Merck opened its defence on Thursday in the second product liability trial over its arthritis medicine, countering claims that it did not study whether Vioxx might cause more heart ailments than other pain relievers.
Merck researcher Dr Briggs Morrison told jurors the company conducted several key studies of Vioxx before putting it on the market in May 1999, each concluding that Vioxx posed no threats to heart health.
Morrison’s testimony came as the trial, over whether Vioxx caused an Idaho postal worker’s 2001 heart attack, entered its fourth week. Frederick ”Mike” Humeston (60) described himself as healthy and occasionally taking Vioxx for knee pain when he suffered a heart attack at his Boise home four year ago.
New Jersey-based Merck counters that work-related stress or health risks unrelated to Vioxx prompted the attack.
Merck voluntarily pulled Vioxx — popular for being gentler on the stomach than many other painkillers — from the market one year ago after internal studies indicated prolonged use could double the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
A defence attorney’s questioning of Morrison revisited the tearful September16 testimony of heart specialist Dr Benedict Lucchesi, a witness for Humeston who claimed Merck ”put profits before life”.
Morrison said Lucchesi’s assertions were ”absolutely not” true.
”I believed Vioxx was completely neutral, but people would misinterpret it and a great drug like Vioxx would not make it to market,” Morrison testified.
Merck faces more than 5 000 Vioxx-related lawsuits filed in state and federal courts in the United States. In August, a Texas jury found Merck liable in the death of another Vioxx user.
Others lawsuits have been filed in Canada, Europe, Brazil, Australia and Israel. – Sapa-AP