarely angioedema. Transient symptoms of myalgia, malaise, asthenia and rarely, fever have been reported with Fosamax, typically in association with initiation of treatment. Rarely, symptomatic hypocalcemia has occurred, generally in association with predisposing conditions. Rarely, peripheral edema.

Gastrointestinal: esophagitis, esophageal erosions, esophageal ulcers, rarely esophageal stricture or perforation, and oropharyngeal ulceration. Gastric or duodenal ulcers, some severe and with complications have also been reported.

Localized osteonecrosis of the jaw
, generally associated with tooth extraction and/or local infection, often with delayed healing, has been reported rarely.

Musculoskeletal: bone, joint, and/or muscle pain, occasionally severe, and rarely incapacitating; joint swelling.

Nervous system: dizziness and vertigo.

Skin: rash (occasionally with photosensitivity), pruritus, rarely severe skin reactions, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis.

Special Senses: rarely uveitis, scleritis or episcleritis.
[url=http://www.drugs.com/sfx/fosamax-side-effects.html]Fosamax Side Effects | Drugs.com[/url]

The only class-action I could find was concerned with the bolded adverse reaction above.

What kind of documentation leads you to believe that it was the Fosamax? What kind of health was your mother in before she started taking that particular pharmaceutical? What other presciption/OTC medications was she taking before/during/after she started on Fosamax?
__________________
Actions have consequences. Remember Newton's Third Law of Motion in everything you do.
  #3  
Old 10-07-2008, 10:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterfalk View Post
CT law
My mother, age 85, was in very good health until she started taking Fosamax
I don't want to interfere with a grieving person's line of reasoning but I can tell you what you would expect to hear as an answer:

First, your mother was 85, roughly 7 years beyond normal life expectancy. 2nd, she was not prescribed a biphosphonate because her health was "very good". It would be done because her bone density was such that a woman of her declining health runs a high risk of morbidity and mortality, especially within 1 to 2 years following a fracture. It would have been irresponsible for the prescriber to not put her on it, and there are additionally no studies that show any relation of biphosphonates to blood clots. They actually draw calcium (an agent of atheroschlerosis) OUT of blood for deposit in bone.

Cardiovascular diseases are THE #1 most predictable cause of death in the elderly. If there was some more unusual cause, it might have been worthwhile to investigate other outside agents.

I do wish you both well.
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:06 AM.



IMPORTANT NOTICE
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS PAGE WERE NOT REVIEWED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR ATTORNEYS AT FREEADVICE.COM. Thousands of professionally prepared and reviewed questions and answers in 130 legal categories are to be found at the Question and Answer pages at FreeAdvice.com.

F
reeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting or the qualifications of any person responding. Use of the Forums is subject to our Terms and Conditions which prohibit advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, or false, defamatory, abusive, vulgar, or harassing messages, and subject violators to a fee for each improper posting. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction who you have retained to represent you. To locate an attorney visit AttorneyPages.com. Copyright since 1995 by Advice Company. All Rights Reserved.