Vioxx Off The Market After A Study example essay topic

Vioxx / MerckSummaryThe painkiller Vioxx was introduced in 1999 by Merck & Co. It has been used by over 20 million Americans since it was put on the market. Vioxx remained on the market for approximately five years without adequate warnings about its risks. In September of 2004, Merck took Vioxx off the market after a study revealed that it doubled the risk of heart attack or stroke for patients that used it for more than 18 months. Although Merck claimed that they had no idea of these possibly lethal side effects, some internal documents imply that they had been aware of the problem for years and had not made moves to change it.

Over 300 lawsuits have been filed against Merck, and it is expected that thousands more will arise. Further studies were conducted on the drug, but Merck adamantly fought Vioxx findings. Even thou Merck funded and agreed with the design of the study, it publicly discredited its findings. Other reports showed that in older patients, Vioxx made no provide as much protection as it is expected to.

One study links Vioxx to 88,000 to 140,000 cases of heart disease. Most of this information had been kept private for quite a long time. Despite the obvious health risks, in February of 2005, government advisers concluded that the benefits of Vioxx outweighed the dangers and that it was the patients decision whether or not to keep using the drugs. They stated that the prescription products should have strong warning, and advised that a long-term study be conducted to further understand the drug. However, 10 of the government drug advisers who supported the continuance of Vioxx were in some way tied financially to the drug.

Without their votes, the committee would have voted that Vioxx should not return to the market. Response Personally, I was shocked by the Merck / Vioxx situation. I could not believe that something that was basically proven to cause heart attacks and strokes was permitted to be put on the market in the first place, and the fact that it may be brought back is horrible. I believe that things are being handled terribly. Since so many of the members of the committee are financially connected with Merck & Co., they would obviously vote in a way that would support the company, and in turn, benefit themselves.

It seems that the value of the well being of the patients that use this medication is being neglected while the Merck and its associates simply look out for themselves. I do not believe that Vioxx should be put back on the market. For one thing, it has already become clear how detrimental its side effects can be. Another reason is that allowing this drug to be put back on the market will only discourage efforts made to create drugs that will be just as effective but without the negative side effects. I also disagree with the statement made by the committee, which basically said that it was acceptable to disburse this drug as long as it had a warning and that a person should be able to make the decision on whether or not to take the drug on their own. However, this is completely unreasonable, since if a person is in excruciating pain, they may agree to take a drug just so as long as it ends their discomfort.

This is just the beginning of numerous uninformed (or improperly informed) people that could make decisions about medication that will harm them later in life.