Remove 2009 Remove Doctors Remove Marketing Remove Pharmaceuticals
article thumbnail

Marquis Who’s Who Honors James D. McChesney, PhD, with Inclusion in Who’s Who in the World

The Pharma Data

He continued his education at Indiana University, where he completed a Master of Arts in botany in 1964, and a Doctor of Philosophy in organic chemistry in 1965. He accepted a faculty position at the University of Mississippi in 1978, rising to become the director of the school’s Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences in 1986.

article thumbnail

Time for FDA’s OPDP to Fill the Gaps on Digital and Social Media

Eye on FDA

In the now distant past, enforcement from this office, then called the Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications (DDMAC) and later re-named OPDP, was robust, with the office issuing scores of letters a year (156 were issued in 1998). This item disappeared from the agenda, however, and no draft guidance was issued.

FDA 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Another RICOdiculous Decision

Drug & Device Law

We’ve discussed recently how a federal statute intended to allow suits against international terrorists has been misapplied as allowing suits against pharmaceutical companies. Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co. , Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. , at *6 (plaintiff “has documents and formularies reaching back to only 2009”).

article thumbnail

A Primer on Alternative Design

Drug & Device Law

procedures that did not use spinal fixation devices” was “irrelevant in a suit against the product manufacturer because “it questioned the medical judgment of doctors”). Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , Danek Medical, Inc. , 3d 154, 162 (4th Cir. Texas adopted the Third Restatement, and in Brockert v.

FDA 59
article thumbnail

Confident Learned Intermediaries Defeat Warning Causation

Drug & Device Law

Further, “both doctors testified that they still prescribe [the drug] for patients with conditions similar to plaintiff’s condition.” 2009), reversed a plaintiff’s verdict for entry of judgment n.o.v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , Wyeth Pharmaceuticals , 526 F.3d Schering Corp. , 2d 1140, 1148 (N.J.

article thumbnail

Unimpressed Learned Intermediaries Defeat Warning Causation

Drug & Device Law

The law presumes that licensed doctors know what they are doing. 1978), where a hypertensive patient was injured after being injected with the defendant’s drug – despite warnings that “expressly directed the doctor administering the drug to refrain from giving it to a patient with hypertension.” Wyeth Pharmaceuticals , 526 F.3d

article thumbnail

Removal, Severance & Rule 21

Drug & Device Law

May 28, 2015)); here (discussing In re Yasmin & Yaz (Drospirenone) Marketing, Sales Practices & Products Liability Litigation , 2011 WL 2746086 (S.D. 2009 WL 1809990 (S.D. 2009)); here (discussing DeGidio v. 2009 WL 1867676 (N.D. Ohio June 29, 2009)); and here (discussing Joseph v. Ohio 2009)).