<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wyeth To Supremes: Waxman Carries &#8216;No Weight&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/</link>
	<description>News, Comment and Conversation</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 11:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anne PME</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/#comment-379946</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne PME</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 11:17:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=17171#comment-379946</guid>
		<description>Why do career FDA employees have to sneak around and risk their jobs to ensure that their professional judgement/viewpoint is noted on the record? Isn't it their job to provide their professional viewpoint - isn't that what my tax dollars are paying them to do?

The Supremes need and should have the right to access and question medical professionals who have current clinical experience and FDA career personnel, especially given that they are the ones who will ultimately be forced to deal day to day with the long term implications of this ruling. 

Perhaps Wyeth should put a disclaimer on all of their inserts that reads: Warning to all of the patients who pay our salary (i.e. customers:  if you complain or if you, your doctor or your pharmacist file a Medwatch report about a Wyeth drug or have the audacity to take a drug that we do not own the rights to, we will turn your life upside down; make you spend years of your life dealing with trial lawyers and litigation; and drag you, your doctor, pharmacist and family through the mud until you beg us for mercy (or another dose of a billable Wyeth drug).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do career FDA employees have to sneak around and risk their jobs to ensure that their professional judgement/viewpoint is noted on the record? Isn&#8217;t it their job to provide their professional viewpoint - isn&#8217;t that what my tax dollars are paying them to do?</p>
<p>The Supremes need and should have the right to access and question medical professionals who have current clinical experience and FDA career personnel, especially given that they are the ones who will ultimately be forced to deal day to day with the long term implications of this ruling. </p>
<p>Perhaps Wyeth should put a disclaimer on all of their inserts that reads: Warning to all of the patients who pay our salary (i.e. customers:  if you complain or if you, your doctor or your pharmacist file a Medwatch report about a Wyeth drug or have the audacity to take a drug that we do not own the rights to, we will turn your life upside down; make you spend years of your life dealing with trial lawyers and litigation; and drag you, your doctor, pharmacist and family through the mud until you beg us for mercy (or another dose of a billable Wyeth drug).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Someone</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/#comment-379907</link>
		<dc:creator>Someone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:55:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=17171#comment-379907</guid>
		<description>If the US wants to see themselves in another civil state of war, then they should find in favor of Wyeth.  No, I think it is time that the people of the united States win one for the Union of the United States.

The only way for there to be any semblance of balance is to vote with the people on this matter, Wyeth must lose.

Justice must prevail, final!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the US wants to see themselves in another civil state of war, then they should find in favor of Wyeth.  No, I think it is time that the people of the united States win one for the Union of the United States.</p>
<p>The only way for there to be any semblance of balance is to vote with the people on this matter, Wyeth must lose.</p>
<p>Justice must prevail, final!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justice in Mi</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/#comment-379869</link>
		<dc:creator>Justice in Mi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=17171#comment-379869</guid>
		<description>I agree with Jim - it suggests how scared the preemptors are that they think this would have the impact they fear.  The real impact would not be from this or that single report, but the much greater number of industry and FDA folks who will be talking much more about how approval/compliance really works.  We've heard from some of them here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Jim - it suggests how scared the preemptors are that they think this would have the impact they fear.  The real impact would not be from this or that single report, but the much greater number of industry and FDA folks who will be talking much more about how approval/compliance really works.  We&#8217;ve heard from some of them here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/#comment-379853</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:00:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=17171#comment-379853</guid>
		<description>It's funny because the other day when I first read the Waxman report on this Blog I was going to ask the question as to how much weight that this report was likely to hold with the Court. 
It appears that Wyeth has answered my question; apparently they felt that the report may influence the decision of the Court.   However after reading Scalia's opinion in Riegel v Medtronics where he pretty much telegraphs his decision for Wyeth I doubt very much that the Waxman Report will carry any weight at all with Justice Scalia or any other member of the Conservative Pro-Business Majority.   
Wyeth could have saved themselves the cost of a messenger.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s funny because the other day when I first read the Waxman report on this Blog I was going to ask the question as to how much weight that this report was likely to hold with the Court.<br />
It appears that Wyeth has answered my question; apparently they felt that the report may influence the decision of the Court.   However after reading Scalia&#8217;s opinion in Riegel v Medtronics where he pretty much telegraphs his decision for Wyeth I doubt very much that the Waxman Report will carry any weight at all with Justice Scalia or any other member of the Conservative Pro-Business Majority.<br />
Wyeth could have saved themselves the cost of a messenger.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Facts</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/wyeth-to-supremes-waxman-carries-no-weight/#comment-379848</link>
		<dc:creator>Facts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=17171#comment-379848</guid>
		<description>Of course Wyeth thinks he has no weight.  They don't want the Supreme Court to pay any attention at all to him.  It could affect their chances of coming out on top.  Although the case under review is a very tough one by itself, there are others that are not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course Wyeth thinks he has no weight.  They don&#8217;t want the Supreme Court to pay any attention at all to him.  It could affect their chances of coming out on top.  Although the case under review is a very tough one by itself, there are others that are not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
