Category: Work

So I’ve been maintaining my silence here on the blog, not for any specific reason such as a big change. In truth, up until last week I’ve been caught up in a new project at work with some extremely aggressive deadlines around Merck’s new SAP implementation, all while transitioning off my old project to a new project manager. That pretty much consumed all my time while I tried to bring some stability to the project, which I’m sure survived well enough without me while I was away this past week.

I’ll give an update in the not-so-distant future, I swear, after I’ve recovered from the sights of Romania and the movie version of Bridge to Terabithia.

Thank God I drugged myself about a half hour ago with Tylenol PM, because I am so fucking pissed off about work today that I wouldn’t sleep otherwise.

I am generally sympathetic to the concept of personal inury litigation as a way to correct wrongs, but reading crap like this makes it hard to stay that way.

Your father?s stroke may have been caused by his high blood pressure; however, the study that led to the recall of Vioxx from the marketplace showed that users of Vioxx had almost doubled chances of heart attack or stroke, so the chances that your father?s use of Vioxx contributed to his stroke are pretty high.

You should certainly consult with an experienced personal injury Vioxx attorney as soon as possible to discuss your father?s case. You should be able to bring an action against Merck Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Vioxx. Merck knew that Vioxx caused an increased risk of stroke, yet continued to market the drug. However, Merck will certainly point to your father?s high blood pressure as the cause of his stroke, and your damages may be lessened or even eliminated due to this fact.

A case against your father?s doctor, however, may be much easier to prove. As early as 2001, Merck was instructed by the FDA to send letters to healthcare professionals, warning them of the increased risk of heart attack and stroke. In 2002, the FDA forced Merck to relabel Vioxx, recommending that the drug not be prescribed to patients with heart conditions and pointing out the study showing that Vioxx caused heart attacks and strokes. Your father?s doctor clearly knew about your father?s high blood pressure as he was prescribing drugs for that condition. Therefore, he should also have known that it was dangerous for your father to use Vioxx. Prescribing Vioxx for your father was professionally unreasonable and negligent on the part of your father?s doctor. This case will probably be more lucrative to you in terms of damages for your father?s stroke.

I love how confident the writers are in their assertions.

As I was trying to poke around the Internet on Vioxx, I stumbled on an interesting site.

In August of 2004, the FDA finally launched its own study, showing that the use of Vioxx was linked to more than 27,000 heart attacks or sudden cardiac deaths. The FDA stated, once and for all, that the use of Vioxx did not protect against heart problems. Merck responded by withdrawing the drug from the marketplace.

Talk about playing fast and loose with the facts. The drug was pulled from the market after the data was unblinded at the midpoint review of a double-blind study that Merck was conducting to determine the answer to the cardiovascular risk, in part at the request of the FDA. The FDA was not doing its own study, and Merck withdrew VIOXX from the market because of the results. It did so before the FDA had time to do anything, including forcing a label change or a withdrawl from the market.

In truth, Merck likely could have kept the drug on the market with a “black box” warning label, avoiding at least some of the appearance of impropriety. Because the company yanked it, it unfortunately gives the appearance of some deep secret that the company was hiding something.

At least, according to the same site, the statute of limitations on product liability cases is two years. Since the drug was yanked in early Fall 2005, anyone looking to cash in better hurry up and file.

I’ve been away from my computer recently. A lot.

My work-life balance, consisting mainly of work, has been a primary driver for this. I’ve recently had two projects move in to production use, with a third coming up this week. Throw on top of that an additional three (or four, I’m not really sure) projects in motion and you might understand why I’ve been a little busy.

Coinciding with being given more project work than is reasonable, I’ve had a rash of family outings lately. About five of eight weekends in April/May/June were up in Sparta, at my cousins’ house, for a wedding, graduation party, the Kentucy Derby (Barbaro!), and miscellaneous other events.

Any downtime I managed to find in the midst of all this has been appreciated.

I’ve been working on a side project for myself, and I’ve been wondering how in the world I was going to find a list of all the drugs approved in the US. There are various websites out there, but nothing that would allow me to load the data directly in to a searchable database.

Enter the FDA. Believe it or not, the FDA provides a list, updated every Wednesday. All ready for importing in to a database.

It was as if the Angel of Death descended upon us, without the comfort of knowing whether you had the mark of safety over your door. We sat huddled at our desks, wondering, waiting, hungering after any news. Rumors zipped along the various communication forms like wildfire, bringing names. More often than not the e-mails would come, confirming the rumor. “I can’t believe it” became the day’s refrain.

By afternoon we began venturing out. Huddled in doorways and hallways, questioning, comforting, supporting, we began to put the pieces together. More names flowed upon the ether, with more goodbyes and good lucks handed out. Some had been expecting, making plans; others were just beginning to process. All were sad. Those of us who remained questioned which was the luckier set. For today was pink slip day. And so tomorrow the work begins.

Yesterday was our Holiday “meeting”, where we engaged in team-building activities while drinking from the open bar. Our hosts were the the Ridge at Back Brook, a posh country club in East Amwell. After the team building activities, everyone was free to relax, sing karaoke or otherwise just hang out until… well, I left at 5 pm, anyway, and people were still there.

In a reminder of the times, our senior management handed out copies of the book Who Moved My Cheese, the popular book about how to respond to change. And after the book, the first of what will likely become many changes was announced, with one of our managers leaving to take a new position with a software vendor.

2006 will be a long year for all of us at Merck. Just remember to always keeping looking for new cheese.

The Merck Layoff Watch continued, with an announcement on Monday, November 28th, that the company would cut 7,000 jobs.

I haven’t blogged about this here because there hasn’t been much to say. The cuts have started, but they’re on a rolling basis that will last in to 2008. While there is a strong focus on manufacturing, including the closure or sale of several sites, no part of the company will be unaffected.

My own area won’t begin to see the impact until early next year, after several budget decisions are made. With that in mind, the layoff watch continues.

From the NY Times today:

In interviews, several jurors said they had intended the verdict, which included $229 million in punitive damages, not to reward Mrs. Ernst but to punish Merck for its actions. Derrick Chizer, one of the jurors, said that the jury wanted to send Merck and the drug industry a message: “Stop doing the minimum to put your drug on the market.” Other jurors made similar comments.

The $229 million punitive damages figure was not picked at random, but referred to a 2001 Merck estimate of additional profit the company might make if it could delay an F.D.A. warning on Vioxx’s heart risk. Mr. Lanier mentioned that monetary figure in his closing argument.