Hibari Posted September 12, 2017 Just saw this article tonight in the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/well/mind/paxil-antidepressants-suicide.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fhealth&action=click&contentCollection=health®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
direstraits Posted September 12, 2017 such a shame and a disgrace...paroxetine is what has ruined me...still having some awful days almost 3 1/2 years after quitting....think I might have internal akathisia,comes and goes..my vision is ruined....just pray to God I can survive this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barbarannamated Posted August 24 This verdict against GSK / Paxil was just overturned by the Supreme Court because it was a generic version. Who IS responsible for generics, especially when they are manadated by insurers? https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1L72D1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JS11 Posted August 25 8 hours ago, Barbarannamated said: This verdict against GSK / Paxil was just overturned by the Supreme Court because it was a generic version. Who IS responsible for generics, especially when they are manadated by insurers? https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1L72D1 The article doesn't say if the Court of Appeals kicked it back to the State court, which is what usually happens. Although then, the attorney would then have to decide if it was worth it to continue. I think this is issue is going to continue to be litigated. It is hopeful that both Massachusetts and California ruled that Brand named manufacturers can be sued by generic drug users. Thank you for the link, Barbarannamated. take care, JS11 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barbarannamated Posted September 3 On 8/24/2018 at 11:53 PM, JS11 said: The article doesn't say if the Court of Appeals kicked it back to the State court, which is what usually happens. Although then, the attorney would then have to decide if it was worth it to continue. I think this is issue is going to continue to be litigated. It is hopeful that both Massachusetts and California ruled that Brand named manufacturers can be sued by generic drug users. Thank you for the link, Barbarannamated. take care, JS11 Thanks JS. Bob Fiddaman is covering this case closely on his blog and Twitter. I don't want to misstate anything, so I'll defer to his expertise. https://fiddaman.blogspot.com/?m=1#.W43ECaApBdY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bubbles Posted September 3 On 8/25/2018 at 3:04 AM, Barbarannamated said: This verdict against GSK / Paxil was just overturned by the Supreme Court because it was a generic version. Who IS responsible for generics, especially when they are manadated by insurers? https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1L72D1 The manufacturer of the generic version? A generic still has a "brand" as such, it is just not the same one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barbarannamated Posted September 5 On 9/3/2018 at 7:56 PM, bubbles said: The manufacturer of the generic version? A generic still has a "brand" as such, it is just not the same one. It's complicated. From what I understand, both GSK and Mylan agree that the paroxetine is likely the cause. However, the labeling by GSK, and used by generic manufacturers, only includes warnings for 18 and under. Better explanation by Bob Fiddaman: https://fiddaman.blogspot.com/?m=1#.W43ECaApBdY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bubbles Posted September 5 Quote It's complicated. From what I understand, both GSK and Mylan agree that the paroxetine is likely the cause. However, the labeling by GSK, and used by generic manufacturers, only includes warnings for 18 and under. I find it baffling that the wording on the bottle can exonerate them from responsibility, especially if it seems that they're accepting that the drug is the likely cause. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JS11 Posted September 6 On 9/3/2018 at 4:31 PM, Barbarannamated said: Thanks JS. Bob Fiddaman is covering this case closely on his blog and Twitter. I don't want to misstate anything, so I'll defer to his expertise. https://fiddaman.blogspot.com/?m=1#.W43ECaApBdY Thank you so much, Barbarannamated, for all the information. I appreciate it so much/ take care, JS11 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
