Re: Laura, as an example of how easy it is to ignore this issue, we ourselves almost always ignore the fact that preemption has _already_ been upheld in the medical devices arena. We are so focused on drugs, that we forget that half the war is already lost (Riegel).

It may be that some version of the Waxman/Pallone bill will ultimately change the devices situastion, but that remains to be seen. It may remain to be seen for a long time.

We are looking for a few (more) dedicated people.

Thanks much for the kind words, and you’re very welcome. I enjoy what I do here and I’m glad to know the information and forum provided are helpful.

Have a nice day,

ed

Your point about the public’s lack of concern with regard to preemption due to their focus on other issues in their lives is spot on. I think Jaynesday said in an earlier post that, unless your own life has been touched in some way by preemption, you’re not concerned. The frustrating thing is that we know what is coming with Levine and we just don’t know how to stop it. It’s like a bad dream where you see the train coming and you can’t move fast enough to get out of the way…

So, anyway, thank you Ed for doing what you do. All of us, on both sides of the issues, appreciate your reporting, insights and dedication to providing a place where we can go to air our views and see what’s going on on the other side of the fence.

Unfortunately, from my perspective, the Senate was tougher. A couple of squeaker races gave the preemptors a very narrow (a vote or two) eduge. They have thus been able to bottle up the House vote in committee.

Polls show people in Michigan are against preemption by about 2=to=1. That is probably why the preemptors are so anxious that there is no open and public debate on the topic. Michigan is a purple state. If it’s 2-to-1 there, it would be even more overwhelmingly rejected most other places.

If they had ever heard of it.

It can be a kind of “poor baby” approach, and one that reinforces the fantasy that this “could never happen to me.” Thus the core point is lost in denial and sentimentality.

On the other hand, when a young healthy 40-something MD with no CV hx stroked on Vioxx, that was a more “effective story.” For a few minutes.

Sorry for not responding sooner, but I took the afternoon off. It’s Saturday, after all.

To answer your question, I don’t know exactly. Preemption is a complicated topic and the average person is consumed with their own problems. And for some number of people, this may mean gas prices, housing or credit issues, a job, or other economic turmoil. Even health care costs, in general, have slipped down the list of priority items this summer.

I do know that a compelling story that focuses on an individual may generate some interest. This was one key reason that I interviewed Diana Levine earlier this year - she’s the one whose suit against Wyeth will be heard by the Supreme Court - and the NYT did a piece about her and preemption shortly afterward. Perhaps another individual’s experience would help to illuminate the legal issues and the ensuing debate.

Hope this helps,
ed