The Fda's Credibility In Merck

Introduction In the year of 2004, 2.5 billion dollars of annual sales hit the blockbuster market on a pharmaceutical drug named Vioxx (Rofecoxib), which thousands of physicians prescribed to their patients worldwide (Medscape Medical News, 2004; Topol, 2004). The drug has shown an increase in heart attacks and strokes with suspiciousness to why leaders did not act earlier to withdraw the pharmaceutical drug from the market timely (Topol, 2004). The leaders involved were faced with more than a 4.85 billion dollars settlement lawsuit for the lives impacted by the prescription drug (Smith, 2007). The maker of the drug and the approvers of the drug are held responsible; knowingly the fraud-drug should not have been on the market (Smith, 2007). …show more content…
The FDA commissioners empirical supporters delegated their commissioners to dominate affirming the drug on the market without considering the relevant data (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991; Smith, 2007; Topol, 2004). The FDA commissioners only limited themselves to putting trust and hope in Merck by giving Merck full credibility with the two placebo-controlled cases initially presented (Bresalier et al., 2005). In which the two data showed no potential cardiovascular side effects (Bresalier et al., 2005). The FDA commissioners acted on their own will to disregard the little significant in the subject results while they overlooking the warning signals provided in the other data forthcoming (Bresalier et al., 2005; Merck, 2004; Smith, 2007). Whereas, their initial thoughts to warrant were withdrawn to unwarranted, not acknowledging the danger associated with Vioxx and their action to act on approving the drug (Bresalier et al., 2005; Risk Sciences International, 2012; United States Food and Drug Administration,