The Wall Street Journal reports that a researcher who questioned the safety of the painkiller drug Bextra was removed by the FDA from an advisory panel that will review Bextra and similar drugs.
Dr. Curt Furberg said, "They'd said because I had taken a public position, I was disinvited."
Furberg was quoted in earlier news coverage that he found that patients taking Bextra might be at higher risk for heart attack or stroke.
Shouldn't we be applauding such openness and early disclosure rather than penalizing it? Especially on the heels of the Vioxx withdrawal, when evidence of harm had apparently been ignored or stifled for years?
Posted by schwitz at November 12, 2004 12:28 PMDo you think Bextra is really harmful? This page has a lawyer that is excepting bextra lawsuits. http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/bextra/lawsuit.html
Posted by: Emily Lawyer at December 7, 2004 05:32 PMFurberg definitely should be applauded, as does anyone with the courage to report the truth. His firing was another example of the Golden Rule (the one where those with the Gold get to make the Rules!)
Don't miss a recent 3-part story on NPR about the corporate strong-arming exerted by Merck on the institutions it funds: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4696609.
Posted by: Stephanie at June 10, 2005 08:36 PM