U.S. Supreme Court Rejects J&J Appeal Over Risperdal Drug

1
728

From Reuters: “The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a bid by Johnson & Johnson to overturn a $70 million jury verdict against the pharmaceutical company for its failure to warn about risks associated with off-label uses of its antipsychotic drug Risperdal.

The court turned away the company’s appeal of a November 2019 ruling by the Superior Court of Pennsylvania that upheld the verdict in favor of a Tennessee man named Adam Yount, who was prescribed the drug at age 4 in 2003.

A jury in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas in 2016 found that the company failed to warn Yount’s healthcare providers about the risk of gynecomastia, an enlargement or swelling of breast tissue in males caused by a hormonal imbalance, and that it intentionally falsified, destroyed or concealed evidence in the case.

. . . Yount developed gynecomastia at age 5 as a result of taking Risperdal, according to his lawyers. J&J has said that Yount’s doctor discontinued the treatment but that the patient’s mother requested that it be resumed. The drug at the time had not been approved for pediatric use so the label did not include a specific warning about gynecomastia in children.

. . . The FDA approved Risperdal in 1993 to treat schizophrenia and bipolar mania in adults, but it was only in 2006 that its use was approved for irritability associated with autism in children.”

Article →

Support MIA

MIA relies on the support of its readers to exist. Please consider a donation to help us provide news, essays, podcasts and continuing education courses that explore alternatives to the current paradigm of psychiatric care. Your tax-deductible donation will help build a community devoted to creating such change.

$
Select Payment Method
Personal Info

Credit Card Info
This is a secure SSL encrypted payment.

Billing Details

Donation Total: $20 One Time

1 COMMENT

  1. This is good news. And, as one who had a “first psychotic break,” on a child’s dose of Risperdal. So I left that “Foul up” confessing psychiatrist. But then I was forced to go to another psychiatrist, by what turned out to be a child abuse covering up psychologist.

    I was initially taken off the Risperdal for two weeks, and put on Seroquel and lithium. Then my husband and I were lied to, and that damn Risperdal was added to that mix. Which resulted in a ton of anticholinergic toxidrome poisonings.

    And I’ve since read some of Paula Caplan’s research into J&J’s and Allen Francis’ crimes, regarding the marketing of Risperdal.

    https://www.madinamerica.com/2015/10/diagnosisgate-a-major-media-blackout-mystery/

    So IMHO – and as one who may have (my mom said she’d check tomorrow, to see if my recollection is correct) used to live in a house, that was purchased from some Janssons – I do most definitely believe that J&J does deserve to pay for their crimes.

    I’m not certain what is confusing to the US government officials, about it makes no logical sense to have “too big to fail” banks, nor a scientific fraud based medical / pharmaceutical industrial complex. Since it’s been well known for a long time that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

LEAVE A REPLY