No Payout / WILX News 10 Lansing/Jackson-The latest in health news as it relates to your family's health

WILX Home · Station Info

News · Sports · Weather · Job Search · Blogs · Contests · iWitness Photo/Video · 10toGo · Instant Alert · World News

Recipes · Restaurants · Community · School Closings · Lottery · Entertainment · Money · Breakroom · Apartment Guide · Repair Don’t Replace · Summer Guide

No Payout

Save

Posted: 5:59 PM Nov 9, 2007
Last Updated: 11:34 AM Nov 12, 2007
Reporter: Jessica Aspiras
Email Address: jessica.aspiras@wilx.com

9 comments

Poll

Merck & Co. will pay $4.85 billion to settle thousands of lawsuits filed by people or family members who claimed the drug Vioxx proved fatal or injured its users, the company said Friday, Nov. 9, 2007. (AP / ABC News)

A | A | A

"When it came on the news that Vioxx was being pulled from the shelves, we knew, we knew immediately."

Do You Think Michigan's Drugmaker Immunity Law Should Be Repealed?

Yes	85.8%
No	14.2%

Last year, Leslie Richter spoke to News 10 about her husband Richard's death back in 2003. He died of a stroke two years after taking the drug Vioxx. Vioxx's manufacturer, Merck & Co. pulled the painkiller in 2004 after research showed it doubled the chances of heart attacks and strokes. On Friday, it agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle lawsuits over Vioxx.

"Right now all Michigan residents are excluded from the settlement" explains Representative Mike Simpson (D).

That's because in 1996 Michigan became the only state in the country to enact a drug immunity law.

"Michigan residents are treated like second-class citizens, because they're barred from seeking recourse if a drug company provides a product to them that they know will harm or kill you and don't disclose that."

Rep. Simpson's legislation to repeal the law passed in the House in February, but he says since then, it's been stonewalled by Senate Republicans.

"I'm emploring the senate. I'm asking Senator Kuipers to please give this three bill package an immediate hearing, and just give it a fair vote. That's all we're asking. The people of Michigan deserve that."

Senator Wayne Kuipers is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee where the legislation is currently being held. In a written statement he says, "A drug manufacturer that goes through a rigorous screening process by the FDA and receives approval should not be subject to litigation contesting whether a product is defective or dangerous. If FDA approval is not good enough what is?"

FDA approval or not, the immunity law means none of the settlement money will go to patients in Michigan.

More Stories
State Falling Behind on Medical Marijuana Applications

Michigan to Host Stem Cell Summit

Flu & Pneumonia Vaccination Clinics Announced

Determining If You Have Swine Flu

Swine Flu Vaccine Q&A

Swine Flu Vaccine Delayed

Swine Flu Vaccine Will Be in Short Supply

Fact-Checking: Are Reports of "Death Panels" True or Not?

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.

Posted by: HG Location: Ann Arbor on Nov 24, 2007 at 05:25 PM
This is probably too late for anyone to read, but for Chris B.: The issue is a simple one. A drug can receive FDA approval but, after approval, a serious side effect starts to turn up. (That happens, btw, in 51% of all new drugs.) That fact alone is not the company's fault. But what _is_ their responsibility is what they do about it. It's really the old Watergate questions: What did they know? When did they know it? What did they do? If the answer to the questions are (a) early (b) nothing and (c) except try to intimidate researchers who raised the problem, create misleading journal articles, or otherwise knowingly suppress the potential dangers, that's when accountability kicks in. And well it should.

Posted by: Charles Location: Lansing on Nov 13, 2007 at 12:46 PM
This issue was debated to death, and the merits settles through long testimony and with much evidence. Michigan's awful drug immunity law is so bad not even the pharma industry likes it. There have been hours and hours of testimony and debate in the Legislature and the result was clear --the law is very very bad. The law is indefensible and was a mistaken --some say hidden-- last minute revision to a bill passed in 1995. There are no valid arguments in favor of the law. It harms people, costs taxpayers millions, kills jobs, makes people in Michigan into second-class citizens and makes no sense legally or logically. That is why it is unique among the 50 states. The only reason it hasn't be repealed already is pure nasty politics and a failure of leadership. Plenty of votes from GOP and Dem lawmakers to pass a repeal. We just need Senate Leadership to step up and take action. Let the repeal have a fair vote!

Posted by: Dianne Location: Commerce Township on Nov 12, 2007 at 09:02 PM
From: The Constitutional Status of Tort Reform, by John C. P. Goldberg, Prof, Vanderbilt Law Sch Why should a federal court care about what kind of tort law a state enacts? The immediate answer lies in the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifies that "[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."… In short, … [it’s] difficult to disavow the existence of a federal right of victim access to what we today know as tort law, a corresponding duty on states to provide such law, and a corresponding power in the courts to consider whether certain forms of legislation so undermine tort law, with so little justification, as to amount to a breach of that duty. No mention of folks being left out because, as Kelly of Lansing states, they are “overweight, underactive people with a whole host of health problems.”

Posted by: Barry Adler Location: Northville, MI on Nov 12, 2007 at 06:29 PM
We need to hold drug manufacturers accountable.Whys hould they get a free pass in Michigan but nowhere else. How many Senators like Kuiper need to be bought before somebody pays attention to the fact that Michigan has become a regressive and unsafe state.

Posted by: Kelly Location: Lansing on Nov 12, 2007 at 08:19 AM
Oh yes. Let's just put those awful drug companies out of business! Oh, those big bad awful corporations. Nevermind that they spend years and billions of dollars in research to find drugs to cure or makes lives more comfortable. Nevermind that they employ hundreds of thousands of this country's best and brightest. Nevermind that they help drive the economies everywhere they're located. And, of course, nevermind that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves every single drug brought to the market. Yes, let's punish our drug companies because a handful of overweight, underactive people with a whole host of health problems died while taking a prescription drug. Apparently, we expect to live forever, but we're too lazy to treat our bodies to accommodate that wishful thinking. Instead, we expect doctors and "miracle" drugs to cure all the damage we do to ourselves. So, yes, let's blame the drug companies and put them out of business!

Posted by: Matt Location: Parma on Nov 11, 2007 at 07:20 PM
The '96 law that was passed to provide immunity against drug companies is another restrictive law to the citizens rights. This is not right, the drug company messes up and harms a individual then that company should be punished. Quit taking our God given American rights away.

Posted by: Dianne Location: Commerce Township on Nov 10, 2007 at 02:20 AM
Recall Sen Wayne Kuipers for failing to present HB’s 4044, 4045 & 4046 that would repeal Michigan’s drug immunity law passed in 1996. The law granted complete legal immunity from liability to drug companies if a FDA approved drug caused harm or death. The law has prevented Michigan residents from finding justice here and in other states. We know FDA drugs have harmed and killed many Americans. If not voted on by the end of the year, the Bills will die. Also, re: Merck’s $4.8 billion payout to victims of Vioxx (11/9/07), Rep. Mike Simpson (D) informs us that, "Right now all Michigan residents are excluded from the settlement" www.wilx.com/news/headlines/11157906.html. Read Henry Greenspan’s essay, “Why We Must Rescind Michigan's Drug Shield Law” We need lawmakers who are working for the good people of Michigan, not for the drug companies. This is America dammit. Let’s rid ourselves of those who want to take away our civil rights.

Posted by: Chris B. Location: East Lansing on Nov 9, 2007 at 11:30 PM
It absolutely should not be repealed. If the Federal government tests a drug and says it is okay and if the drug company is not dishonest in the information they give the FDA, then how can anyone hold the drug company responsible? Do you expect them to be omnipotent? Maybe see the future? If we knew everything there was to know about human biology we'd have a cure for everything already. Obviously, medicine is full of uncertainty and lawsuits help no one. Do you think a lawsuit is going to prevent the CEO from buying a boat or something? All this does is discourage future potentially life saving drugs from reaching the marketplace. It takes money away from research and development, and ultimately it results in an increase in drug prices. If a drug company complies with the law, if the FDA certifies a drug as safe, then they should be immune. With so many things wrong in our state, I'm glad we've atleast got this right.

Posted by: Mike Location: Holt on Nov 9, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Senator Wayne Kuipers comments are ludicrous. With that kind of thought process any vehicle not deemed unsafe should be free from any legal action even though it may have design flaws. All of our meat that is inspected by the USDA should be safe. Why not include toys? Look at what’s happening in that area thee days. Just how much of Senators Kuipers ejection fund is financed by drug companies? Remember who elected you and the constituents your suppose to server and protect. The Citizens of Michigan!!!!