Tempers Flare as Vioxx Cases Come to Trial

April 26, 2005
Giant drugmaker Merck & Co. has vowed to fight every one of the
thousands of personal injury cases filed against it after the Vioxx
withdrawal, starting with the case of Brad Rogers, 42, an ambulance
dispatcher in Alabama.

Merck came out swinging, its lawyers calling Rogers' widow, Cheryl, 33,
a liar. At a pre-trial deposition, she presented packages of Vioxx that
she said her husband had used just before his death from a heart
attack.

But Merck's lawyers said the packages in question left the Merck
factory six months after Rogers died. Rogers' lawyers shot back that it
was an unintentional error and then filed a motion seeking sanctions
against Merck for violating a protective order and disclosing personal
and confidential information about Mrs. Rogers and her husband.

In addition, the motion cites Merck being in violation of the
provisions of the federal health privacy act, HIPAA, by disclosing
personal medical information pertaining to Brad Rogers.

Vioxx was withdrawn from the market last September after studies
suggested it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke in those who
took the drug for more than 18 months.

Merck has set aside $675 million to fight the roughly 2,500 cases that
have been filed. Its defense strategy, as illustrated in the Rogers
case, is to question whether Vioxx was actually to blame for the deaths
and illnesses claimed by the plaintiffs, or whether other factors,
including lifestyle, heredity, diet and smoking may have been
significant.

Rogers collapsed and died shortly after finishing a night shift. He was
overweight and had high blood pressure and high cholesterol, which is
why his lawyers say he shouldn't have been taking Vioxx.

Attorney Jere Beasley, representing Mrs. Rogers, asked that since Merck
allegedly violated the protective order by releasing information about
the Rogers couple to the press, the court vacate its protective order
as it relates to documents produced by Merck. He is asking the court to
allow for public disclosure by plaintiffs' attorneys of all Merck
documents.

"Releasing Merck's documents would serve the public interest by
exposing its wrongful conduct over the years," Beasley said. "Clinical
tests have proven Vioxx is and was a dangerous drug. It has killed
literally thousands of unsuspecting victims who trusted the company and
who had no idea that Vioxx caused heart attacks and strokes."

During the Advantage trial in 2000, eight people taking Vioxx suffered
heart attacks or sudden cardiac death, compared with just one taking
naproxen, according to data released by the FDA earlier this year,
Beasley said.

The difference was statistically significant, but Merck never disclosed
the data that way. In fact, according to previously undisclosed Merck
records, including email messages between top Merck officials, it
appears that Merck went out of its way to hide these facts, Beasley
said in a news release.

In 2000, amid rising concerns that its painkiller Vioxx posed heart
risks, Merck overruled one of its own scientists after he suggested
that a patient in a clinical trial had probably died of a heart attack,
he said.

"Merck intentionally misled the public and the medical community by
withholding information relating to known dangers associated with
taking Vioxx," Beasley says.

Merck argues that Mrs. Rogers' credibility has been damaged and moved
for a dismissal of the case.

--

TC