Carol Ernst did not sue Merck for money

The Houston Chronicle has conducted an interview with Carol Ernst, the widow who sued and won the first Vioxx lawsuit against Merck last week. She makes two very important points about why it was worth suing the company:

1. [I]t's not on the market anymore.
2. [T]he pharmaceutical companies know or should know that physicians and consumers have the right to know risks that are involved in taking drugs, especially when the information is there. (Related article: Merck knew Vioxx risks prior to launch)

Most Americans and people worldwide will agree. If a company sells a pair of jeans with defective zippers, what do we have to lose? Not much. Maybe the jeans wouldn't last that long or we might need to repair the jeans. With drugs, people get hurt - some even die. At least that is what happened to 140,000 or so Americans who were naive enough to believe Merck and sought pain relief in Vioxx. As many as 60,000 are no longer alive to question Merck while others suffer with their cardiovascular systems affected in some way. (Related article: 2000 deaths estimated in Britain from Vioxx)

That is what happened to Ms. Ernst too. She lost her husband within a year of her marriage. The company still does not accept that it caused the death of Robert Ernst and has vowed to appeal the verdict, despite strong warnings from analysts and attorneys that it may be a good time to settle all pending lawsuits out of court.

Recommended article: Dr. David Graham praises the Texas jury verdict