Charlottesville Personal Injury Lawyer - Consumers

Obama Ends Bush’s Policy That Favored Corporations Over Consumer

Greg Webb — Tue, 26 May 2009 08:00:00 GMT

Recently, the Obama White House undid a Bush administration pre-emption policy, which used federal health and safety regulations to limit the power of injured consumers to sue companies in state courts. Trial lawyers who file class actions for millions of consumers praised this decision.

This issue of preemption does not solely involve the right to sue. The Bush administration extended preemption laws to include such areas as health, safety, and environmental regulations, along with financial and consumer protections. Also, during his second term, more than fifty federal regulations were adopted or proposed that included language aimed at limiting state lawsuits in a bid to protect industry.

In a memo to department heads, President Obama stated the preemption of state law should be commenced only with full reflection of the legitimate rights of the states. Kenneth Baer, the communications director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, says the White House will no longer use this approach and will instead go back and make it clearer and more defensible under the law.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

FDA Warns Consumers About Contamination In Procter & Gamble Plant

Greg Webb — Mon, 18 May 2009 21:02:24 GMT

In a letter released last Tuesday, U.S. regulators claimed Procter & Gamble failed to sufficiently address manufacturing and contamination problems at a plant in Puerto Rico that produces over-the-counter drugs, as well as Olay cosmetics. Procter & Gamble has since said none of the issues compromised the safety of products manufactured at its plant in Cayey, Puerto Rico.

Inspections last year found many of the products had been prepared, packaged, or held under unsanitary conditions. This could cause the products to become contaminated with filth or otherwise be made injurious to consumers’ health. One inspection showed the machines that made the over-the-counter drugs were contaminated. Products manufactured at the plant include, Vicks Sinex nasal spray, along with skin and hair care products like Olay Total Effects Revitalizing Daily Foam and Olay Moisture Foaming Face Wash.

While the FDA asked Procter & Gamble to correct the problem and prevent this from happening again, Procter & Gamble insists it is confident in the products it places out in the marketplace. It claims its products are safe because they undergo extensive tests before being released for public consumption.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

Recent Supreme Court Ruling Bring Back Issue of Medical Devices

Greg Webb — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:31:52 GMT

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that consumers can sue drug makers for defective warnings, though earlier ruled consumers cannot sue medical device manufacturers if the device was FDA approved. This seemingly contradictory ruling claims federal law does not protect drug companies from product liability suits in state courts, though it earlier decided federal law prevents lawsuits against the manufacturers of such medical devices as heart stints and artificial joints. In the drug maker case, the defendant, drug manufacturer Wyeth, argued federal oversight of drug labels by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) precluded state courts from hearing drug injury lawsuits; the Court ruled, however, that consumers may sue the manufacturer in state court for a defective warning. The Court distinguishes the two cases by pointing out that there are different legal issues involved.

Experts believe that after this decision, there may be an influx in the amount of lawsuits drug makers will face because the FDA approved label will not provide a cover for the industry. Drug maker supporters fear the verdict could make companies more reluctant to produce beneficial drugs if the drugs pose a high risk. The decision could also offer support to some members of Congress who are planning to introduce a bill that would supersede the Court’s medical device ruling, thus allowing injured people or their survivors to sue faulty device makers. Many hope the outcome will lead to more updated labels of possible side effects, though it would require FDA approval every time.

The Wyeth ruling was a victory for consumers – for normal citizens. It was a blow to big business, especially the pharmaceutical industry. If it could, the pharmaceutical industry would have the federal government give it blanket immunity from any law suits, no matter how egregious its conduct. Because the FDA is unable to adequately police the pharmaceutical industry (for a variety of reasons, including funding), one of the most effective checks on that industry is the product liability lawsuit. Wyeth gave this writer hope that that our Court is not turning into the “Corporation Court”, rubber-stamping whatever the industry wants.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb

FDA Allowing Melamine to Remain in Infant Formula

Greg Webb — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 08:00:00 GMT

Scientists at Consumer’s Union, a nonprofit group, believe that a decision by the Food and Drug Administration to allow infant formula contaminated with melamine or its byproducts to remain on store shelves is “seriously flawed.”

The FDA tested 89 containers of U.S.-manufactured infant formula and reportedly detected traces of melamine in a can of milk-based liquid Nestle Good Start Supreme Infant Formula with Iron, and traces of cyanuric acid in three different cans of Mead Johnson’s Enfamil LIPIL with Iron.

The FDA says studies show that the dangers of health effects are only a concern when both chemicals are present. Because dual contamination is key, there have been no recalls of the formulas.

Consumer’s Union is concerned that the FDA was assuming parents would never feed their babies more than one type of formula. They point to a case where one mother fed her baby two different formulas because “one caused constipation, and one caused loose bowels, but together the baby’s digestion seemed just right.”

The International Formula Council, an organization representing major infant formula makers, said doctors generally recommend feeding infants only one type of formula.

An FDA spokeswoman said the agency’s testing “found that the U.S. supply of infant formula is safe,” but that they were reviewing Consumer’s Union concerns.

In China, melamine has caused sickness in 300,000 babies, killing at least six infants. There, melamine was intentionally added to watered-down milk in order to show higher protein levels in food quality tests. Byproducts of the milk ended up in various products, including infant formula and coffee creamers.

The concentration levels detected in U.S. infant formula samples were 10,000 times smaller than the levels detected in China’s infant formula. However, there has been little research on what levels are considered safe. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, who heads a panel which oversees the FDA budget, called for a zero-tolerance policy for melamine in domestic infant formula.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Greg Webb