The Vioxx Paradox

Merck, the manufacturer of Vioxx, will pay dearly for its deception, creating a lose-lose-lose situation for everyone but the attorneys.

Vioxx is the drug developed by Merck, released in 1999, that brought welcome pain relief to millions of patients worldwide. It had gone through its usual testing, was approved by the FDA, and was considered safe when it was released.

As is the usual process, even after release, drugs continue to be tested. Vioxx was, and it didn't take long to learn that in some patients, Vioxx was the likely cause of heart attacks and strokes. People were getting sick and dying from taking it.

Even though they had the proof this was true, court documents from later lawsuits revealed that Merck executives covered up the safety issues and continued profiting -- billions of dollars from the sales of Vioxx, at the cost of patient health and lives.

Here's the paradox. Many patients, those not at risk for heart problems or strokes, would take Vioxx again starting today, if it was available to them. Both my husband and daughter are among them. They both think Vioxx was the best drug ever invented, and since it was withdrawn from the market, neither has found the same level of relief. Both wish they could relieve their pain with it again.

So consider this: Merck's greed stands between life and death for some patients, and life and pain for others. Had Merck come clean immediately when they began to suspect problems, the quality of life for patients with pain could be dramatically different. The drug might have been removed from the market while further studies were done, then released again later for the patients who could have taken it safely.

Then those decision-makers at Merck would have been heroes, not villains. And this lose-lose-lose for patients, Merck and its stockholders, could be win-win-win for everyone but the lawyers.