Remove Doctors Remove Licensing Remove Regulations Remove Testimonials
article thumbnail

Unblock My Hormones And Start Burning Fat TODAY With HB5

The Pharma Data

Description: How A Handsome Doctor From Texas Saved My Life. I could hear doctors and nurses speaking in hushed tones…. I gave up carbs, fats, alcohol, meat – just as the doctor ordered…. My dear old doctor told me that hormone testing is expensive and unnecessary…. My doctor said it was all simple math….

article thumbnail

The BFDs – The Ten Best Prescription Drug/Medical Device Decisions of 2023

Drug & Device Law

2023) (remote trial testimony cannot be compelled beyond Rule 45’s 100-mile limit on subpoenas) ( here ); Carson v. They excluded bogus expert testimony under Fed. Further, “adequacy” is an objective standard, that neither a plaintiff’s self-interested testimony nor equivocal health care provider testimony can touch.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

S.D. Texas Trims Back Mesh Plaintiff Regulatory Expert Opinions

Drug & Device Law

The issue in Robinson was the admissibility of testimony by the plaintiff’s regulatory expert. When we consider the damage a regulatory expert can do, misinterpreting both company documents and FDA regulations to make the company look like Murder, Inc., So much for judicial gate-keeping, Inadequate Warnings to Doctors.

article thumbnail

Wisconsin Court of Appeals Reverses Injunction Forcing Ivermectin Use

Drug & Device Law

We’ve been writing for a while about cases rejecting someone’s insistence that a doctor prescribe ivermectin for Covid-19, even when that doctor (or hospital) thinks such use of ivermectin is not appropriate medical care – is, in fact, horsebleep. ?. You will, of course, say this very respectfully.).

Doctors 124
article thumbnail

The Medical Device Labeling Exception for “Commonly Known” Hazards

Drug & Device Law

The FDA’s regulations for medical device labeling generally require that such labeling include “any relevant hazards, contraindications, side effects, and precautions.” That testimony was contrary, not only to the common-law cases discussed in our prior posts , but also flatly contradicted §801.109(c). 801.109(c). Bard, Inc. ,