There’s no Justice!

General Discussion
#23

Yes, I can well imagine that there were certain hints from their internal studies that pointed to PFS (of course not in its full scope, as thats hard to imagine/understand as a non sufferer). However thats far from what many people here imagine: Conclusive, obvious, proof/information on the full scope of the devastating impacts of PFS like they experience it. Information that no one could overlook or reasonably explain away. And information that it affected a large number/significant percentage of people.

If that was the case they would have won the case! No such proof was submitted to the court. It is a very muddy picture precisely because so few are affected, so that its easily ignored even by US when we took the damn drug with updated labels (in many forums members cases).

#24

You aren’t really listening and very clearly haven’t done the reading yourself. Go read the materials and you are free to PM me but please don’t drag this on. You don’t have the slightest idea how the legal issues unfolded and I have explained them to you but you have chosen not to acknowledge them or you just don’t understand. But one final time before I stop engaging you:

There were conclusive data points from the clinical trials that Merck intentionally excluded from the warning label. The cases simply did not run into trouble because of lack of proof of fraud, it was their difficulty and neglect of the scientific component.

3 Likes
#25

They did know that it causes side effects that is a fact however the term PFS didn’t come about until a much later date to describe the syndrome.

The company stinks of corruption and that goes along for all pharmaceutical companies they are all up to their necks in it. They manipulate data all the time to bypass FDA regulations but sure who wouldn’t when they are given free reign over their own studies. It’s like someone doing a test in high school and them having the answers right beside them of course their going to take advantage of the system if it’s handed to them on a plate.

  1. The number of participants of the surveys isn’t even close to the real numbers of this syndrome, like I said a large number haven’t identified that finasteride is the cause to their current health problems or even know this syndrome exists.

  2. https://youtu.be/xAZ3-t7vJeg
    That should clear this up, they knew full well the implications and chose to look the other way this was only a small study.

  3. At the time of the class action lawsuit they couldn’t use Robert Melcangi’s data and basically had nothing to back up their claims except from testimonies that can be easily discredited as psychosomatic.

#26

I sent you a PM. Still does not make sense to me how people on this forum square in their head their simultaneously held positions that A) Merck had conclusive evidence the PFS is caused by finasteride in a significant percentage of people B) The victims lost the court case despite this information being presented to the court (as per Reuters).

#27

It’s been on the market 27 years man I’m pretty sure they knew that side effects didn’t go away after stopping the medication thus people were stuck with them. PFS

1 Like
#28

Does this mean settling for a pittance is a very bad idea when we may be within a few years of finding a concrete causative link?

I can’t comprehend why some have taken these settlements of thousands of dollars unless they have been forced into premature action by something I don’t understand. I know virtually nothing of law.

#29

I’m not kidding when I say you may want to join up with the parents of post-Accutane patients and suicide victims if you are going to go this route. MHRA have more or less slammed the door in their faces on the issue of sexual dysfunction and suicide.

2 Likes
#30

This is really a difficult and complicated question to answer and I can’t speak for why other people maybe did or didn’t agree to the settlement.

But the lawyers used questionable tactics to get people to sign. They disclosed very little information about the settlement, they gave an artificially pressured time line to sign, and at least I was personally threatened that they would drop my case and nobody else was interested in taking the cases.

It’s always hard in life to be the relatively smaller guy.

2 Likes
#31

Well, living a life in the shadow of being wrecked by a drug puts one in a position of feeling pressured to take any money they can for the sake of survival.

Makes sense in the context you provided why some of those who took the settlement later came here to say they felt like their lawyers were in cahoots with Merck.

#32

Yes, it’s not quite accurate to say the lawyers were “in cahoots” with Merck but it felt like it at times. With any human relationship, there are always conflicts of interest in life. Sometimes the lawyers success is aligned with your success, but never entirely. There are ethical rules set by the bar association that prevent lawyers from totally fucking over their clients. Especially towards the end of cases, the lawyers are less aligned with their clients, and like Merck, all the lawyers want to wrap things up as quickly as possible and call it a day. That’s when it probably most feels like they’re “in cahoots”.

2 Likes
#33

Are you sure that is the case if proof that Person X caused the injury emerges only years later? Lets say I took finasteride in 2014, and know of its side effects in 2015, but can proof a causation only 10 years later 2025.

Would the law really prohibit me from filing a lawsuit if I do it immediately after needed evidence emerges?

#34

Btw.: In my case the doctor told me that people didnt actually belief in the permanent side effects warning.

What good is a label if the medical field doesnt belief in it and lets patients know?

We need a better label and the medical field needs to change their tune.

#35

There is no contradiction between 1) someone knowing something and 2) not being able to prove they knew it beyond reasonable doubt. Burden of proof is called a burden not by coincidence. In fact, I am quite puzzled anyone would even suggest that 1 must necessarily lead to 2. This makes no sense.

In addition to the Reuters article info, which @Frustrated is talking about, there is a lot of additional incontrovertible evidence that Merck absolutely knew everything about finasteride based on decades of animal research with the substance and with DHT.

#36

And gullible people like me took that hook line and sinker, believed in merc that was a useless hormone because they were scientist and experts… I will never trust the medical system again.

2 Likes
#37

@Papasmurf

The liability laws in Europe are different form the US. As far as I know, in Europe you have a liability case if there is a plausible causative link between your injuries and the drug. I.e. burden of proof is lower. This is a recent development in EU law I think. Research it.

#38

I totally get this belief but it is something that needs to be improved. We’ve all been horribly burned by the medical system and it would be uncontroversial to say that it has some huge blindspots and flaws. The medical system is designed in spirit to help people and when things get scaled up and industrialized, it creates problems. In time, I hope you learn to heal from this traumatic experience and find and use the benefits of the health care system. Of course, it is always important to have a healthy dose of skepticism.

#39

If the evidence is so clear we can look forward to the success of the foundations petition demanding that the FDA update the leaflet to reflect the symptomatology of PFS. Lets see if that happens.

1 Like
#40

I think the only way we will get any real justice is if a major celebrity admits to having PFS.

1 Like
#41

It would be great if the FDA acts on the petition but it wouldn’t change what’s already out there. There are a lot of politics within the FDA, Trump is still the head of state, and there is institutional inertia to do nothing.

Same thing with respect to the Ukrainian scandal. The facts are all out there in plain site for everybody to see but politics will play a role in the Congressional process. Whether or not Congress acts on it doesn’t change whether or not there is enough evidence to show something happened.

Just read the materials already.

#42

I remember when someone burned themselves with coffee and they sued McDonald’s and won. I feel like genetic damage and increased suicide and depression is a bit more serious than a coffee spill.

We will win this. Merck is probably already preparing for these studies that are coming out.

3 Likes