<?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: Spinal Tap: Medtronic And A Patient Death</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/spinal-tap-medtronic-and-a-patient-death/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/spinal-tap-medtronic-and-a-patient-death/</link>
	<description>News, Comment and Conversation</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: laura</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/12/spinal-tap-medtronic-and-a-patient-death/#comment-384758</link>
		<dc:creator>laura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 03:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/?p=18598#comment-384758</guid>
		<description>This will be a very interesting case to follow.  It is an example of "parallel" requirements with regard to preemption (the FDA requires proper adverse event reporting and, since Medtronic didn't report as required, the state's requirement "parallels" the FDA's) and, if the family is allowed to proceed with its case, it will help establish that parallel requirements are not preempted.  My family is going through a very similar situation with another medical device company.  We are approaching a year since our lawsuit was filed and are still waiting to see if we will be allowed to proceed. I'm sure many victims and their families will be watching this case with interest. I extend my best wishes and heartfelt sympathy to the Nesbit family.  I understand their sorrow, and I also understand how important it is to them that Medtronic be held accountable for the medical device that took 
Ms Nesbit's life.  I wish them the best of luck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This will be a very interesting case to follow.  It is an example of &#8220;parallel&#8221; requirements with regard to preemption (the FDA requires proper adverse event reporting and, since Medtronic didn&#8217;t report as required, the state&#8217;s requirement &#8220;parallels&#8221; the FDA&#8217;s) and, if the family is allowed to proceed with its case, it will help establish that parallel requirements are not preempted.  My family is going through a very similar situation with another medical device company.  We are approaching a year since our lawsuit was filed and are still waiting to see if we will be allowed to proceed. I&#8217;m sure many victims and their families will be watching this case with interest. I extend my best wishes and heartfelt sympathy to the Nesbit family.  I understand their sorrow, and I also understand how important it is to them that Medtronic be held accountable for the medical device that took<br />
Ms Nesbit&#8217;s life.  I wish them the best of luck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.148 seconds -->

