Phoenix Personal Injury Lawyer

Distracted driving-How close are you to becoming a criminal?

Michael Monheit — Mon, 14 May 2012 08:06:08 GMT

The riskiest activity most of us engage in is driving our cars. There is a chance we could be seriously injured or killed in a car accident. But there is another risk, the risk that we, law-abiding citizens-could become criminals and go to jail. That was one of the points discussed at a recent distracted driving presentation sponsored by the Boulder Valley School District’s Lifelong learning program and held at Fairview High School. Joel Feldman, founder of EndDD.org and father of Casey Feldman, who was 21 when she was killed by a distracted driver, was the presenter at the talk titled “End Distracted Driving-Keeping Your Kids Safe.”

About 75 people attended and most adults brought children with them ranging in ages from 12-16 years old. Only a few of the teens had started driving. Joel told his personal story and played powerful videos that are contained in the EndDD.org presentation. He talked about the devastation that distracted driving causes for the family members of those killed by distracted driving, but also talked about how distracted driving affects those who kill through their driving. Joel asked the audience “How many of you are criminals? And no one responded. When Joel talked about all the law abiding decent people, who are now criminals because of their distracted driving, the audience paid attention. Their questions and comments indicated that they realized that a moment’s distraction while driving could land them in jail.

Boulder Colorado’s Lifelong Learning selects programs that are of unique interest to the community and demonstrates a commitment to educating teens and adults on a variety of subjects . To learn more about the programs offered go to http://bouldervalley.augusoft.net/index.cfm?fuseaction=1010

To arrange for a distracted driving presentation in your school or community organization go to EndDD.org.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Michael Monheit

Will Seau’s Death Impact Concussion Lawsuits?

Jackie Fedeli — Fri, 11 May 2012 11:55:28 GMT

The NY Times announced on May 4^th that the family of Junior Seau, the prominent football player that committed suicide last week, has asked that his brain be donated to the study of football injuries and their impact on the brain.

Seau's death devastated fans and players alike. Seau was well-liked and those around him said he showed no signs of depression.

What's even more devastating is that two weeks prior, Ray Easterling, another retired football player, took his own as well.

Easterling asked that his brain be donated to the study on football injuries and brain trauma. Ray Easterling was the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against the NFL, along with Riddle, who manufactures the NFL’s helmets, alleging that the NFL and Riddle concealed the severity of the last effects of concussions and repeated head injuries.

Shawn Mitchell, the Charger’s Chaplain, told The NY Times that Junior and his family very philanthropic people and want to do this to help future athletes.

Many of the brains that have been studied revealed CTE as the cause of death of the ex-players. CTE, or Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, is a progressive degenerative disease of the brain due to head trauma. Dave Duerson, a former Chicago Bears player who committed suicide last year, left his brain to science and CTE was ruled as his cause of death.

CTE was difficult to diagnose, because the degenerative symptoms mirror those of ALS, Lou Gherig’s disease. In fact, many players who died of ALS and left their brain to science were later discovered to have died from CTE.

Will it be determined that Easterling and Seau suffered from CTE? Is it just a coincidence that these three famed and prominent ex-football players took their own lives? Is there a link between CTE and suicide? If so, Can we prevent this from happening to other football players?

Only time and research will tell. And Seau’s family’s selfless decision will in fact help other future and current players.

Attorney Larry Coben, who is representing Ray Easterling’s wife told The NY Times that he believes these recent tragedies will prompt other players who may be exhibiting signs of head trauma, including dementia to get involved in the Class Action.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

Sales Of Jack3d And Other DMAA Products Halted by FDA

Jackie Fedeli — Thu, 03 May 2012 11:33:23 GMT

On April 30^th, the FDA ordered that sales of body building supplements containing DMAA be halted due to potentially fatal side effects.

After much controversy, the FDA concluded that DMMA, or 1,3-dimethylamylamine, methylhexanamine, or geranium extract is in fact a synthetic substance, not a naturally occurring product of the geranium plants, as the manufacturers claimed.

Over 40 complaint have been made by DMAA users, including individuals who have taken the Popular Jack3d, alleging the drug has caused heart attacks, side effects to the nervous system, and psychological side effects.

Back in December, the use of drugs containing DMAA were banned by members of the military, but was still available to the general public.

The FDA warned that companies that fail to comply with the order to halt sales could face Strong FDA enforcement such as court junctions to stop distribution, or seizure of the products.

DMAA manufacturers have until May 9^th to comply.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

How To Find Out If Transvaginal Mesh Is Recalled

Jackie Fedeli — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:58:00 GMT

On July 13, 2011, The FDA issued a warning about serious complications associated with transvaginal mesh used to treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence. The warning was not a recall and did not necessarily order surgeons to stop using this device. Rather, the FDA communication asked doctors, patience, and healthcare providers to review all other options before deciding to undergo surgery to implant this device. The reasoning is that Transvaginal mesh, also commonly known as pelvic mesh causes more complications and is riskier than other treatments for the specified conditions.

In September, The FDA met with an advisory committee who advised that Pelvic Mesh should be reclassified from a Class II to device to a high risk Class III device. However, the Panel decided not to reclassify Pelvic mesh at this time as the FDA believes that the cases listed in their adverse event reports were not serious enough.

Almost four months later, the FDA issued a mandate requiring all manufacturers of transvaginal mesh to initiate investigations into implant related injuries.

These manufacturers must provide up to three years of data on the safety and effectiveness of pelvic mesh implant procedures.

Over the past few years, Pelvic mesh has been used in the majority of surgeries performed to treat pelvic organ prolapsed and stress urinary incontinence. It is still available today. The results of the FDA Mandated study may be the key needed to prompt the reclassification or even a transvaginal mesh recall. Since the manufactures are conducting their own individual studies and reporting their findings, this could even result in the recall of a specific brand of recalled mesh rather than a complete recall of all pelvic mesh.

Pelvic mesh removal is complicated. If there is a recall, this may force many already anguished patients to undergo another surgery whether or not they experiencing complications.

To keep up on the latest developments regarding pelvic mesh and to find out if the transvaginal mesh is recalled, please visit the FDA’s website at www.fda.gov and review their list of recalls and alerts.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

What Is The FDA Doing About Metal On Metal Problems?

Jackie Fedeli — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:06:00 GMT

Since the recent Order for Post market Surveillance, requiring all Metal on Metal Manufacturers to monitor the effectiveness of their hip replacement and resurfacing systems, the FDA has begun their own review on metal on metal hip implant system data.

The FDA is working with a number of partners, domestically and internationally, to understand why certain hip implant systems are failing, and if there are any related signs and symptoms. In addition to working with the manufacturers to review device retrieval analyses, the FDA is reviewing published Medical Device Reports including Adverse Event Reports, and post approval studies for the following data.

Comparison of Risk-Benefit Analysis
Utilization Trends
Patient Selection Criteria
Pre-operative counseling for the patient
Follow up counseling and care
Revision Rates

The Chief complaint for some of the major metal on metal hip implant manufacturers, including DePuy, Biomet & Wright have been a high early failure rate resulting in high revision rates.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

National Safety Council Calls Drivers To Take The Pledge

Jackie Fedeli — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:15:22 GMT

In Honor of Distracted Driving Awareness Month, the National Safety Council is asking everyone to Pledge to Drive Cell Free.

After taking the Pledge yourself, you can spread the word and encourage others to do so by downloading Posters to get theri attention and Fact Sheets to show evidence of what an important cause this is. You can also go viral and share videos, such as this new Public Service Announcement “One Call Can Change Everything”.

The National Safety Council offers plenty of resources for those looking to increase Awareness of Distracted Driving. From Statistics, to the latest news on distracted driving. The NCS is also hosting a free Webinar on April 25^th about Corporate Liability and the need for employers to enact cell phone polices for their employees. Corporate cell phone policies are strongly advocated for the Network of Employers for Traffic Safety, who each fall encourages Employers to participate in Drive Safely Work Week. During this week Employees are asked to pledge not to answer their cell phone, make calls, or send and views texts while driving. Employers are in turn asked to refrain from contacting their employees when they know he or she might be driving, and to allow a longer response time.

NCS Also offers online training courses for various safety topics such as defensive driving and first aid training, and is dedicated to raising safety awareness in all situations, not just on the road. The National Safety Council offers great resources for handling injuries that may occur in the workplace, at home, or during recreational activities. For more information, please visit: http://www.ncs.org

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

Are Boys Better Drivers Than Girls?

Jackie Fedeli — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:47:09 GMT

A recent conducted by AAA, Distracted Driving Among Newly Licensed Teen Drivers, reveals that teenage girls are twice as likely to use a cell phone or electronic device than boys.

This was the first study conducted using in-car video footage to specifically focus on teen distracted driving habits.

Girls were also observed reaching for an object in the vehicle while driving more than twice than the boys. Young female drivers are 25% more likely to eat or drink beverages while behind the wheel. Boys however, were more than twice as likely to turn around in their seats while driving, completely taking their field of vision away from the road.

Looking at a cell phone is a bigger distraction than reaching for another object inside the car. Young drivers that took their eyes off the road to look at a cell phone did so for a full second longer than those that were faced with another type of distraction.

The AAA study also revealed that passengers can positively and negatively affect a teens driving habits. Distractions decreased and the teen drivers were more focused when parents or other adults were in the car. On the other hand, when more than one teen passenger was in the car, the distractions increased through loud conversations and horseplay in more than 50% of these situations. Drivers were six times as likely to have a serious incident when there was loud conversation in the vehicle, and were more than twice as likely to have a high g-force event when there was horseplay.

Click here for more information on AAA.

For additional resources on educating young drivers of distracted driving, please visit; www.endDD.org, www.60forsafety.org, or http://www.anapolschwartz.com/attorneys/joel_feldman.shtml

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli

How Long Does Fosamax Remain In The Body?

Amber Racine — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:45:38 GMT

Fosamax is a drug from a category of drugs called bisphosphonates. Bisphosphonates are used to treat and prevent osteoporosis and bone loss, something that many women, and even some men experience as they get older. This is a condition that can come with age, and is not curable. But, it is manageable through bisphosphonates such as Fosamax and a few lifestyle changes such as diet, exercise, and calcium and vitamin supplements.

Once you’re prescribed Fosamax, you’re on it for the long run. Generally, Doctors will prescribe this drug to prevent osteoporis and build bone density for a period of 5 years or 10 years, sometimes more, depending on the patients individual needs.

What if after a few short years, you decide Fosamax is not for you. In the unlikely event you develop stomach or esophagus problems, which can happen, you may want to consider alternative treatment. You may also be exploring other options after learning about recent studies linking Fosamax with Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (ONJ) or spontaneous femur fractures. Perhaps you yourself have suffered one of these unfortunate effects of Fosamax. Deciding to discontinue use, you may be wondering how long Fosamax remains in your Body?

Some drugs, like Accutane, which are used to treat a specific, short term problem stays in your system for months after discontinued use. But, Fosamax which is used to treat a long term problem, stays in your system indefinitely.

What’s surprising about Fosamax is, only about 0.6% at most, of a Fosamax dosage is actually used by your body and the rest is excreted through the kidneys. This is why Fosamax is not recommended for people with a history of Kidney Problems. The 0.6% that is used by your body gets incorporated into your bone matrix and stays indefinitely. Your bone cells grow around the medication, and once covered by your bone, it is no longer active. The incorporated drug has a half life of more than 10 years. A benefit to this is that after taking Fosamax for five years, the benefits of the drug, can last for an additional five years.

Some Studies are advising that using Fosamax for longer than 5 years, may actually be counterproductive, and may increase the risk of Fractures.

As with any medication, If you are concerned about the long term risks of Fosamax, or are thinking about getting off of Fosamax, please talk to your doctor about the benefits, risks, and alternative treatments.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Racine

QNEXA: Weight Loss at What Cost

Amber Racine — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:16:00 GMT

Many of us are trying to find a way to shed a few pounds. Americans have been gaining weight steadily for the last two decades. The Center for Disease Control estimates that 34% percent of adults and 17% of children in America are obese.

That trend may be changing. In February, an FDA advisory panel voted in favor of the approval of an anti-obesity pill known as Qnexa. Good news? Only if you disregard the fact that the drug was previously denied due to safety concerns. In October 2010, when Qnexa was first submitted by the manufacturer, Vivus Inc., the FDA rejected the diet pill due to concerns over side effects such as raised heart rate, psychiatric problems and birth defects. Vivus resubmitted the drug this year with new data in an effort to prove that the drug’s benefits outweigh the risks.

It appears that the advisory panel was impressed with the weight loss results. The clinical trials showed that most Qnexa patients lost nearly 10% of their overall weight after a one year trial of the drug. The panel was so impressed that it seemingly glossed over many of the side effects that the FDA was concerned with in 2010. While stressing the fact that the manufacturer should be required to conduct a large, follow-up study of the pill's effects on the heart, they did barely address the fact that one of the drug’s main components, topiramate, is known to cause birth defects. Instead of requiring additional studies before the drug is approved for sale, it recommended giving Vivus approval to conduct its study after FDA approval. “The potential benefits of this medication seem to trump the side effects, but in truth, only time will tell,” said Dr. Kenneth Burman of the Washington Hospital Center.

The FDA is not required to follow the advice of its panels, though it often does. A final decision on the drug is expected to be made in April. With side effects that could potentially cause death, it seems unfathomable that the FDA is considering an about-face on Qnexa. In my opinion, you can’t solve the problem of obesity by approving a medication with huge potential for other health problems. The loss of extra pounds in exchange for an increased risk of heart attacks, birth defects and psychiatric problems? That’s a tradeoff that I hope we aren’t willing to make.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Amber Racine

Are Metal On Metal Hip Joints Dangerous?

Jackie Fedeli — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:01:40 GMT

On July 24, 2008, Zimmer Holdings issued a recall of their Total Hip Replacement system with Zimmer Durom Cup Hip Socket Implant. This was just the beginning of a rash of prosthetic metal on metal hip devices that would be subject to recalls and warnings over the next three years. The most notable came in August 2010 when DePuy Orthopaedics issued a voluntary recall of its ASR™ XL Acetabular Hip System and DePuy ASR™ Hip Resurfacing System.

Zimmer Durom recipients have suffered high early failure rate which has required many to undergo revision surgeries.

Recipients of Depuy’s Total Hip Replacement systems ASR and Pinnacle, have also complained of high early failure rate, in addition to loosening of the device and metal poisoning. Revision surgery is also required for many DePuy recipients.

Patients who received metal on metal hip implant systems from Biomet and Wright have had advised of similar experiences.

In May 2011, almost a year after the DePuy Recall, the FDA issued an order for post-market surveillance to all manufacturers of Metal On Metal Hip Implant systems. In short, the FDA is requiring these manufacturers to monitor the successes and failures of the products and report findings to the FDA. The agency is seeking information on metal ion concentrations and their effects on long-term outcomes.

These metal on metal hip implant manufacturers were given thirty days from receipt of the FDA’s letter to provide their own three-year research plan, which must be submitted to the FDA for approval.

The DePuy recall has left many consumers, doctors and lawyers who are filing suit on behalf of injured implant recipients, to wonder Are Metal on Metal Hip Implants Dangerous? The FDA is hoping that results of the Manufacturers three year study will help them determine if we’re looking at a few design flaws, or if the concept of metal on metal hip joints is unsafe.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Jackie Fedeli