The Injury Board Commentary - Defective & Dangerous Products - Most Popular

Aunt Jemima Pancake Recall: Too Close for Comfort

John Lowery — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:36:05 GMT

I've never been a fan of the shopping cards some stores make you sign up for to get their discounts. But the nearest grocery store to my house is Kroger and I begrudgingly signed up and let them track my purchases. I admit the coupons targeted to one's shopping patterns are nice but the whole concept was a little too "Big Brother is Watching" for my comfort level. Until tonight. I got a phone message on Sunday night stating that certain varieties of frozen pancakes have been recalled and to not consume them. As some of you may know, I'm a single dad with a daughter who LOVES pancakes. I can't cook anything without either making way too much or dirtying every dish in the kitchen, so the frozen pancakes are an easy option that I let my kiddo have once every week or so. The shopping history traced by my registration with Kroger enabled them to alert me of this recall almost as soon as it was announced. It was a bit scary since I just opened a box of those very pancakes this morning, but thankfully the recall was based upon cross contamination with soy that could cause problems for those with soy allergies, which we don't have at our house.

If you have purchased any variety of Aunt Jemima Frozen Pancakes, click here for more information. I'm reconsidering my distaste for discount programs that track purchase histories and giving two thumbs up to Kroger for the quick safety alert that could save lives.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by John Lowery

The Floxacin Gang: Cipro, Levaquin, Factive, Cinobac, Tequin, Enoxacin, Grepafloxacin, Sparfloxacin, Temafloxacin, and Trovan

Armand Rossetti — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:08:35 GMT

Please watch the Fluoroquinolone Toxicity Research Foundation’s video entitled A Prescription for Disaster.

Two drugs, Cipro and Levaquin, belonging to the fluoroquinolone (Floxacin) family of antibiotics have notoriety. Cipro was in the news during the Anthrax scare a few years back as the antibiotic treatment of choice to combat Anthrax, and Levaquin has recently been linked to several incidents of ruptured tendons. Over 50% of the floxacins are no longer on the market.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Armand Rossetti

Darvon and Darvocet Pulled From Market Over Heart Problems

Scott Kappes — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:27:58 GMT

The makers of the popular prescription pain medications Darvon and Darvocent have agreed to voluntarily withdraw the drugs from the U.S. drug market, see the CNN article here.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asked Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals to remove the drug from the market after a recent study showed that the medication could cause serious and potentially fatal heart rhythm abnormalities in some patients.

The FDA does not believe that that the pain reducing efficacy of the drug outweighs the potential risks involved with taking the medications. The FDA has also asked generic manufacturers to their products as well.

The FDA is urging patients currently taking Darvon, Darvocet or other generic versions of propoxyphene to consult with their physicians as soon as possible about switching to an alternative medication.

Propoxyphene was first approved for use by the FDA in 1957 to treat mild to moderate pain. Since 1978 the Administration has received two requests to remove the drug from the market, but concluded that the benefits of the drug outweighed any potential health risks each time.

Individuals who have suffered heart rhythm abnormalities and other heart problems while taking Darvocet, Darvon, or any other form of propoxyphene should contact with a drug recall attorney for a free consultation to discuss their legal rights.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Scott Kappes

Avandia and Avandamet Raise Risk of Heart Attack For Type II Diabetes Patients

David Lowe — Mon, 21 May 2007 19:55:32 GMT

The widely used drugs Avandia and Avandamet significantly increase the heart attack risk for type II diabetes patients according to an alarming report published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The maker of Avandia (also known as rosiglitazone) is GlaxoSmithKline. The firm's own study found a 30 percent increased risk of heart attack, and turned the results of it study over to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The NEJM report suggests a 43 percent increased risk.

FDA officials issued a safety alert today. Congressman Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight And Government Reform Committee reacted immediately by scheduling a hearing on the FDA's evaluation of Avandia in considering the drug's safety, inviting the author of the NEJM study, a representative of GlaxoSmithKline, and FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach.

The hearing should shed some light on the question of how quickly and effectively the FDA responds when presented with substantial evidence of significant health risks to the public.

Meanwhile, the American Diabetes Association is advising that diabetics should talk to their doctors before stopping any medication. This is clearly a case where the learned intermediary rule (an exception to the manufacturer's common law duty to warn consumers directly of reasonably foreseeable risks--provided they provide adequate warnings to the prescribing doctors) is going to play a significant role in any injuries or deaths that occur going forward in the wake of the FDA Safety Alert, and doctors who keep their patients on Avandia will probably be called to answer for that judgment call.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Lowe

Ford 6.0 Power Stroke Diesel Lawsuit

Pete Strom — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:05:40 GMT

Ford 6.0 Class Action

The Strom Law Firm, L.L.C. is currently investigating claims on behalf of Ford owners who purchased a Super Duty Truck or Excursion built with the 6.0L Power Stroke Diesel engine manufatured between 2003 and 2007.

The engines, which were manufactured by Navistar (formerly known as International Truck and Engine Corporation) and used in approximately 275,000 Ford Diesel pick up trucks annually, are believed to be plagued with serious and pervasive design and manufacturing defects that render the engines and vehicles unmerchantable and unsuitable for use.

Many owners contend the Ford 6.0L diesel engine is defective and can result in breakdowns.

Common complaints include significant, persistent, and costly breakdowns. Ford 6.0 truck owners further complain about a diminished resale value.

Known problems include, but are not limited to problematic injectors and required turbocharger replacements.

Upon information and belief, Ford's F-Super Duty Truck line has been one of Ford's best selling vehicle lines over the years and Ford has continuously boasted about the truck's first rate quality, superiority and toughness.

While Ford continued to market the engine's superiority, Ford was pursuing their own claim against Navistar for failing to contribute to its share of the significant warranty costs that Ford was incurring in having to repair, replace, or repurchase a significant number of Ford trucks equipped with the 6.0L Diesel Engine.

If you own a Ford Super Duty Truck or Excursion built with the 6.0L Power Stroke Diesel Engine manufactured between 2003 and 2007, contact the defective products attorneys at the Strom Law Firm, L.L.C. today for a free consultation to discuss your legal rights.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Pete Strom

Dangerous Drugs: Digitek and Reglan

Peter Wetherall — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 21:46:16 GMT

The IB News today reported on the recall and subsequent litigation surrounding Digoxin (Digitek). As reported, Digitek "double dose" tablets were distributed to patients nationwide. Manufacturers ignored FDA warning letters and FDA "Revised" warning letters. These warnings letters, particularly a February 1, 2007, warning letter cited Actavis Totowa (the manufacturer) for significant deviations from Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations. These "deviations" were noticed by the FDA during inspections conducted between July 10, 2006 and August 10, 2006. While it was the hope of the FDA that Actavis would correct the problem, the drug company did not and instead distributed defective tablets.

We know, drug manufacturers often place profits over people. This profit motive can be seen in many problematic drugs on the market today. In the case of Reglan (also known as metoclopramide). Wyeth failed to properly warn of the real risk of tardive dyskinesia. When Reglan (metoclopramide) was first approved, Wyeth told the FDA that the risk of contracting tardive dyskinesia was 1 in 500. But, it was not. The real risk of tardive dyskinesia has been estimated as 1 in 8. Since the drug is widely prescribed many people are at risk. In the case of Digitek, the number of persons at risk is much lower because the drug is not widely prescribed. However, Digitek is quite dangerous in double dosages and poses a deadly danger for those who ingested the drug.

Consumers ingesting either Digitek, Reglan or metoclopramide should contact an attorney to determine their rights to recover for possible personal injuries they may have sustained as a result of ingesting these drugs. Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Peter Wetherall

Digitek Tablets Recalled

Rick Patterson — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:41:57 GMT

All lots of Digitek tablets that have been sold under the labels Sold Under the Labels "Bertek" and "UDL" have been recalled due to possible double dose. The recall was announced by Actavis Totowa, the maker of the defective product. In fact, they announced a recall of all generic drugs which were manufactured at its Little Falls, New Jersey plant.

Digitek is a drug that is used treat heart failure and abnormal heart rhythms. According to the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), Actavis Totowa did not meet the required standards for good manufacturing practices. In August 2006, the FDA issued a warning letter to Actavis for failing to provide periodic safety reports at its oral dose manufacturing plant in Little Falls, N.J." And as recently as April, Actavis Totowa recalled Digitek tablets due to some of the medication containing twice the active ingredient normally found in Digitek. According to the FDA, the type of defect in this product could cause serious and even fatal reactions in users.

Should you be a consumer of this particular provider, you would be well advised to consult with your medical provider.

Additional Information Pertaining to Defective and Dangerous Products

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Rick Patterson

Did You Know... Ford Explorer Rollover Crashes Continue To Happen?

Brett Emison — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:34:14 GMT

One of the great advantages to writing on this platform is the tremendous number of people I am able to interact with. One family sent me a link to a video tribute to their mom, who was killed in a Ford Explorer rollover crash. Nicole Miller was killed when her Ford Explorer suffered a flat tire and instead of being able to pull over, the Ford Explorer rolled over. Her sons made the video below in her honor and to help warn people about the Explorer rollover problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQk1-DJxQzc

You can follow the Miller Family and their cause on Twitter by searching #DontRollover or #1000MilesForMom.

There are still millions of Ford Explorers on the road with documented stability problems that lead to rollover crashes. A simple Google News search this morning showed news concerning at least 4 Ford Explorer rollover crashes in just the last few days here, here, here, and here.

The Ford Explorer has been plagued by rollover and stability problems since its inception as the Ford Bronco II in March 1983. More than 25 years later, Ford is still battling the stability problems that plagued the vehicle at its inception and fighting losing battles in courts across the country.

PBS analyzed the long history of the Explorer stability and rollover problem on its Frontline series back in 2002. PBS found that Ford's Bronco II -- the precursor to the Ford Explorer -- suffered from stability and rollover problems from the day it was rolled out in 1983. According to the PBS report, even Ford engineers were "flipping these things over" in test drives.

To make the Bronco II less likely to roll over, Ford engineers proposed to widen the vehicle by two inches. But widening the vehicle would have delayed Job 1 -- the first date of production. Management decided not to widen the vehicles.

Ford engineers knew there was a problem and knew how to fix it. Engineers told management they needed to widen the vehicle by 2 inches. However, the delay would have cost Ford money by delaying production, so management scrapped the plan and produced the Bronco II "as is", and knowing about its stability problems.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rated the Bronco II the most deadly SUV on the road.

The Ford Explorer grew directly out of the Bronco II. The Explorer was made for a family, but kept the rugged characteristics -- and the stability problems -- of the Bronco II. In fact, an internal Ford memo from May 1987 said that the stability of the UN46 -- the Ford Explorer Prototype -- was worse than the Bronco II, but could be improved by widening and lowering the vehicle.

Alarmed, Ford immediately sent its engineers to the company's Arizona proving grounds to put the Explorer prototype through the Consumer Reports tests. When the Explorer was put through the same tests, it repeatedly tipped up off the ground. Ford engineers scrambled to find a fix.

Ford tried a number of small fixes, such as tire pressure and suspension changes, but they were not enough. Ultimately, the Explorer suffered the same problem as the Bronco II and needed two more inches in width to achieve a safe level of stability.

Ford executives admitted that one of the reasons Ford refused to widen the vehicle was because it would lose money if it waited for the fix. Instead, the company again sold vehicles to the public that it knew would roll over.

The Explorer's inherent stability problems came to light in the mid-1990s when Explorers began to rollover after Firestone tire failures. In 2001, Firestone ended its 100 year relationship with Ford Motor Company. In a letter to Ford, Firestone's chairman, John T. Lampe said:

Today, I am informing you that Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. is ending its tire supply relationship with Ford Motor Company.

***

Business relationships, like personal ones, are built upon trust and mutual respect. We have come to the conclusion that we can no longer supply tires to Ford since the basic foundation of our relationship has been seriously eroded. This is not a decision we make lightly after almost 100 years of history....

Our analysis suggests that there are significant safety issues with a substantial segment of Ford Explorers. We have made your staff aware of our concerns. They have steadfastly refused to acknowledge those issues.

In sworn testimony before Congress, Mr. Lampe said:

There is something wrong with the Ford Explorer. The testing and the accident data we have submitted prove it.

This isn't some plaintiff's lawyer saying this. This isn't some safety organization saying this. This isn't some consumer rights organization saying this. This is the head of Firestone acknowledging to Congress that its testing proves the Ford Explorer is defective.

Finally, in 2002, after 20 years of stability and rollover problems, Ford finally widened the Explorer. However, Ford resolutely denies that it widened the vehicle because of stability problems.

Late model Ford Explorers are still driving on our roads and highways. Each year, more innocent passengers are killed or paralyzed because of stability and rollover problems knew about more than 25 years ago. Ford's conduct in knowingly putting dangerous and defective vehicles on the roadway is inexcusable.

Fortunately, juries across the country are taking their duty seriously and holding Ford accountable for its actions. In 2009, Ford lost at least four vehicle defect cases with verdicts of $10 million or more.

In 2010, a California jury awarded more than $23 million to Cynthia Castillo after she was paralyzed when her Ford Explorer became unstable, ran off the road and crashed.

Ford's conduct in knowingly putting dangerous and defective vehicles on the roadway is inexcusable.

[More information about the Ford Explorer]

[More information about Rollover Accidents]

Follow @BrettEmison on Twitter.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brett Emison

Segway Company Owner Dies After Segway Accident

Brett Emison — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:01:33 GMT

There have been wide reports that James Heselden, owner of the company that makes the Segway personal transporter, died after apparently falling off a cliff and into a river while riding one of the Segway devices. According to reports, police have not released details of their investigation, but the incident is not believed to be suspicious.

Witnesses are reported to have seen a man fall Sunday over a 30 foot drop into the river. Jimi Heselden's body and a Segway personal transporter were found in the River Warfe shortly thereafter.

Heselden's death tragically coincides with a new study to be published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine finding that injuries sustained while riding Segway transporters are significant and on the rise.

According to an NBC report:

People hurt on the self-balancing devices are more likely to be admitted to the hospital, particularly with traumatic head and face injuries, than pedestrians struck by cars, said Dr. Mary Pat McKay, a professor of emergency medicine and public health at the George Washington University.

She’s urging U.S. consumer safety experts to better monitor harm from the tens of thousands of Segways in use nationwide.

“What we need is a system to look at this on a national basis, which we don’t have now,” said McKay. “People are falling off of Segways and they’re really getting hurt.”

According to the study, victims of Segway accidents are likely to suffer facial trauma, brain injuries and serious fractures of clavicles, robs, ankles and arms.

A quick search of YouTube reveals a number of Segway crash videos (including several compilations). Though the videos are often accompanied by laughter, the serious risks are nothing to laugh about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmLLGYn9Fo8

This video and others like it should serve as a warning. If you choose to ride a Segway, be sure to follow these safety tips:

Be sure that you meet the minimum weight requirements for the device. Segways should not be ridden if you weigh less than 100 pounds because you may not be able to slow down or stop the Segway, since you must shift your weight back and forth to maneuver the device.
Wear a properly fitting helmet when you ride.
Begin in "Turtle" mode - a low speed beginner mode - until you become comfortable with the device.
Learn to ride. Like a bicycle or motorcycle, there is a learning curve. Take a training course or have an experienced rider teach you how to ride, turn, stop and spot.
Do you push the Segway past its limits.
Do not let children ride the Segway or do so only with adequate supervision.
Do not take unnecessary risks such as riding near traffic, hills or other dangerous terrain.

More Segway coverage:

Segway owner dies after falling off river cliff [Gregory Katz at AP via Yahoo! News]
Segway Scooter Injuries On the Rise; ER Docs Recommend Helmets [ConsumerAffairs.com]
Segway scooters can lead to serious injuries, experts warn [JoNel Aleccia at MSNBC]
Segway Boss Jimi Heselden Dies on Segway: Are Segways Safe? [Dan Childs at ABC News Medical Unit]
Segway Chief Dies in Segway Accident [Julia Werdigier at NYT]
Segway Inc.'s owner dies after Segway accident [John Letzing at WSJ MarketWatch]
From Hype to Disaster: Segway's Timeline [Jennifer Valentino-DeVries at WSJ Blogs Digits]

Segway officials say their training materials -- a 30 minute video, reading materials and demonstration -- are sufficient. However, the accident and injuries in the George Washington University Hospital Emergency Department study published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine may suggest otherwise. Since 2001, approximately 50,000 Segways have been sold. Injury reports from the devices continue to rise.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Brett Emison

Study links diet soft drinks to stroke and heart attack

Paul Napoli — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:15:20 GMT

A new study has found that people who drink a can or more of diet soda each day are at a dramatically increased risk of vascular events, including stroke.

Researchers from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and New York’s Columbia University studied the soft-drinking habits of 2,564 participants from the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS) over the course of ten years. NOMAS is an ongoing research study, started in 1990, of the population of Washington Heights in Northern Manhattan.

They compared people who drank diet or regular soft drinks and their frequency, either less than one soft drink per month, up to six per week, or daily.

Researchers found study participants suffered 591 vascular events, including strokes, myocardial infarctions and vascular death over the course of the study. Those who drank diet soft drinks daily, versus those who drank none, had a 43% increased risk of vascular events, even after accounting for conditions such as high blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes. Data showed no increased risk of vascular events associated with the consumption of regular soft drinks or light consumption of diet soft drinks.

The study Diet Soft Drink Consumption is Associated with an Increased Risk of Vascular Events in the Northern Manhattan Study was published online January 30 in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

HuffPost reports that two other unrelated studies have found health concerns related to diet soda, one study showing that people who drank diet soda had a wider waistline and another study that found the artificial sweetener in diet soda raises the blood sugar in mice prone to diabetes.

“Our results suggest a potential association between daily diet soft drink consumption and vascular outcomes,” said lead researcher Hannah Gardener, Sc.D., epidemiologist in the Miller School’s Department of Neurology, in a release. “However, the mechanisms by which soft drinks may affect vascular events are unclear. There is a need for further research before any conclusions can be drawn regarding the potential health consequences of diet soft drink consumption.”

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Paul Napoli