The answer is a surprising, and disconcerting, NO.

Trials for new prescription drugs that are vying for a place in the market focus on efficacy rather than safety. If pre-market clinical tests find a drug to be effective and that drug does not appear to be unsafe, then the FDA typically approves the drug and that drug enters the market. Many pre-market studies, however, simply are not large enough to allow researchers to gauge the safety of a new drug. A determination of safety is made usually after thousands of people have taken the drug. That is to say, the safety of a new drug is only fully known once it has been widely available to consumers.

Taking new prescription medicines makes the consumer an unwitting guinea pig of sorts. The hybrid anti-cholesterol drug Vytorin, for instance, was prescribed to millions of people before the ENHANCE trial found it to be effective in lowering LDL cholesterol levels but ineffective in preventing cardiac events, which is its ultimate purpose. Another trial named SEAS later suggested that Vtytorin increased the odds of developing and dying from cancer. Vytorin continues to be sold while researchers continue probing its effectiveness and safety. The results from larger tests aren’t expected until 2012.

Currently, the rights of consumers who have been harmed by toxic prescription drugs and faulty medical devices are standing on unsteady ground. The issue of pre-emption, the legal notion that FDA approval of a drug trumps state laws concerning safety, efficacy, and proper labeling, is now before the United States Supreme Court. Diane Levine, a musician from Vermont, sued Wyeth earlier this month over inadequate labeling of the drug Phenergan, which caused her to lose part of her right arm. Wyeth’s defense argues that the company shouldn’t be held responsible by state laws because the drug met federal standards by gaining FDA approval.

If the Supreme Court rules that federal standards do supersede state laws, or if it throws the case out altogether, then many people may have no legal recourse should they ever fall victim to risky drugs and medical devices.

Keeping the issue of pre-emption in the public eye as the Supreme Court mulls the Levine case, a non-profit group called Alliance for Justice has created a documentary about pre-emption. A trailer for “Access Denied: The Fight for Corporate Accountability” can be viewed here. The video can also be viewed in its entirety by going here.

SOURCE: Vytorin Recall › Will FDA regulations and pre-emption silence Vytorin victims?

New Haven City Hall spent more than $400,000 on Vytorin and Zetia (ezetimibe) prescriptions for members of the city’s healthcare plan when it could have spent a fraction of that amount for cheaper generic statins that have proven to be as or more effective and less risky.

Zetia is Merck’s anti-cholesterol drug that works by blocking absorption of cholesterol in the digestive tract. It is combined with Schering-Plough’s statin drug Zocor, which targets cholesterol produced by the liver, to form Vytorin – a drug that works to diminish cholesterol on both hereditary and dietary fronts. Studies have shown, however, that cheaper generic statins are in some cases more effective and safer than the Vytorin cocktail.

“This drug doesn’t work. Period. It just doesn’t work,” Steven Nissen, head of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic, told Forbes magazine.

Merck and Schering-Plough are under Congressional inquiry for possibly withholding study data that indicated Vytorin was a flop while collecting billions in sales from the drug. The companies collected windfall profits knowing that cheaper and possibly more effective drugs were on the market.

Growing controversy over Vytorin’s performance and the way its makers have handled both past and ongoing studies have spawned a number of class action lawsuits. New Haven wasn’t able to find a suit that it could join, so it’s striking out on its own.

SOURCE: Vytorin Recall › New Haven wants to recover Vytorin money

Suffolk County joins Congress and a growing number of individuals and municipalities in claiming it had been ripped off by the pharmaceutical giants. Suffolk County’s case states that Merck and Schering-Plough engaged in a “scheme … calculated to ensure that Plaintiff would pay for Zetia and Vytorin despite cheaper and effective alternatives.

However, Suffolk County has added a little more heft to its lawsuit than other similar suits filed against the drug companies. On page 25 of the deposition, Suffolk County claims:

“Defendants have conducted and participated in the affairs of the Enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity that includes acts indictable under 18 U.S.C. ++ 1341 and 1342 (mail and wire fraud) …”

Confusion and outrage have surrounded the ENHANCE trial results and the way in which Merck and Schering-Plough officials released the results, sparking Congress to launch an investigation. The Suffolk County lawsuit, however, goes further than just accusing the companies of negligence; it claims the companies may have acted criminally. In this lawsuit we see phrases indicating some serious charges:

“…concealing from Plaintiff and physicians, and the public the results of the ENHANCE study …”

“… deliberately misrepresenting the efficacy of Zetia and Vytorin …”

“publishing or causing to have published materials containing false information …”

“… pattern of racketeering activity …”

SOURCE: Vytorin Recall › Suffolk County NY sues for return of Vytorin money