Federal actos trial

Quote

Anonymous

Guest
Any input whether Takeda will try to settle before the federal trials, since they have been found liable in 2 so far, with 1 on appeal and the other was thrown out for Contributory negligence, but thats only good in 5 states. Plus they have over 6000 waiting to come up. BTW, I am not a lawyer or do I work for some other pharma company, just looking for some thoughts since you work for the company.
 




My thoughts are that we're 2-0. In both court trials thus far, the rulings have been in favor of Takeda, and no causality has been proven. Don't know where your getting your data from - but you better check again.

We will aggressively defend our position in every case.
 




Anonymous said:
My thoughts are that we're 2-0. In both court trials thus far, the rulings have been in favor of Takeda, and no causality has been proven. Don't know where your getting your data from - but you better check again.

We will aggressively defend our position in every case.
Click to expand...

The facts are causality has been proven...California 6.5m on appeal and Maryland 1.7m but was a wash because even at 1% fault, he gets to collect nothing. There are only 5 states like that. So let's just say...you are 0-2 but a little lucky, which will not be the case for the rest.
 




Anonymous said:
Any input whether Takeda will try to settle before the federal trials, since they have been found liable in 2 so far, with 1 on appeal and the other was thrown out for Contributory negligence, but thats only good in 5 states. Plus they have over 6000 waiting to come up. BTW, I am not a lawyer or do I work for some other pharma company, just looking for some thoughts since you work for the company.
Click to expand...

Awefully curious and informed about the case, to be an innocent bystander...nice try.
 




Anonymous said:
The facts are causality has been proven...California 6.5m on appeal and Maryland 1.7m but was a wash because even at 1% fault, he gets to collect nothing. There are only 5 states like that. So let's just say...you are 0-2 but a little lucky, which will not be the case for the rest.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...any statement with respect to the courts and the word "California" used as proof source - you lose all credibility, champ. Try again.

Actos was and IS a great drug (still FDA approved, mind you). Scum class action lawyers prey on the underinformed and sometimes greedy to gain a "class action victory", which is nothing more than a settle out of court ridiculous sum not because - mind you - there was a victory, but rather it's (usually) cheaper for a company to settle out of court. I just don't understand how these "trial" lawyers can sleep at night - its corporate robbery, so they can keep a ridiculous amount of the suit's proceeds, and the thousands of plaintiff litigants are left with squat - per person. Sickening.
 




Anonymous said:
Any input whether Takeda will try to settle before the federal trials, since they have been found liable in 2 so far, with 1 on appeal and the other was thrown out for Contributory negligence, but thats only good in 5 states. Plus they have over 6000 waiting to come up. BTW, I am not a lawyer or do I work for some other pharma company, just looking for some thoughts since you work for the company.
Click to expand...

Why would we, when it's the patients fault? Even the judges agreed, why do you think the 2 verdicts were thrown out? Go ahead and do your dog and pony show, but these lawsuits aren't a up to Snuf.
 




Anonymous said:
Why would we, when it's the patients fault? Even the judges agreed, why do you think the 2 verdicts were thrown out? Go ahead and do your dog and pony show, but these lawsuits aren't a up to Snuf.
Click to expand...

When you go against a non smoker you will get your ass handed to you just like you do errr day from Forest Ironwood reps.
 




Anonymous said:
Ahhh...any statement with respect to the courts and the word "California" used as proof source - you lose all credibility, champ. Try again.

Actos was and IS a great drug (still FDA approved, mind you). Scum class action lawyers prey on the underinformed and sometimes greedy to gain a "class action victory", which is nothing more than a settle out of court ridiculous sum not because - mind you - there was a victory, but rather it's (usually) cheaper for a company to settle out of court. I just don't understand how these "trial" lawyers can sleep at night - its corporate robbery, so they can keep a ridiculous amount of the suit's proceeds, and the thousands of plaintiff litigants are left with squat - per person. Sickening.
Click to expand...

Sorry champ, this is not a class action suit. Takeda will have to defend themself on every single one. I get it about the scum lawyers but on the other hand your company kept the Dr's and the public uniformed about the side effects, so there is scum and greed on both sides. How can either sleep at night. BTW i guess those rats smoked when they got the tumors from actos, Just a thought.
 




Anonymous said:
Sorry champ, this is not a class action suit. Takeda will have to defend themself on every single one. I get it about the scum lawyers but on the other hand your company kept the Dr's and the public uniformed about the side effects, so there is scum and greed on both sides. How can either sleep at night. BTW i guess those rats smoked when they got the tumors from actos, Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I guess having a warning about increased tumors in our PI is keeping the Dr's and public uniformed. It's been there since 2006 and Actos was just approved in a combo pill. We sleep well at night knowing the truth
 




Anonymous said:
Sorry champ, this is not a class action suit. Takeda will have to defend themself on every single one. I get it about the scum lawyers but on the other hand your company kept the Dr's and the public uniformed about the side effects, so there is scum and greed on both sides. How can either sleep at night. BTW i guess those rats smoked when they got the tumors from actos, Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Nice try lawyer boy. Look, if the patient and doctor were UNinformed...then this lawsuit has been pending for 7 years. B/c the Actos label has had the precaution for the past 7 years. And, California is still not a good proof source. That place is a lawyer's haven...
 




Anonymous said:
I guess having a warning about increased tumors in our PI is keeping the Dr's and public uniformed. It's been there since 2006 and Actos was just approved in a combo pill. We sleep well at night knowing the truth
Click to expand...

Sure it is out in a combo pill, but it has the warning about BC. So what is the truth? Just what is fed to you. If you would look at some of the emails and documents from the higher ups. It was nothing but a big cover up and stall job.
 








Anonymous said:
Nice try lawyer boy. Look, if the patient and doctor were UNinformed...then this lawsuit has been pending for 7 years. B/c the Actos label has had the precaution for the past 7 years. And, California is still not a good proof source. That place is a lawyer's haven...
Click to expand...

Didn't Actos come out in 1999? What took so long to even put it in. Loss of profits!!!!! Greedy bastards. Then another 5 years to put the real truth on the label.
 




This case is ambulance chasing at its finest. The thousands of people in the class action likely do not have BC, and probably have never even been on Actos. Seeing an ambulance chaser pop up on TV telling naïve cretins that "if they have taken Actos, they may be entitled to compensation" is a clarion call for scammers. Here's my prediction: the ambulance chasers have lost some of their confidence after these two dismissed verdicts. Had the verdicts gone against Takeda, Takeda probably would have quickly settled to make them go away. Now the AC's don't have much leverage with which to extort the company. Poor ambulance chasers.....now they'll have to be content with ginning up slip 'n fall cases at Home Depot
 




Anonymous said:
This case is ambulance chasing at its finest. The thousands of people in the class action likely do not have BC, and probably have never even been on Actos. Seeing an ambulance chaser pop up on TV telling naïve cretins that "if they have taken Actos, they may be entitled to compensation" is a clarion call for scammers. Here's my prediction: the ambulance chasers have lost some of their confidence after these two dismissed verdicts. Had the verdicts gone against Takeda, Takeda probably would have quickly settled to make them go away. Now the AC's don't have much leverage with which to extort the company. Poor ambulance chasers.....now they'll have to be content with ginning up slip 'n fall cases at Home Depot
Click to expand...

From your own website.


While the jury found that Takeda negligently failed to adequately warn Mr. An’s physician of the potential risk that ACTOS (pioglitazone HCl) might cause bladder cancer, the jury also found that Mr. An failed to exercise reasonable and ordinary care for his own health and safety. As a result, judgment was entered in favor of Takeda, as required by Maryland law.
 




Anonymous said:
From your own website.


While the jury found that Takeda negligently failed to adequately warn Mr. An’s physician of the potential risk that ACTOS (pioglitazone HCl) might cause bladder cancer, the jury also found that Mr. An failed to exercise reasonable and ordinary care for his own health and safety. As a result, judgment was entered in favor of Takeda, as required by Maryland law.
Click to expand...

First, Mr A. Chaser, I don't have a website so I have no idea what you are referring to. Secondly, the nexus between the two cases that have been reversed is a lack of causation. Read about the cases: the plaintiffs (aka the grifters) claim that BC developed within two years of taking Actos. That flies in the face of medical dogma (cancer has a latency of 10-20 years). But I do appreciate your weighing in. I know you would prefer to be passing your business cards out at funeral homes than corresponding with me. So many ambulances to case, so little time to chase them.
 




Anonymous said:
From your own website.


While the jury found that Takeda negligently failed to adequately warn Mr. An’s physician of the potential risk that ACTOS (pioglitazone HCl) might cause bladder cancer, the jury also found that Mr. An failed to exercise reasonable and ordinary care for his own health and safety. As a result, judgment was entered in favor of Takeda, as required by Maryland law.
Click to expand...

Uh..yeah, it's the patients fault. That's what I said 5 posts ago.
 




Anonymous said:
First, Mr A. Chaser, I don't have a website so I have no idea what you are referring to. Secondly, the nexus between the two cases that have been reversed is a lack of causation. Read about the cases: the plaintiffs (aka the grifters) claim that BC developed within two years of taking Actos. That flies in the face of medical dogma (cancer has a latency of 10-20 years). But I do appreciate your weighing in. I know you would prefer to be passing your business cards out at funeral homes than corresponding with me. So many ambulances to case, so little time to chase them.
Click to expand...

Grifters? Maybe you should read the cases dumb ass. And that quote was from Takeda's website. Your a takeda tool.
 








Anonymous said:
Didn't Actos come out in 1999? What took so long to even put it in. Loss of profits!!!!! Greedy bastards. Then another 5 years to put the real truth on the label.
Click to expand...

It is quite obvious (and sad) that lawyers/legal aides/paralegals (whatever you are..) are not required to THINK - and have a BASIC knowledge of science - before suing a pharmaceutical company. Listen, tool, it's simple: Drugs that come out in 1999, do not magically have long-term, rigorous data showing possible links to cancer, etc. That's called post-marketing data, and it often is not available (especially showing possible links, or causation - that takes time) immediately after or even, within a few years of a drug's approval. Look at Actos: there still is no causation link - as evidenced by the FDA's CONTINUED APPROVAL of the PRODUCT and PRODUCTS that are COMBINED WITH IT.

Let me provide you an example, on a level you can understand:

Patient begins taking product A in 2000.

Patient develops cancer XYZ in 2002.

"Adverse event" may (or more likely, may NOT) be mentioned to the company that distributes product A. (many times, the patient is on 5-15 therapies...because they have a CHRONIC, high risk disease - and probably more than 1 or 2 of them, such as diabetes type 2).

(lets just say the distributor of product A does get wind of the cancer XYZ). Patient's doctor reports the cancer, as an AE, to the company in 2003. (Again...not likely. The doctor knows the patient is on 10 drugs - how can he decide what he believes may be correlated the cancer?).

....So 3 years later, the company is aware of the cancer. There is no causation that has been established. There may be 10 or similar cases of the cancer, for product A. So the company develops a study to look at new patients on product A, which takes 3-5 years to complete. Get the idea? The time course for proving ANYTHING is usually many years - and usually a decade or longer, if you look at the history of products.

Don't come on here and show your ignorance - you will just continually get crushed...by little ole reps like me. Ironic thing is - I don't even sell the drug. I just know an idiot when I see one.
 




Top Bottom
Back
Quote