Do you think you should be able to sue a drug manufacturer for a complication related to the medication if the possible side effect is already known and printed as a warning?

I think those class action suits are BS. If the side effects are printed and the patient is made aware of them then they take the medication at their own risk and of their own free will. If someone forced the medication down their throat, sue that person.

No and this puts me into an apoplexy of rage. People and their stupid need to take every pill under the sun. I hate them. They have the warning, take the pill and then when what the warning states happens and they want to sue. This is why I got out of the medical field after I left the navy.
I saw that Yaz commercial too, where they had to “clear up” a few things.
Are you serious? Really? I think it’s a fucking shame that they have to state “This does not prevent HIV or Aids.” As if by not stating it, someone could say “I thought taking this pill would stop me from getting HIV. Now I want to sue and be financially compensated for being stupid.” It’s ridiculous.

Heck yes. Those warnings are not specific to individuals.

@trillian You mean those pills don’t prevent AIDS?? Dang!

@Trillian I had not thought about the AIDS, and other STD’s. That is so dumb to me, I agree. Those are not really side effects though. I was thinking more about warnings like stroke, DVT, high blood pressure, death, or allergic reactions that are severe or can lead to death like rash, TENS, anaphylaxis, etc.

The people suing are arguing that the company never properly investigated the side effects. Birth control pills have been associated with cardiovascular problems for a long time. These people are suggesting that certain pill formulations (Yaz, Yasmin, and Ocella) are worse than other pills.

There is a big difference between saying “birth control pills may cause cardiovascular problems” and ”this particular birth control pill has a higher risk of causing cardiovascular problems than other pills.”

Because thorough, high-quality studies of these side-effects still have not been performed by these companies on these specific drugs, I think they have an excellent case.

@Trillian: I really do not thinking taking a birth control pill can be equated with “taking every pill under the sun.”

And you’re right, it is a “fucking shame” that companies have to tell people the pill does not prevent against HIV or AIDS. But I do not think the shame is that people are fucking stupid and irresponsible. I think the shame is that people are so poorly educated about contraception.

Imagine for a second that you are a poor teenager from a deeply religious community that doesn’t discuss sex and contraception openly. You know that you are supposed to take certain precautions against getting STDs and getting pregnant, but you don’t understand how all the different kinds of birth control work—the pill, the patch, the ring, IUDs, depo shots, implants, condoms, spermicides, sponges, diaphragms….

It does not seem completely unreasonable, then, that you might mistakenly believe—or be misinformed by people around you—that the pill covers all your bases.

It must be really nice to know everything and never be misinformed or make mistakes. You go right on judging people with less knowledge, intelligence, and access to information than you. Enjoy your “apoplexy of rage.”

@nikipedia Allow me to make clear that I refer to those who see a new pill commercial and automatically want to start taking it. And I don’t think that being poorly educated or under informed is a viable excuse, as any drug is not obtained in a void. One has to go to the doctors office. If you are going to take a drug, it is your responsibility to educate yourself, and you can’t say that the information is not readily available, or in a locked file cabinet at the bottom of some broken stairs behind a door marked “Beware of the leopard.” And as point in fact, I don’t think that these are the people filing suit, it’s a bunch of people who are just looking for yet another loophole to get money that they really haven’t earned.
And I plan on a nice fit of rage before i go on the road. Thank you for your generalizations and blind defense of something that may ultimately cost you money in the form of still higher prices for drugs and doctor visits.

HHG Adams, D

It depends on a lot of things. Best to talk to a product liability attorney.

With Yaz, the commercials I saw implied that they had originally omitted or trivialized some of the side effects and billed the product as an effective substitute for mitigating PMS (not PMDD). Companies know the law and need to follow it. If they intentionally misrepresent a product, they should expect to be held accountable for their blatant lies. Your question assumes that the company provided accurate information and full disclosure, which is apparently being disputed.

Yes, I do think people should be able to sue. It doesn’t even matter to me what the facts are. Everyone should be allowed to sue for anything. It’s called ‘justice for all’. If the suit is rubbish, it will be thrown out.

@lilikoi I was not picking on Yaz in particular, it is just the commercial inspired me to think about the question. I probably could have worded it better. Yes, I am assuming side effects and complications have already been advised to the patient by the company, and that the drug company has made accurate assertions of their medication for this partuclar question. I might go as far to say that whether the drug was effective or not might be irrelevant to the question at hand. But, as a side note, or corse blatant lies of a drugs effectiveness would be unnacceptible. Possibly Yaz has always billed it correctly? I have no idea.

I guess I am not asking if they should be able to sue, rather do you think the suiut has merit?

Another example related to a birth control was an ad I saw years ago that people on the pill had more incidence of cervical cancer. At the time I thought it completely bogus, people on the bill have more unprotected sex, that is why they might have more cervical cancer, that is not the pills fault. That lawyers even try to get these things going is annoying, and also leaves the public with false knowledge. I don’t know what happened to that supposed case.

There are two separate risk issues for COCs containing drospirenone Yasmin, Yaz and Ocella.

First, dropirenone has a mildly diuretic action, meaning it decreases bloating by increasing urinary output, and can cause electrolyte imbalance through increased potassium levels. The effect is similar to a ½ dose of a potassium sparing diuretic called spironolactone that is sometimes used to treat acne and excessive hair growth. So if a woman already has some kidney, liver or adrenal issues that might increase potassium, she may get into trouble.

Second, there are conflicting studies about whether drospirenone might cause a slight increase in the risk of VTE venous thromboembolism, i.e.; clot compared to the progesterones that have been around since the 1960s.

So that’s what has the liability lawyers salivating. It will take awhile to sort out the VTE issue. I talk about it with my patients, but the fact is that there is no “one size fits all” COC. Some women do better with one progesterone type than another, and each is a little different. For exampe, levonorgesterol the one that drospirenone was unfavorably compared to in the study is androgenic, which means it can cause higher cholesterol, acne, and hair growth. Modern COCs contain varying amounts of estrogen, 20–50mcg. Complications are dose related, so in general, lower doses are safer, but some women don’t do well on the 20mcg pills. It behooves us all to be aware, ask questions, and share information. But htere’s not much profit in that for the ambulance chasers.

@MagsRags Have you ever noticed increased platelets in pill takers? I realized once that mine was the very high side of normal, the doctor said it was nothing. But, I noticed that all of the labs I have looked at while not on the pill are always very normal normal. I do have a bad gene for clotting, and my father has had a DVT. So, I just wondered if any doctors have ever observed that with other patients?

No I don’t think we should be able to sue a drug company for something they have already warned people about. If I am made aware of any possible side effect of taking a drug then it is completely my decision as to whether I take it or not.

I strongly feel that it has become far to easy to sue people and because of this, less and less people are taking responsibilty for their own actions.

@JLeslie platelet count does not increase on COCs, but estrogen does cause increased platelet “activity”, meaning they’re a little stickier and a little more prone to forming a clot.

What kind of genetic clotting disorder do you have?

@MagsRags I know it isn’t supposed to cause increased platelets, but I still wondered if you had ever observed it. Since I was still in normal range, I think it is something doctors might never notice or pay attention to. I am positive, but only heterozygous for Prothrombin G20210A – FRET. And, another close relative is positive for something else that I cannot remember, that I have no been tested for from what I can tell I don’t really need to be tested, my family is full of clogged arteries and heart disease.