Blood Clots

[egann]

Hi Jack, can you recommend an attorney in Arizona?  Last year i miraculously survived 3 clots in my lungs, and 3 in my hips as a result of 3 months on Yaz.  I know you say clots are common from birth control, but the warning say combined with smoking.  I have never been a smoker! How can i get the warning changed?

Thank you.  You have a great name.  I have a son Jack!

Katy

ANSWER: Go to Rxlist on Google and search Yaz. Thrombophlebitis is listed and several other clotting problems. Someone is misleading you.

I can't recommend a lawyer for you. In the first place I don't know any of the Arizona lawyers, although as I recall no one gave them great marks in handling malpractice cases. Phone the LA Bar Association and ask them for lawyers who practice in Arizona and who do malpractice. I am sure they will give you a couple of names.

On smoking: That used to be quoted on every warning printed on the 'package insert'. You might ask your pharmacist for the package insert for Yaz. He should be able to help you. Then you can copy it and give it to lawyers you talk to. It should list thrombophlebitis as an adverse reaction. Smoking does increase the risk for clots, but does not have to be present. Any pharmcologist will tell your lawyer that. And his chief expert should be a pharmacologist, not a mere pharmacist. There is a difference.

My mother named me Jack so no one would give me a nickname. It's a good name and easy to remember even at my age.  Good luck.

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

When you answered another question regarding birth control and blood clots, you mentioned the value of their case was high.  Do you think the same for mine.  I don't want to waste my time if i can't help stick it to the drug company as well as help stop this YAZ being passed out like candy!  And how much is high?

ANSWER: I am going to answer your question for all others who may be considering a lawsuit for medical malpractice.

The verdicts and settlements for successful malpractice cases are higher than those for automobile accident cases and most other personal injury cases. However, this higher value is based on the greater difficulty in bringing these cases to successful conclusions. Lawyers often refuse these cases, and recently the number of lawyers who say they handle malpractice has been reduced. Lawyers must have a lot of money they can devote to these cases, and they must be prepared to lose meritorious cases despite their putting in time and money. No medical malpractice case is a lead pipe cinch. I have sat through cases and watched defense 'experts' lie and dream up reasons for defending a doctor who has a record for being drunk in the operating room, sniffing cocaine during his lunch hours. These cases are lost because juries are reluctant to condemn doctors.

Another aspect of malpractice cases is that the defense has nothing but time and money. Insurance companies hire investigators who will expose every mistake you have made over the years. The insurance company will make you look like a purse snatcher and child abuser by the time they finish with you. These are not nice cases. The case will linger through two or three years and at the end will produce only grief and tears. Even those cases that end in a verdict for the plaintiff will have wrung every drop of blood out of the injured patient.

However, malpractice lawsuits are the only way to let a doctor know he is not Jesus and to provide a public examination of a doctor or a pharmaceutical manufacturer. No other wystem for the exposure of lousy medical care or cheating hospitals is available for the public. Licensing boards frequently do nothing even when a doctor's criminal behavior is shown at trial, because most State licensing boards do not read the papers or check trial decisions.

When I answer questions on this web site I encourage people to file their lawsuits. I think you should file a lawsuit even if you do not intend to carry it through. A filed lawsuit provides information for another lawyer who later may have a case against that doctor. I have interviewed many patients who have filled a case(later dismissed) and got good information for my client. Lawsuits againts a medical entity must be filed for every malpractice.

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

I am truly more concerned about the manufacturer than the doctor.  It appears this is happening quite often with this drug.  And it is practically getting pitched as the cure for cancer!  Are many individual verdicts won against the drug manufacturers?

[shen86]

Yes.

The lawsuit becomes a products liability case. These are much easier for a lawyer than a malpractice case. The pharmas have expensive, welltrained lawyers but plaintiffs' victories are far easier in these cases. Your lawyer MUST get a pharmacologist not connected to a univeristy or the business of drug making. Most University pharmacologists are in league with the manufacturers and make a lot of money running 'tests' of new drugs for the manufacturers. Big bucks for those university professors who don't have to bother with classes. They just run a few tests and say the drug is great for anything the pharma wants.

It's a lousy world out there. First thing we must do is get medical care out of the insurance industry's hands. Then the next thing is to make the pharma companies honest. Both tough jobs but essential for the health of our citizens.

AARP is one of the worst of the insurance companies. Years ago(1981-3) I was a member of their Legislative Counsel and as members we recommended that every citizen get Medicare, but the AARP staff bombed us out of existence. They did not want to hear that. I still think that is our best bet. I hope Obama has not been paid by the insurance industry or the pharma boys. He should think about a system like that. A minor paycheck tax like SSA, maybe as low as 5% would pay for everyone to have medical/hospital care. That's everyone. And even the big boys like GM, Ford, Exxon would go for it because that would save them billions.