Merck finally caves in to more evidence of the risks of Vioxx and pulls it from the market. It's interesting that the data that broke Vioxx's back came while Merck tried to expand the market for the drug. Before the safety of the drug was established for its original intended use for pain and inflammation, Merck was testing it as a preventive for colorectal polyps. That's when the new heart and stroke risks were detailed. (Although there has been mounting evidence of heart risks for years.)
So the drug that never did what it was supposed to do -- treat inflammation and pain while avoiding stomach ulcers -- while costing about 6 times more than ibuprofen, is now gone.
No more ads showing Dorothy Hamill figure skating pain-free.
No more slogans such as "Once Daily Vioxx for Everyday Victories."
But this won't be the last time we hear about a drug's true risk profile not being established until the drug has been on the market and in use for some time.
Caveat emptor.
Posted by schwitz at September 30, 2004 06:02 PMI read the Vioxx New York Times story with interest because I was on the drug for a year. It was very good at controlling the pain/inflammation that I had, but I'm sure glad I didn't use it for more than a year! One thing I'm wondering about the study that showed heart problems is what were the ages of the people in the study (I'm wondering if using the drug is more of a risk for older vs. younger people), and how many people total participated in the study.
Posted by: Marie Zhuikov at October 1, 2004 09:15 AMWe have also been trying to ask the question that Marilyn has been asking. Apparently, Pfizer has said in a statement that while they all belong the same family (COX-2), the chemical formulation for their drugs is different from Vioxx. It better be!
Posted by: Vioxx recall at December 2, 2004 01:06 PMDrugs, in any shape or form, carry inherent risks. There's NO SUCH THING as a safe drug. We've become quite conditioned as a society that things are safe, just because we've legislated or sued companies into performing exhaustive tests to see exactly how the drug will interact with each person. Everyone's chemistry is different and I find it ridiculous that we've come to EXPECT safety when taking drugs. There's a RISK to everything in life and we can't ASSUME that life doesn't carry those risks.
The makers of vioxx knew without a doubt, the inherrent problems with the cox-2 inhibitor. There are many statements in the blogs, by cardiologists who warned both the FDA, and Merck, of the cardiovascular risks for those taking vioxx. Merck must pay these injured clients who took vioxx in good faith and ruined their lives by a heart attack, arrithmia attack, stroke, or CHF. I took this drug for only eight months, and had an arrithmia attack that almost killed me. Now I akso have CHF and a difibulator, thanks to merck's vioxx.
Posted by: Ted Chittenden at September 27, 2005 09:24 PM