Contents


    Executive Summary

    Pharmaceuticals are manufactured medicinal drugs used to diagnose, treat, and prevent a number of diseases and illnesses. The development of pharmaceutical drugs has revolutionized the way that health professionals and patients manage sickness. Pharmaceuticals are a profitable business, with some experts projecting that the U.S. pharmaceutical market will be worth approximately $550 billion by 2020.

    With the far-reaching influence that pharmaceuticals have on the daily lives of nearly everybody, there is a high risk of injury and damage at both the personal and corporate levels. As the drug industry continues to grow, the safety, effectiveness, and quality of pharmaceuticals will become increasingly important to protect public health by helping manage the treatment of illness and disease.

    Background

    The production of pharmaceutical drugs began between the early 1830s and late 1890s throughout Europe and the United States. Biochemical research, combined with novel manufacturing techniques into the early 20th century, sparked the creation of a pharmaceutical industry that was quickly becoming capable of producing medications, vaccines, and antitoxins that could effectively fight serious diseases. The rise in the number and variety of drugs brought with it public health miracles; fatal diseases were being cured for the first time in history, maternal deaths during childbirth were declining, and infant mortality was severely reduced. As the pharmaceutical industry expanded to include academic researchers, organic chemists, and engineers, medications were designed to cure specific ailments. Over time, antipsychotics, tranquilizers, antidepressants, antihistamines, antibiotics, and biotechnical innovations changed the way diseases were managed.

    Over the course of drug development, the pharmaceutical industry became more heavily regulated by the federal government, however, the industry stayed largely out of the public eye even as private businesses became multi-million-dollar corporations. Drug-makers have continued to investigate novel methods of drug production and expand the range of offered pharmaceuticals. Still, the industry does not exist without controversy -- high drug prices, privatized business models, expensive regulatory processes, and intense competition for intellectual property rights have at times put the industry at odds with its consumers, the federal government, and the health care sector in the United States.

    Injuries and Damages

    The physiological and psychological effects of pharmaceuticals can cause serious health problems and, with some drugs, eventual addiction. Injuries and damages can be related to physician prescribing habits, drug manufacturer misrepresentations, consumer abuse, drug recalls, generic drugs, or environmental pollution from discarded drugs.

    Over-prescription and over-diagnosis
    Over-prescription occurs when health professionals prescribe unnecessary medications or excessive dosages to patients to diagnose or treat a medical ailment. Research has shown that the U.S. consumes the majority of the world’s prescription drugs. Some industry critics argue that pressures from the pharmaceutical market and industry misinformation has created a culture in the United States of misdiagnosis and excessive pharmaceuticals use.

    The widespread use of antibiotics, which some experts consider to be the most over-prescribed medication in the country, has led to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains called “superbugs.” Millions of people are infected with these superbugs each year, resulting in thousands of deaths annually. Also, some industry observers warn of over-prescribed psychiatric drugs, and note that most Americans with mental health disorders are treated solely with medication rather than psychiatric healing methods. Finally, the prescription of opioids has drawn considerable attention as overdoses and addiction increase at extraordinary rates nationwide.

    Millions of children in the U.S. are diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and many use drugs to treat the disorder. While major medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Institutes of Health, recognize the existence of ADHD and youth behavioral disorders, there is controversy surrounding whether pharmaceutical prescriptions are too easily utilized as the primary form of treatment.

    Industry misrepresentation of product
    Conflicts in the industry can arise from relationships between physicians and pharmaceutical drug representatives. The industry spends millions annually on marketing to doctors, and some – including doctors – have questioned if this practice alters how they prescribe. Also, traditionally, a pharmaceutical firm advertises a drug to physicians and informs them of the benefits and dangers, then physicians prescribe the medication for patients. Industry watchers, however, note that while pharmaceutical companies have an obligation to inform health professionals of all pertinent information, misinformation from the drug companies has allegedly become one source of damage for patients. For example, pharmaceutical companies now produce commercials that provide information to potential consumers. While physicians used to serve as a liability buffer for pharmaceutical companies by acting as the “learned intermediary,” some charge that pharmaceutical companies are increasingly becoming the providers of drug information for potential patients, increasing company exposure to product and corporate liability if injuries and damage occur from the improper use or misinformation related to the drug.

    Consumer addiction and overdose
    The strong psychoactive and physical effects of certain classes of drugs can lead to high rates of dependency and misuse. The most commonly abused pharmaceutical drugs are opioids and narcotics for pain relief, central nervous system depressants for anxiety disorders and sleep problems, and stimulants for ADHD and narcolepsy.

    Prescription medicine abusers usually report that they obtained their drugs legally from a doctor, friend or relative – or by stealing them. College campus drug abuse is extreme, and often revolves around “study drugs,” meaning stimulants that provide better focus. It has been reported that in the U.S., one person dies every 19 minutes from a drug overdose, most often involving painkillers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has officially declared prescription drug abuse in the U.S. to be an epidemic.

    Pharmaceutical recalls/withdrawals
    Over the years, the FDA has pulled dozens of previously approved drugs off the market because it was found that they posed a risk to consumers. These withdrawals are usually prompted by adverse effects that were not detected during clinical trials, because manufacturers sometimes conduct trials only on a few thousand subjects, choosing to rely heavily on survey data from consumers after regulatory approval, to determine side effects. Some drug companies press the FDA to approve drugs more quickly, accepting the risk that a drug might have an unexpected side effect.

    Brand-name vs. generic drugs
    Brand name pharmaceuticals are often particularly expensive because of high initial development, marketing, and distribution costs; generic equivalents can cost up to 85% less. Because some insurers do not cover brand name medications, patients are prescribed the generic equivalent. If there is no generic substitute, the patient may need to pay for the medication out of pocket.

    Pharmaceutical companies file for a patent on developed brand-name drugs that prohibits outside manufacturing and distribution of identical generic drugs for a set period. By law, generic pharmaceuticals must have identical chemical composition and product labeling as the brand-name, a potentially harmful regulation if the generic developer identifies new safety concerns or side effects with the drug that it cannot disclose. The limits placed on generic drug manufacturers are matched by limited liability – patients who take generic drugs cannot sue the generic manufacturers for issues relating to the efficacy or labeling of the drug. These regulations were established by the Hatch-Waxman Amendments to the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984. In several cases, the substitution of ingredients with metabolic equivalents or the exclusion of active ingredients has prompted patent infringement claims between patentee pharmaceutical manufacturers and generic companies.

    “Off-label” drug use
    “Off-label” drug use refers to the use of a medication in any manner not specifically approved by the FDA and delineated on the label that was approved for the drug during the regulatory process. Off-label drugs can be used for different diseases or medical conditions than originally intended, given in a different way such as by a different route of administration, or given in a different dose than in the approved label. Drugs are most commonly used off-label for combating cancer, controlling extreme pain, and treating autoimmune diseases, psychiatric problems, and conditions of the central nervous system such as multiple sclerosis. Health insurance companies manage off-label drug usage in different ways.

    Environmental contamination
    Improperly disposed of pharmaceutical medications can negatively affect local ecosystems, posing a potential risk for illness and disease in humans. Significant amounts of medicinal products are dumped into sinks and toilets, introducing large quantities of pharmaceutical compounds into local water supplies. Pharmaceuticals including antibiotics, anticonvulsants, mood stabilizers, and synthesized hormones have been found in the drinking water of millions of American homes in major metropolitan areas. While the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are still small enough to classify the water as still potable, scientists are worried about the long-term health consequences of pharmaceutical contamination because many pharmaceuticals, like synthetic hormones, function at very low concentrations in humans. Residues of both prescription and non-prescription drugs have been detected in ecosystems, raising the question of whether this creates a risk for exposed plants, animals and microbes, or for humans. Highly lipid-soluble drugs may accumulate in the fat of animals, meaning that meat products consumed by humans can carry these chemicals.

    Legislation and Regulation

    Regulation of the pharmaceutical industry began in the early 20th century with the 1938 Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) after pharmaceutical manufacturers used a sweet-tasting but toxic chemical in a drug that led to consumer deaths. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded their oversight of pharmaceutical businesses, and the new legislation allowed federal officials to review controlled, double-blind clinical trials and block harmful drugs from sale by requesting that manufacturers conduct further testing.

    In the late 1950s, the federal government launched a lengthy investigation into the pharmaceutical industry’s pricing and marketing policies after the use of the drug thalidomide resulted in nationwide tragedy of deformed infants. Attention was focused on drug company marketing and drug prices versus the cost of manufacturing. International incidents involving dangerous or lethal pharmaceuticals also came under scrutiny. The U.S. government amended the FFDCA in 1962 to allow outlined evaluation and approval criteria for new drugs and permitted officials to postpone or reject the approval of under-tested pharmaceuticals through the New Drug Application (NDA) rules. In 1988, the Prescription Drug Marketing Act was signed into law; it sought to create safeguards in pharmaceutical production and distribution, making the sale of counterfeit, misbranded, and expired medications more difficult. Additionally, the FDA created guidelines that pharmaceutical firms must follow, called the Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMP).

    Liability and Insurance

    Access to pharmaceuticals has become an expected part of society but, at the same time, presents significant insurance risks. The risks include, for example, excessive prescriptions by doctors and tainted or inadequately tested drugs that lead to class-action suits against manufacturers, distributers, and prescribers.

    Pharmaceuticals litigation is extraordinarily costly, and may involve manufacturers and distributors seeking insurance coverage for:
    • Product, product recall, and environmental liability
    • Employers and public liability
    • Clinical trials liability
    • Marine cargo/goods in transit (applicable for pharmaceutical companies that function internationally)
    • Management liability
    • Business interruption, such as for a cessation of manufacturing or a recall
    • Engineering liability for pharmaceutical plants under construction

    Litigation

    Tort law in the United States makes the pharmaceutical industry particularly susceptible to extraordinarily expensive lawsuits; however, filing claims against big pharmaceutical companies is complicated, making litigation expensive, time-consuming, and sometimes unrewarding for plaintiffs. Litigation concerning pharmaceuticals often involves allegations of defective manufacturing, dangerous side effects or improper marketing of pharmaceuticals. Some litigants accuse pharmaceutical firms of violating a wide variety of federal and state laws and regulations, and the number of lawsuits continues to increase. Examples of high-stakes litigations are described below.

    Harmful Pharmaceutical Compounds
    Diet drugs Redux and Pondimin, known as “fen-phen” in combination, were ordered off the market by the FDA in 1997 after grossing more than $360 million in worldwide sales in 1996. The ingredient fenfluramine was linked to heart valve problems and lung damage, which led to damage awards of over $13 billion. Of the approximately 100,000-plus claimants, about 90,000 opted out of Wyeth’s settlement, which was funded at $14 billion.

    False marketing
    Rezulin, an anti-diabetic and anti-inflammatory drug, was withdrawn from the British market in 1997 and the U.S. market in 2000 after being linked to liver damage and drug-induced hepatitis. It was the target of thousands of suits, and in 2001, manufacturer Pfizer, Inc. awarded $43 million to a Texas woman who alleged that the drug destroyed her liver. This was the first of a series of payouts involving the drug that was blamed for dozens of deaths and liver failures worldwide.

    "Generic" Pharmaceutical Litigation
    Karen Bartlett, a New Hampshire woman, was prescribed the anti-inflammatory Clinoril for shoulder pain. The pharmacy gave her the generic version, called sulindac. Soon after taking sulindac, she developed Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), a rare and life-threatening skin disorder caused by certain medications, infections, or cancer. Bartlett spent months recovering in the hospital after losing two-thirds of her skin and surviving in a medically induced coma. Permanently blind and disfigured, she later sued the generic-drug maker and won a $21 million judgment in 2010. However, in 2013, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling on the basis that generic manufacturers could not be sued. Because the name-brand version of the drug, Clinoril, did not specifically warn patients about SJS, the generic drug did not either; accordingly, the generic drug maker had no further legal obligation. (Mut. Pharm. Co. v. Bartlett, 570 U.S. 472 (2013)).

    Top Twelve Class Action Suits
    The top twelve class action drug suits pending in 2017 involved severe or even fatal side effects caused by specific drugs, including:
    • Ability (for depression)
    • Benicar (for high blood pressure)
    • Fluoroquinolone drugs (a group of synthetic antibacterial medications)
    • Onglyza/saxagliptin (for diabetes)
    • Risperdal/risperidone (an anti-psychotic)
    • Talcum Powder (usually for hygiene)
    • Proton Pump Inhibitors (for gastrointestinal acid-related conditions)
    • Taxotere/docetaxel (cancer therapy)
    • Testosterone drugs (TRT therapy)
    • Viagra/sildenafil citrate (for erectile dysfunction)
    • Xarelto/rivaroxaban (an anticoagulant)
    • Zofran/ondansetron (for nausea)

    Future Outlook

    The U.S. is the most medicated country in the world and many experts have expressed the opinion that Americans are over-diagnosed and over-medicated. While pharmaceuticals are here to stay, the way our society deals with drug products is likely to change in the coming years, as the issue of opioid abuse demonstrates.

    It is widely agreed that opioid addiction has in the past few years become a public health crisis that has strained governmental budgets. Lawsuits have been filed by individuals, and local and state entities, against major drug distributors. Allegations are varied but include assertions that some manufacturers engaged in negligent and aggressive sales tactics such as emphasizing the benefits of treating chronic pain with opioids while downplaying the risks, and in failing to address the known opioid black market. State and federal governmental groups have launched investigations into opioid issues.

    Some industry observers contend that the opioid crisis will bring a great deal of high-dollar litigation like the tobacco litigation, but there is disagreement on that point. Experienced litigators have pointed out that opioids are approved and federally regulated drugs, and that there are several intermediaries involved in distribution, leaving prosecutors with the prospect of bringing litigation against companies who may be complying with the law. Also, manufacturers may seek legal protection from such suits.

    The practical issue of what to do with funds that might result from large-scale litigation has been raised. Some experts note that providing money to addicted victims would not be helpful, and any effort to solve the national crisis would demand more money than is available. Also, opioid-makers have been taking steps to address the problem, such as providing clearer warnings about addiction and creating less-easily-abused versions of the drugs, measures which may make it more difficult to sue the companies going forward.

    It is possible, however, that a legal theory that can be used successfully against opioid makers and distributors may yet be developed, given the number of experienced legal minds addressing the problem of how to pay for the enormous public health costs. How legislation and litigation related to the opioid crisis progresses will provide invaluable guidance for drug companies, legislators and legal experts – and importantly, insurers.

    In the News

    2023

    • U.S eyes battle with drug giants over 10 costly medications for seniors - Tony Romm, The Washington Post (08/18/2023)
      The Biden administration is preparing to announce the first 10 medicines it will target under a program that allows the government to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical giants, part of a sweeping — and legally contested — campaign to lower costs for seniors on Medicare.
    • Supreme Court blocks Purdue Pharma bankruptcy plan shielding owners from lawsuits - William Brangham and Courtney Norris, PBS (08/11/2023)
      The Supreme Court blocked a bankruptcy plan for drug maker Purdue Pharma that would have paid out billions of dollars to address the opioid epidemic and shielded the company’s owners from legal liability.
    • Company recalls all its drugs for people and pets. It can’t assure safety and quality - David J. Neal, Miami Herald (04/26/2023)
      Check any prescription or over-the-counter drugs taken by you or your pets. If any of them carry the Akorn brand or were made by Akorn for another brand, that medication got recalled Wednesday. All the drugs were recalled because all the employees were laid off after Akorn Operating Company declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy on Feb. 23. No employees means no quality control.

    2022

    2020

    2019

    • Pharma nears landmark win as Supreme Court leans toward Merck's Fosamax defense - Angus Liu, FiercePharma (01/08/2019)
      The Supreme Court case brought by hundreds of Fosamax patients against Merck & Co. seems to be going the drugmaker’s way, potentially upholding the popular preemption argument the pharma industry has used to fight product liability suits. . . . After hearing oral arguments Monday, some of the court’s justices— including liberal Justice Stephen Breyer and conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts—appeared to support Merck’s defense, while Liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor voiced reservations. . . . The dispute centers on patients’ claims that the osteoporosis drug caused “atypical femoral fractures,” and that the drugmaker failed to warn them about the risk. But Merck argues that it couldn't have offered that official warning, because the FDA rejected its 2008 request to update the drug’s label. Merck says it shouldn’t be held liable under state law because it followed the federal agency's decision. . . . Whichever way the justices eventually land, the high court's decision would ripple through the pharma industry. The drug industry has contended that if Merck lost, biopharma companies would post speculative safety warnings. Patient advocates have argued that a ruling in favor of Merck could encourage inadequate warnings or prompt companies to deliberately give the FDA improper warnings and expect the agency's rejection to absolve them from lawsuits. . . . During Monday’s session, the back-and-forth boiled down to Merck’s request itself. The FDA first turned down the proposal because Merck had used the inaccurate wording of “stress fractures,” which didn't reflect the more serious “atypical femoral fractures” that appeared in the label update FDA approved in October 2010, the patients argued. . . . But, as the administration’s Justice Department argued on behalf of Merck, the FDA was not confused by the "stress fractures" term. . . . “But FDA understood it to refer more generally to any fracture that was caused without external trauma,” said Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart. Therefore, the agency rejected Merck’s bid not because of the language, but because it didn't have enough evidence to warrant a warning. Indeed, the FDA later initiated a task force to determine whether the drug indeed caused fractures.

    2018

    • Two more blood pressure medications recalled for ingredient that might cause cancer - DAVID J. NEAL, MIAMI HERALD (11/28/2018)
      The list of blood pressure drugs recalled because they have NDEA grew by two Tuesday when Teva Pharmaceuticals yanked all lots of Amlodipine/Valsartan and Amlodipine/Valsartan/Hydrochlorothiazide combination tablets. . . . Both have too much N-nitroso-diethylamine (NDEA) in its Valsartan, the active ingredient made by Mylan India. NDEA has been classified as a probable cancerous ingredient by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
    • FDA: Recall of heart, blood pressure medication grows due to cancer concerns - Theresa Seiger, Cox Media Group National Content Desk (08/22/2018)
      Officials with the FDA announced Friday that Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited is voluntarily recalling 14 lots of its valsartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide tablets after trace amounts of N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) were found in one of the drug’s active ingredients. On Tuesday, the list of medications under recall grew to include all lots of Torrent Pharmaceuticals’ valsartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide, valsartan/amlodipine and valsartan tablets. . . . Authorities last month recalled some drugs containing valsartan, a medication used to treat heart failure and blood pressure that’s often a component of generic medicines, because they contained NDMA.

    2017

    • CVS Health moves to limit access to opioid painkillers - Fox Business (09/21/2017)

      One of the largest managers of pharmaceutical benefits in the U.S. says it will start limiting the duration and dose of some prescriptions for opioid painkillers, in an effort to combat widespread addiction. . . . CVS Health, which administers drug benefits for employers, insurers and some state Medicaid programs, said it would limit opioid prescriptions to seven days or less for certain patients with acute pain who haven't previously taken an opioid painkiller. That will be a big change, given that many CVS-covered patients with acute pain receive opioid prescriptions for 20 days or more, Troyen Brennan, CVS's chief medical officer, said in an interview. . . . CVS will also limit patients with chronic pain to a maximum daily dose of 90 morphine milligram equivalents, or MMEs, a standard unit of measure in pain medicine, Dr. Brennan said. 

    • South Carolina sues drug manufacturer over opioid crisis - MEG KINNARD, AP (08/15/2017)

      South Carolina has become the latest state to accuse a drug manufacturer of exacerbating its opioid drug crisis by using deceptive marketing, with the state's top prosecutor suing the maker of OxyContin. . . . Attorney General Alan Wilson on Tuesday announced the state had sued Purdue Pharma, accusing the maker of OxyContin and other opioid drugs of violating South Carolina's Unfair Trade Practices Act.

    • FDA cites Waukesha County company for making oral rinse and car polish with same equipment - Rick Barrett, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (07/31/2017)

      Federal regulators have ordered a Waukesha County company to stop making oral hygiene products with the same equipment used to produce car polish that's labeled “Harmful or fatal if swallowed.”  . . . . In a warning letter sent by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ChemRite CoPac, of Lannon, the FDA said the company also was making toxic products, such as leather treatments and sealants, with the same mixing tank and product filling line used for over-the-counter oral drug products. 

    • $3 million awarded to widow who sued pharmaceutical firm over husband's suicide - Grace Wong, The Chicago Tribune (04/21/2017)
      A Glencoe woman hugged her attorneys after a jury in Chicago awarded her $3 million Thursday in a lawsuit against a pharmaceutical company that she blamed for her husband's suicide.
    • McKesson Agrees to Pay Record $150 Million Settlement for Failure to Report Suspicious Orders of Pharmaceutical Drugs - Department of Justice (01/17/2017)
      McKesson Corporation (McKesson), one of the nation’s largest distributors of pharmaceutical drugs, agreed to pay a record $150 million civil penalty for alleged violations of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the Justice Department announced today. The nationwide settlement requires McKesson to suspend sales of controlled substances from distribution centers in Colorado, Ohio, Michigan and Florida for multiple years. The staged suspensions are among the most severe sanctions ever agreed to by a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) registered distributor. The settlement also imposes new and enhanced compliance obligations on McKesson’s distribution system.

    2016

    • Ten thousand pregnant Frenchwomen took epilepsy drug that raises risk of birth defects, report says - Henry Samuel, The Telegraph (08/10/2016)
      France was on Wednesday facing a health scandal over revelations that 10,000 pregnant women were prescribed an epilepsy drug despite the known risks of it causing incurable birth defects. . . . A British victims' group said the same drug was "very likely" taken by a similar number of pregnant women in the UK over the same period, between 2007 and 2014.

    2015

    • Controversy over testosterone therapy lands in Chicago - Robert McCoppin, Chicago Tribune (09/21/2015)
      The ads promise to restore a man's vitality to that of a teenager: one "trick" that makes him strong and energetic, helps him "regain his former glory" and "leaves wives speechless." . . .The so-called trick is testosterone therapy.
    • Superior Court OKs $4M Topamax Verdict - Max Mitchell, The Legal Intelligencer (08/21/2015)
      The state Superior Court has denied Janssen Pharmaceuticals' bid to overturn a $4 million verdict stemming from claims that its anti-seizure drug Topamax caused birth defects.
    • It pays to read the warnings when you open up a prescription - Idelle Davidson, Washington Post (08/03/2015)
      Levofloxacin ranked third and another fluoroquinolone, ciprofloxacin (often known by the brand name Cipro), ranked fifth in the number of serious adverse event reports submitted directly to the Food and Drug Administration in 2013, according to the nonprofit Institute for Safe Medication Practices. The blood thinners warfarin and rivaroxaban ranked first and second.
    • Blood thinner causing deaths, injuries at nursing homes - Charles Ornstein , The Des Moines Register (07/14/2015)
      When Loren Peters arrived in the emergency room in October 2013, bruises covered his frail body, and blood oozed from his gums... The 85-year-old had not been in a fight or fallen down. Instead, he had been given too much of a popular, decades-old blood thinner that, unmonitored, can turn from a lifesaver into a killer.
    • Big pharmaceutical companies are spending far more on marketing than research - Ana Swanson, Washington Post (02/11/2015)
      Prescription drugs are a massive market: Americans spent $329.2 billion on prescription drugs in 2013. That works out to about $1,000 per person in the U.S., as John Oliver pointed out in his show on Sunday night.

    2014

    • Lawsuit seeks to make drugmaker pay for OxyContin abuse - Laura Ungar, USA TODAY (12/29/2014)
      Prescription drug abuse has killed more than 20,000 Americans a year, filled jails and treatment centers and spawned a resurgence in heroin use. And nowhere is the pill problem more prevalent than in Kentucky's Appalachians, where officials trace its roots to the aggressive marketing of one potent drug: OxyContin.
    • How thalidomide survivors fought, won the battle for better compensation in Europe - Joanna Slater, The Globe and Mail (12/01/2014)
      As Canadian thalidomide survivors press the Harper government for a fund to cover their growing medical needs, the experience of their counterparts in Europe is illuminating. There, thalidomide survivors waged a lengthy and ultimately successful battle for greater compensation.
    • Are Over-the-Counter Pain Meds More Effective than Prescribed Pain Killers? - Sandy Smith , EHS Today (10/06/2014)
      New research from the National Safety Council reveals that the combination of over-the-counter pain medications ibuprofen and acetaminophen are more effective at treating acute pain than opioid painkillers.
    • Bypassing pharmacies boosts workers' comp prescription costs in Pa. - Don Sapatkin , | Philadelphia Inquirer (09/24/2014)
      Nearly half of what Pennsylvania's workers' compensation program pays for prescription drugs goes to physicians who dispense them directly to patients, bypassing pharmacies, a lucrative practice that is limited by many states and not reimbursed at all by private insurance, Medicare or Medicaid, according to a new report.
    • Chicago, other big cities take aim at prescription painkillers - Matthew Perrone, Chicago Sun-Times (09/16/2014)
      Chicago's lawsuit, filed in July, alleges that five pharmaceutical companies deceptively marketed their drugs to treat long-term, non-cancer pain, even though that use was "unsupported by science…” Chicago is also seeking damages for a range of other expenses…"
    • Alabama high court upholds generic drug decision - USA Today, AP (08/15/2014)
      Brand-name drug makers can be held liable for warnings on a generic medication even if it was produced by another company, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled Friday, standing by an earlier decision that business leaders viewed as a defeat.
    • Gilead Faces New Pressure From U.S. Senators & Europe Over Hep C Pricing - Ed Silverman, Wall Street Journal (07/11/2014)
      [Gilead Science’s Sovaldi] can cure about 90 percent of the patients who have the common form of hepatitis C, but costs about $1,000 a day for a 12-week course, or $84,000 for one patient…  Gilead argues Sovaldi is cheaper than alternative remedies, such as liver transplants.
    • Phage therapy gets revitalized - Sara Reardon, Nature (06/03/2014)
      [F]aced with the looming spectre of antibiotic resistance, Western researchers and governments are giving phages a serious look. In March, the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases listed phage therapy as one of seven prongs in its plan to combat antibiotic resistance.
    • Woman who suffered stroke awarded $14 million in birth control case - Juan Perez Jr., Chicago Tribune (04/18/2014)
      A Cook County jury awarded $14 million to an Elmwood Park woman who suffered a severe stroke after using a controversial birth control medication, according to the Clifford Law Office, which represented the woman.
    • Japan drugmaker Takeda to fight $6 bn damages awarded by US jury - DANIEL LEVINE AND EDMUND KLAMANN, Reuters (04/08/2014)
      Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd said it would contest $6 billion in punitive damages imposed by a jury in the United States in a case that accused Japan's largest drugmaker of concealing cancer risks associated with its Actos diabetes drug.
    • "Brand" New Law: Illinois Court Holds Brand Manufacturers Owe Duty Of Care To Generic Users - James W. Huston, Erin M. Bosman and Julie Y. Park, Morrison & Foerster LLP (03/15/2014)
      Last week, a federal district court in Illinois held that GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a branded drug manufacturer, owed a duty of care to a patient who took the generic version of its drug.
    • Is The Feeling Really "Mutual"? - Hart Knight and Richelle W. Kidder Butler Snow LLP, butlersnow.com (02/10/2014)
      The United States Supreme Court's now well-known trio of cases on implied preemption — Wyeth v. Levine, PLIVA v. Mensing, and Mutual Pharmaceuticals v. Bartlett — has generated sweeping change in pharmaceutical litigation.
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules on Whether Drug Company Has Expanded Duties - Kathleen D. Wilkinson, Henry F. Canelo, Wilson Elser LLP (02/10/2014)
      On January 21, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held in a 4–2 vote in Lance v. Wyeth, 2014 PA. 17 EAP 2011 (PA Supreme Court 2014), that a pharmaceutical company for the first time under Pennsylvania law may face negligence claims where the drug manufacturer introduced a drug into the marketplace with actual or constructive knowledge that the drug is too harmful to be used. 
    • Drug makers may face liability for design defects - Max Mitchell, The Legal Intelligencer (01/27/2014)
      Drug companies may face product liability claims in Pennsylvania for defectively designed drugs, the state Supreme Court has ruled.

    2013

    Additional Items

    By far and away the most well rounded and useful Cat-focused industry conference out there. Perfect for all levels within the industry. From the conference content, the presenters and the attendees, this conference is a can’t miss for those interested in expanding their knowledge and learning more about cat related insurance and reinsurance modeling topics Nick DiMuzio, Everest

    "Fantastic, enriching conference - brilliantly planned and run, illuminating talks and excellent opportunities for networking across multiple areas of catastrophic risk.” Gary Ackerman, University at Albany

    “From a treaty underwriter's point of view, RAA presented relevant topics related to today's macro events. Scientific presentations provided insight that I can incorporate in underwriting and share with my clients.” Eric B. Silberman, Munich Re

    "Great conference with some of the biggest names in the business presenting their work. What more could you ask for?” Ron Nash, Nash Consulting

    “A perfect introduction to the world of reinsurance. Relevant topics, great speakers and the opportunity to network with industry peers makes this a must go event.”
    Tom Barrett, Everest Re

    Demystifying Reinsurance was an excellent tool to clearly understand and break down the basics. Very good class and recommend it for beginners and even as a refresher course for the intermediate student.”
    Chenessia West, TransRe

    “Re Basics is the ideal opportunity whether an industry professional or student of insurance to understand the in and outs of reinsurance while being able to network with persons spread across the whole industry.”
    Darius Zuill, Bermuda Monetary Authority

    “This has been the best reinsurance seminar that I have been to! Whether a reinsurance seasoned vet or new to the field, this is an engaging seminar that addressed specific issues of the reinsurance market.”
    Michelle Thimm, Church Mutual Insurance 

    “Re Underwriting provided a comprehensive and interesting overview of underwriting in the current market with a major (and interesting) focus on trends. Very useful for underwriting and non-underwriting alike.”
    DeVika Bourne, PartnerRe

    “Very informative experience, and a great way to keep up to date on current underwriting events and trends.”
    Steven Whalen, Aspen Re

    “Time well spent in learning the updated underwriting business and networking!”
    Christine Chen,  Everest Re 

    “The panels and presentations were thought provoking and fascinating as numerous topics were covered affecting the industry. I’m leaving the conference with a greater insight of the future market.”
    Brittany de Frias, AXIS Capital 

     

    “RAA Re Finance was the first RAA seminar I attended, and I was thoroughly impressed with the speakers and content. I learned a great deal from the presentations and intend to bring some new ideas back to my company and share with the team!”
    Taylor Robinson, ICW Group

    “Fantastic slate of instructors who thoughtfully walked us through financial reporting and other aspects of reinsurance finance. They used terminology that non finance people (lawyers) could understand. Really great program.”
    Steven Bazil, The Bazil Group

    “If you are in Reinsurance Accounting/Finance, you need to take this course to help you with your job.”
    Frank Borawski, Markel  

    “The speakers were excellent! There is something to be said about a person, and in this case a group of people, who can take time away from their busy schedules and explain to everyone something they feel passionate about in a manner that's understandable. My only complaint is that I wish we had more time with them.”
    Jessica Mieles, Sompo International

    “The RAA ReContracts is the most comprehensive reinsurance contract wording training available in the U.S. market.”
    David Kragseth, Guy Carpenter   

    “The course was very helpful in addressing different viewpoints and important things to consider in contract design and review.”
    Andy Martin, AmericanAg 

    “The RAA contract course was very informative and interesting. It covered a wide range of Reinsurance Contracts Types. In my Reinsurance Career, I have had the opportunity to work on a limited type of contracts, so I learned a lot.”
    Vivian Castro, Arch Insurance Company 

    “The RAA Contracts course provides the opportunity to engage with relevant topics, taught by industry experts, in both seminar and small group environments. The course material and industry experts provide an understanding on a wide range of subjects.” 
    Kevin English, LMRe

    “Participation in Re Claims should be mandatory for all P&C reinsurance underwriters. It’s truly an eye-opener, providing an in-depth look from a claims manager’s perspective on what happens to the business that we underwrite. There are lots of do’s and don’ts to pay attention to. Re Claims answers all the hard questions."  Michael Delacruz, China Re P&C

    “I absolutely love this program. I learned so many new things. Reinsurance from the industry’s top executives, interactive activities, interesting panels, and innovating presentations makes for an intriguing few days. Well worth the time and money.” Chenessia West, TransRe

    “As a reinsurance attorney I find Re Claims highly valuable to stay abreast of emerging issues. Also, being walked through practical case studies is extremely helpful in creating a thorough understanding of how contracts work.” Steven Bazil, The Bazil Group

    Become a Re Scholar!

    The Re Ed Institute's Re Scholar Program seeks to recognize those who achieve a high standard of reinsurance education by completing the Re Scholar curriculum. Learn More.


    Become a Re Ed Sponsor

    The RAA’s Reinsurance Education Institute programs attract professionals from the world’s leading insurance/reinsurance companies, brokers, law firms and consulting firms. Interested in sponsoring? Contact Carolyn Fahey.