Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDN who wrote (697408)	8/19/2005 7:29:54 PM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

That award won't stand.

To: JDN who wrote (697408)	8/19/2005 7:33:47 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The damages will be reduced per Texas state law, and I certainly hope they are. But I think the point the jury tried to send was that if you were a drug company, and you knowingly hid information which may adversely affect sales because of known side effects of a drug, then you will pay a steep price. And that is the way it SHOULD BE. Merck knowingly deceived people for profit, and people died as a result. There is no absolutely excuse for this.....but I do agree that this verdict was also excessive. But I hope the pharmas get the hint that this sort of behavior is simply not acceptable. The House Committee on Government Reform uncovered Vioxx documents instructing Merck's sales force to lie to doctors about the cardiovascular risk posed by Vioxx. ahrp.org

To: JDN who wrote (697408)	8/19/2005 7:51:45 PM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

JDN, such a verdict could never happen in the true blue state of Washington. Our state does not allow punitive damages. Time for Texas to wake up and do the same.

To: JDN who wrote (697408)	8/19/2005 8:00:50 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 769667

Don't let the headline fool you, the jury awarded in excess of the stated allowed maximum by a factor of over 10.

To: JDN who wrote (697408)	8/20/2005 5:43:22 AM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

It is nuts for a jury to award that kind of money. BTW, it was quite alright for you to have changed the conversation. I picked up an ignore from that post anyway. * * *