Merck Agrees to Pay $950 Million in Vioxx Case

From the New York Times: nytimes.com/2011/11/23/business/merck-agrees-to-pay-950-million-in-vioxx-case.html?_r=1&hp

[Size=4]Merck Agrees to Pay $950 Million in Vioxx Case[/size]

Merck has agreed to pay $950 million and has pleaded guilty to a criminal charge over the marketing and sales of the painkiller Vioxx, the company and the Justice Department said Tuesday.

The negotiated settlement, which includes resolution of civil cases, was the latest of a series of fraud cases brought by federal and state prosecutors against major pharmaceutical companies.

By the time Vioxx, which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1999, was pulled off the market in 2004 because evidence showed that it posed a substantial heart risk, about 25 million Americans had taken the drug.

In a statement on Tuesday, Merck said that it had previously disclosed the seven-year investigation by the United States attorney in Massachusetts and had charged $950 million against its earnings in October 2010.

Merck agreed to pay a $321 million criminal fine and plead guilty to one misdemeanor count of illegally introducing a drug into interstate commerce, the Justice Department said in a news release. The charge arose from Merck’s promotion of Vioxx to treat rheumatoid arthritis before the Food and Drug Administration approved it for that purpose in 2002.

Merck also is paying $426 million to the federal government and $202 million to state Medicaid agencies. Those payments will settle civil claims that its illegal marketing caused doctors to prescribe and bill the government for Vioxx they otherwise would not have prescribed.

Physicians are free to prescribe drugs for any purpose they see fit, but pharmaceutical companies are prohibited from marketing them for any uses except those that the Food and Drug Administration has determined are safe and beneficial.

“When a pharmaceutical company ignores F.D.A. rules aimed at keeping our medicines safe and effective, that company undermines the ability of health care providers to make the best medical decisions on behalf of their patients,” Tony West, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department’s civil division, said in a statement.

Merck, based in Whitehouse Station, N.J., withdrew Vioxx from the market in more than 80 countries in 2004 after a clinical trial showed it doubled the risk of heart attack, stroke and death.

In 2007, Merck agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle 27,000 lawsuits by people who had claimed they or their relatives had suffered injury or death after taking the drug. Merck has also signed a corporate integrity agreement in connection with the settlement, promising to monitor future promotional activity and report back regularly to the government. Merck joins Pfizer and most other major drug companies in settling long investigations with prosecutors.

No person was held liable for Merck’s conduct. “It’s just a cost of doing business until a pharmaceutical executive does a perp walk,” said Erik Gordon, a pharmaceutical analyst and clinical assistant professor at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan.

Investors are also suing Merck, saying it played down the risks of Vioxx and cost them billions of dollars in stock value after the drug was removed from the market.

Merck shares declined most of the day on Tuesday, dropping 0.97 percent to $33.81.

What a joke…

Well at least they paid sufferers some money for the damage they caused to them.
Offcourse money is not always so important, in our cases if you loose 10 years of your life or you loose your sexual life or get serious hypogonadal,mental or metabolic issues that torture your every day living and have you put on drugs.
But it still is an example that chasing those shark-companies will get you to some justice

And if i did the maths correctly with my fancy calculator it amounted to apprx 179.000 dollars for each Vioxx victim.
Well it probably spent around 60.000 Euros from my pocket for doctors/tests and treatments and another 37-38.000 covered by my country in tests and hospitalisation.
But the 8 years of suffering and loss of work-hours and what is more to come in dealing with this has an unpredictable cost

nytimes.com/2011/11/23/business/merck-agrees-to-pay-950-million-in-vioxx-case.html?_r=2&hp

This probably doesn’t belong in this thread but i don’t know where else to put it so MODS, feel free to move it or even delete it if you don’t think it’s useful but i thought most of us would be interested in this.

Wonder how much victims actually wind up with and if any of this will be admissable in our cases as it shows a pattern.

I gotta agree that’s pretty hysterical.

So the feds get the tax revenue from the sales and the nice hefty fine on the back end. Win.

Yes, and Merck pleads guilty only to marketing the drug before it was approved by the FDA, not to marketing the drug with an insufficient warning label and suppressing studies that the drug causes heart attacks.

haha you will have to settle again soon for procepia.

bbc.co.uk/news/business-15847909

this makes me laugh
Merck & Co said the civil settlement did not constitute an admission of liability or wrongdoing.

“We believe that Merck acted responsibly and in good faith in connection with the conduct at issue in these civil settlement agreements, including activities concerning the safety profile of Vioxx,” said the company’s Bruce Kuhlik.

i saw something similiar to this, except it was for Pfizer, but i forget what the pill was… it might have been the same one because i remember them saying something about pain medications being used at dentists offices, i saw it on greed (msnbc show about corporations that steal)

but the the payout they had to give was equal to only 2 weeks of profit for the pill they pushed and they paid their fines in one check of cash… kinda ridiculous, they should be taking at least 75% of the profit they made from the drug because it could’ve been way higher than what the settlement was