The Food and Drug Administration was very detailed in the warning that it issued on March 12, 2010 about the fact that some patients may not be able to metabolize the medication and thus be put “at risk for heart attack, stroke and cardiovascular death. Here is the official FDA statement:

“The U.S. Food and drug Administration today added a boxed warning to the anti-blood clotting drug Plavix (clopidogrel), alerting patients and health care professionals that the drug can be less effective in people who cannot metabolize the drug to convert it to its active form.
Plavix reduces the risk of heart attack, unstable angina, stroke and cardiovascular death in patients with cardiovascular disease by making platelets less likely to form blood clots. Plavix does not have its anti-platelet effects until it is metabolized into its active form by the liver enzyme CYP2C19.

People who have reduced functioning of their CYP2C19 liver enzyme cannot effectively convert Plavix to its active form. As a result, Plavix may be less effective in altering platelet activity in those people. These “poor metabolizers” may not receive the full benefit of Plavix treatment and may remain at risk for heart attack, stroke and cardiovascular death.” Learn more about a possible Plavix Lawsuit

FDA officials estimated that up to 14 percent of the U.S. population falls into the category of “poor metabolizers.” The FDA recommended that patients who have concern about their use of Plavix contact their health care professionals about the use of the drug. If you have been diagnosed as a “poor metabolizer” of Plavix and suffered from these side effects you also have the option of invoking your legal rights against the drug’s manufacturer.

If you’ve been taking Actos, which has been reported to be the world’s top-selling diabetes drug, you should be aware of the fact that you could be at risk of developing some serious side effects. There have been a number of recent stories in the media and announcements made by the U.S. Drug Administration in which serious concerns have been raised about the consumer safety of this drug made by Asian drugmaking giant Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. You should also be aware that Takeda is maintaining that its drugs are safe and is vigorously defending what are expected to be thousands of Actos bladder cancer lawsuits over these side effects.

The major allegation is that long-term use of Actos can cause bladder cancer. A French government-funded research project that analyzed the effects of the drugs on diabetics between 2006 and 2009 raised such serious concerns there that France banned Actos after concluding that there was a link to bladder cancer. Germany also banned Actos, citing research confirming the link. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not banned Actos but has issued public health advisories in which it informed the public that use of the drug for more than one year put patients at increased risk of developing bladder cancer.

There is also another study by British medical researchers that was presented to the American Diabetes Association in which the use of Actos raises the risk of an eye disease that can lead to blindness, according to a report in Bloomberg News. “People taking the drugs have a 3 to 6 times increased risk of developing diabetic macular edema, a condition in which the retina thickens and swells,” according to the report.

One of the questions that is frequently asked by people who have been exposed to asbestos is whether they are at risk of developing a cancer known as malignant mesothelioma and how and where does this cancer invade the body. Medical researchers have confirmed without a doubt over the last several decades that exposure to asbestos in the overwhelming majority of cases is the reason that this cancer develops. The exposure in most cases occurs at a workplace where tiny, invisible particles of asbestos that are floating around are inhaled. It has been documented that those who worked in occupations in which asbestos was a common component are most at risk.

Asbestos was universally used for many years in insulation, fireproofing, roofing, construction work, shipyard construction and repair, military facilities, factories, assembly lines and many other areas in which it was prized for its insulating and fire-resistant qualities. When these particles were inhaled they invaded the linings of vital organs and over several decades generated cancer cells which formed tumors.

It can frequently take several decades for malignant mesothelioma to develop and be diagnosed, most often too late to be effectively treated.
This cancer is generally divided into three groups. PLEURAL MESOTHELIOMA is the most common type of malignant mesothelioma and develops in the linings that surround the lungs. PERITONEAL MESOTHELIOMA is the second most common from of malignant mesothelioma and develops in the linings of the vital organs in the abdomen. PERICARDIAL MESOTHELIOMA is the rarest form of malignant mesothelioma and develops in the lining of the heart. All share the common characteristics of being slow to develop and becoming very aggressive. If you have been told you have mesothelioma you may want to find a mesothelioma lawyer as soon as possible to protect your rights.

Asbestos lawsuits have been one of the major sources of litigation in U.S. courthouses for decades and cases are still being filed, settled and debated by juries every day. And, with federal health officials estimating that about 2,000 to 3,000 Americans will be diagnosed with asbestos-caused cancers such as malignant mesothelioma for the foreseeable future these lawsuits can be expected to continue. One of the most recent suits involved a settlement of a case in Kansas City, Missouri, where the family of an employee who had worked in the Jackson County Courthouse for many years agreed to drop their suit in return for a settlement of more than $10 million.

The victim was a 56-year-old woman who had worked at the courthouse for almost 35 years before she was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma that her mesothelioma lawyer attributed to exposure to asbestos at the facility. She died of the cancer in 2010.

Another asbestos lawsuit, a class-action suit filed by other courthouse employees, their families and courthouse visitors stemming from the asbestos problem at the courthouse is still pending. The public announcement of the damages in the case was unusual because the settlements in most cases are confidential because employers and manufacturers responsible for the exposure and their insurance companies do now want the public to know how much they paid out to victims. Malignant mesothelioma is caused by exposure to asbestos. Tiny particles of the material invade the body and generate cancer cells which form tumors that develop over several decades. In the case of most victims the cancer is so far advanced by the time they are diagnosed that they usually are given a life expectancy of less than 18 months.

Here are a few questions people have asked a San Francisco dui lawyer.

Q: DUI, higher PAS result than machine at station. Is this case defensible: 24 year old, 2nd DUI with probation violation. Said no to physical FSTs, PAS test .09 with breath test at station of .08 was not asked about sleep or eating pattern and was only pulled over for basic speed violation. I did unfortunately say I had zero drinks when asked, but the machine obviously proved this to not be true. I could afford a good attorney, but want to know realistically if a good attorney could beat this at trial or if I should just save my money and take a plea. Also, would the numerical result of the PAS be heard at trial? I think if the .09 PAS was heard at trial it would not be a good thing as that would eliminate most defense possibilities.

A:If you are still absorbing alcohol when you do the PAS test, then the PAS results can be higher than your actual Blood Alcohol Level at the time of the blow. Also, the PAS results might not be allowed in at Trial, although more often than not they come in. A good DUI lawyer can help you determine the strengths of your case, and negotiate a disposition if you choose not to go to trial. It costs you nothing to get a Free consultation.
For more information or help please see this San Francisco dui lawyer for a free case review.

Q:Can I get an extension of the dmv hearing date to hire a attorney?: I called the to ask for an extension a week before the hearing date and was told I should hired a attorney now and I could not get a extension unless a attorney called on my behalf.

A:Each DMV Driver Safety Branch is different and the best approach is to talk with a qualified DUI lawyer who regularly conducts hearings where you are scheduled. Most attorneys in that area will give you a free consultation, and should be familiar with what it will take to get the continuance. looking on AVVO is a good start, but make sure the attorney is a member of the California DUI Lawyers Association, and the National College for DUI Defense. These attorneys typically practice mostly DUI. Good Luck

It must have been embarrassing to officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when they recently issued a Drug Safety Communication in which they announced that the use of the diabetes medication Actos (pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of Actos bladder cancer. The agency also announced that the warning labels on the medication would be updated to provide patients about the existence of this risk. Agency officials said that the safety alert came after they reviewed a medical research study that had been underway for five years was raising concerns about this type of long-term use and its ramifications.

The agency also said “The FDA is also aware of a recent epidemiological study conducted in France which suggest and increased risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone. Based on the results of this study, France has suspended the use of pioglitazone and Germany has recommended not starting pioglitazone in new patients.”

For those of us whose health and choice of medications is strongly affected by what the FDA does and doesn’t do that quote raises a lot of questions. Why is the FDA lagging behind France and Germany in acting on behalf of consumer safety? Why did France and Germany have a study that the FDA didn’t have? How safe is Actos? If it has been banned in France, why not here? What did the drug’s manufacturer, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. know about these studies and this dangerous side effect and why did they not take action to inform the consumer? The last question is one being asked in Actos lawsuits filed against Takeda by patients who have suffered these side effects.

In the case of malignant mesothelioma health officials say it is imperative that patients with this cancer receive mesothelioma treatment and medication as soon as possible because this form of cancer – caused by exposure to asbestos – is usually very far advanced by the time it is diagnosed. This is because it usually takes several decades for the cancer to develop in the linings of a victim’s lungs, heart or abdominal organs and form deadly tumors. Chemotherapy, surgery, radiation and drug therapy are the most common forms of treatment. If you’ve suffered or have been diagnosed with mesothelioma seek medical help as soon as possible.

Many of us consider it is a shame that the newspaper industry is in decline across the nation. Newspapers have long served as our primary watchdog by overseeing the workings of our government and big business. It’s too numerous to count the number of crooks and perpetrators of shenanigans that have been unmasked by investigative reporters. If you review the history of the Pulitzer Prizes you will find an overwhelming number of awards were handed out to newspapers that shined a light on corruption and questionable activities.

A recent article in the Pulitzer Prize-winning Milwaukee Journal Citizen, therefore, should be of interest to the many people who have received an orthopedic joint implant device. The story focused on five companies that reached settlements with the U.S. Justice Department in actions taken against how they operate. After settling their cases with the government, the story reveals, the companies increased their payments to doctors from $198 million in 2007 to $228 million in 2008.

Just two years later one of the companies, DePuy Orthopaedics, announced a massive recall of two of its metal-on-metal hip implant systems that failed as often as 13 percent of the time, causing thousands of patients to suffer through excruciating pain and have to undergo second operations. A cynic might wonder how many of those implants were made by doctors who received payments from DePuy. A large number of these patients have responded by fielding DePuy Hip Recall lawsuits in which they are seeking damages from the company, which is a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration is conducting a review of its approval process by which the devices were allowed to go on to the marketplace.

We all know that every type of medication carries the possibility of causing side effects that can range from mild to severe. The Food and Drug Administration closely monitors the side effects of the drugs that it approves and requires manufacturers to post them on warning labels that accompany prescriptions when they are purchased by consumers. Most of us pay lip service to this fine print and suffer few lasting consequences but there are side effects that can be very dangerous. Many read of these problems and seek a Zoloft lawyer

Take the case of Zoloft, for instance. Zoloft is one of a newer-generation of antidepressants known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, that juggle the chemical balance of the brain to control mood. SSRIs have grown so popular they are now the most frequently prescribed drug for Americans between the ages of 18 and 44, according to national health statistics. The fact that the medical community prescribes them so often speaks to their faith in the drugs. Critics voice concerns over whether this is more a case of pharmaceutical firms’ superb marketers overwhelming professional judgment but the fact remains that millions and millions of prescriptions for them continue to be written.

However, patients should still remain on guard against side effects, particularly in the case of women and Zoloft and the other SSRIs. Medical researchers and patients who have filed Zoloft lawsuits have long raised concerns about the link between Zoloft use during a pregnancy and the development of birth defects in an infant. Recently the Food and Drug Administration issued a public health advisory warning consumers that mothers who used Zoloft during pregnancy are at significantly higher risk of giving birth to infants suffering from defects than mothers who did not use the medication.

There are some important hearings going on before advisory committees to the Food and Drug Administration involving consumer safety concerns about the side effects of Fosamax and other bisphosphonates drugs prescribed to prevent or treat osteoporosis. These side effects are of immense importance to pre and post-menopausal women and elderly men who suffer from bone disease or deterioration, a growing problem as the number of aging Americans grows. The issue is fairly simple: Can Fosamax and other bisphosphonates actually do the opposite of what they are prescribed for and cause spontaneous fractures and destructive jaw disease?

The companies that manufacture the drugs have insisted the drugs are safe and that only a small part of the population might suffer harmful side effects. However, a wave of Fosamax lawsuits, findings by medical researchers and concerns raised by consumer advocates has caused the FDA to hold the hearings to reexamine the safety of Fosamax and other bisphosphonates. As the number of reports about the side effects increased the FDA also issued a safety announcement last year in which it warned consumers about the possibility of a connection between the medications and femur fractures. Labeling on the drugs was changed by the manufacturers to reflect these concerns.

So far, some testimony has been offered by the non-profit consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen showing that there is a connection between the medications and fractures, that the scope of the problem may have been underreported to the FDA and that patients who are prescribed the medication for more than five years are at greater risk of suffering these side effects. If you’ve suffered from taking this drug please see this site for a Fosamax class action lawsuit