Wyeth May Face Prempro Class Action In Canada
4 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // July 1st, 2008 // 7:05 am
Last Friday, the Supreme Court of British Columbia denied an attempt by the drugmaker to dismiss a lawsuit that alleges its hormone replacement therapies cause breast cancer. And the move clears the way for a possible class action proceeding against not only Wyeth’s Canadian subsidiary, but Wyeth itself, The Canadian Press reports.
Hundreds of women who claim they developed breast cancer after taking the drugs - known as Premarin and Premplus in Canada - have contacted the law firm involved in the lawsuit. “Now we can put the case back on track toward getting it certified as a class action,” David Klein, an attorney for the one existing plaintiff, Dianna Stanway, tells the Press.
Wyeth asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the Canadian women didn’t have jurisdiction to sue the US parent of the Canadian subsidiary. But Justice Miriam Gropper refused to release the drugmaker from responsibility. “I find that the US defendant’s admitted engagement in activities in relation to the Canadian companies and to consumers in Canada is sufficient to establish a real and substantial connection,” she said in a written ruling released Monday.
Klein says it was important to keep the US defendants - not just the Canadian subsidiary - involved in the action because of the larger asset pool if there is a judgment against Wyeth, and because it would mean more witnesses to testify as to what the company knew about the drugs and what it was telling doctors and the public. “If we had just the Canadian defendants we felt that we would only be seeing a small part of the total picture,” he tells the Press.
If the class-action lawsuit is approved by the court, Klein says women in British Columbia will be able to join the lawsuit if they fit the category, and that women across Canada may also enter the lawsuit, with the court’s approval.
war horse
The marketing of these drugs was masterful–the implication to women was that they’d be “Feminine Forever” (the title of the book that launched the whole HRT thing), not the sweaty, crazy, dried up messes they were led to think they’d become.
Decades ago, when HRT was first launched in Japan, focus groups were conducted on menopause. And one of the most common responses was “was did no one ever tell us we were sick and that there were treatments for this?” Exactly.
The docs were sold a bill of goods that basically consisted of “hormones forever”–the pill till menopause, then HRT. And they were told they would be lowering the patient’s risk of heart disease, osteoporosis, etc.
Former pharma Marketing Exec
“Wyeth asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the Canadian women didn’t have jurisdiction to sue the US parent of the Canadian subsidiary. But Justice Miriam Gropper refused to release the drugmaker from responsibility. “I find that the US defendant’s admitted engagement in activities in relation to the Canadian companies and to consumers in Canada is sufficient to establish a real and substantial connection,” she said in a written ruling released Monday”.
This isn’t just a HRT issue. J.I.M. - you think this just might be able to help your Preemption issues?
Warm congratulations to Canada for stepping up to the plate on this.
Hey - isn’t today July 1 - Canada Day?
Justice in MI
It’s an interesting question, and one I must say I hadn’t thought about - the potential liability of companies to suits brought outside the U.S. if/when preemption is upheld here.
Of course, it wouldn’t help U.S. citizens harmed, for example, by a drug that was approved through defrauding the FDA.
Sharon
I was diagnosed with Breast Cancer in 2001 at age 51. A mammogram and ultrasound did not detect the cancer. It did show a calcification deposit just below the nipple. A lumpectomy was done to clean it up so that I would have a clear mammogram the next year and low and behold it was cancer. Breast tissue showed that the tumour was Estrogen and Progesterone receptors positive.
I was started on HRT in 1990 at the age of 40 and I was administered HRT drugs for eleven years until I was 51. I was told later that I should not have been on HRT for no more than 4 years.
After being told that these drugs were safe and would keep me feeling and looking younger I took what was prescribed for me.
In 2005 I was diagnosed again with cancer, this time of the bladder. I had 8 of 6 weeks (once a week) sessions of BCG chemo. December 16th, 2006 I had a major heart attack, an angioplasty was done within 12 hours and a bare metal stent inserted into my artery. On March 23rd, 2008 I lost my bladder and now have an Ileostomy. Very, very devestating. In 2003, studies showed that hormone replacement therapy (HRT), a treatment used by many postmenopausal women, significantlt increased the risk of bladder and other cancers. (Printed from http://www.healthAtoZ.com) (www.healthatoz/Atoz/ency/bladder_cancer.jsp)
Canadian women (all women) need to have restitution in this case against the makers of drugs that destroy peoples lives. My family and I have gone thru hell and back since 2001.
Thank you for letting me get this said and know that someone out there is listening.
Sharon Hicks