Comments on: Matthew Isn’t A Person… Or Is He? http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/ News, Comment and Conversation Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:37:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Ed Silverman http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20990 Ed Silverman Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:19:51 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20990 Hi Sea, I'm sorry, but I've no info on the other chimp at the moment. Although I would suspect the group will be similarly concerned. Regards ed at Pharmalot Hi Sea,

I’m sorry, but I’ve no info on the other chimp at the moment. Although I would suspect the group will be similarly concerned.

Regards
ed at Pharmalot

]]> By: sea http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20989 sea Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:08:40 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20989 If a corporation can be a person, why not a chimpanzee? There must be some way to provide protection and shelter that doesn't involve using him for something. What about the other chimp, Rosi? Is she also to be saved? If a corporation can be a person, why not a chimpanzee? There must be some way to provide protection and shelter that doesn’t involve using him for something. What about the other chimp, Rosi? Is she also to be saved?

]]> By: Anna http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20774 Anna Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:26:15 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20774 OK, how long before we start arguing personhood, interest and right to life for cockroaches and such? OK, how long before we start arguing personhood, interest and right to life for cockroaches and such?

]]> By: Jack http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20682 Jack Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:23:50 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20682 I don't know a whole lot about this, but I think: 1. You could still sue for manufacturing defects (the most relevant issue here). 2. You could sue a company that hid safety information from the FDA (i.e. allegedly Merck and Vioxx's Cardiac Risk). 3. You could not sue if you suffered an adverse effect disclosed in the product label, where the company disclosed all information to the FDA (i.e. Lilly and Zyprexa's weight gain risk). 4. I also don't think you could sue if you suffered an unexpected AE not disclosed in the product label, if the company did not know about the risk of that AE (i.e. it is a new drug and you experienced a rare AE that didn't occur in clinical trials, so the company didn't know about the risk). ...Again, legalese isn't my area of expertise, so someone may be able to correct me. I don’t know a whole lot about this, but I think:

1. You could still sue for manufacturing defects (the most relevant issue here).
2. You could sue a company that hid safety information from the FDA (i.e. allegedly Merck and Vioxx’s Cardiac Risk).
3. You could not sue if you suffered an adverse effect disclosed in the product label, where the company disclosed all information to the FDA (i.e. Lilly and Zyprexa’s weight gain risk).
4. I also don’t think you could sue if you suffered an unexpected AE not disclosed in the product label, if the company did not know about the risk of that AE (i.e. it is a new drug and you experienced a rare AE that didn’t occur in clinical trials, so the company didn’t know about the risk).

…Again, legalese isn’t my area of expertise, so someone may be able to correct me.

]]> By: CMM http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20676 CMM Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:03:52 +0000 http://www.pharmalot.com/2007/09/matthew-isnt-a-person-right/#comment-20676 How can the argument for preemption be made when the FDA is admitting that they are unable to regulate overseas manufacturing after the approval process.. i.e. "some factories have not been inspected in over ten years." It does seem like a catch-22 for the consumer to lose the ability to recover for harm done by pharma due to FDA's oversight stance when the FDA is unable to ensure quality and consistency in the manufacturing process. How can the argument for preemption be made when the FDA is admitting that they are unable to regulate overseas manufacturing after the approval process.. i.e. “some factories have not been inspected in over ten years.” It does seem like a catch-22 for the consumer to lose the ability to recover for harm done by pharma due to FDA’s oversight stance when the FDA is unable to ensure quality and consistency in the manufacturing process.

]]>