Too bad we won't be able to sue the trial lawyers when the inevitable deaths happen.

Health care hawks in Congress may seize on painkillerVioxx"s woes to push for major changes in the Food and Drug Administration"s drug approval process.

In 2004, Merck withdrew its pain reliever Vioxx from the market because of new studies showing increased cardiovascular risk. Merck announced that it would not settle any of the tens of thousands of Vioxx lawsuits filed, and set aside over a billion dollars to litigate cases without reserving a penny...

Without profound changes in the scientific and regulatory environment, things will remain very tough for the agile disruptor -- relatively good news for established giants, presumably less good news for patients and for progress.

Media Inquiries: Sara Hunekesara.huneke@aei.org; 202.862.4870

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 29, 2008

Today, an appeals court in Texas reversed the $26 million judgment in Ernst v. Merck, which made worldwide headlines in 2005 when the first Vioxx case to go to trial returned a $253 million...

The announcedsettlement of the Vioxx litigationshows the weakness of the plaintiffs' claims and the weaknesses of the current pharmaceutical product liability law.

On August 19, 2005, a jury in Angleton, Texas, found Vioxx producer Merck liable for the death of fifty-nine-year-old Robert Ernst. The Brazoria county jury assessed a staggering $253 million ($24 million compensatory, $229 million punitive) in damages against Merck, although Texas law will cap the punitive damages at less...

An examination of Cox-2 class drugs for assessing Merck's decision to withdraw Vioxx.