conducir a la muerte<\/strong>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\nSin embargo, adem\u00e1s de solo sangrar, Plavix tambi\u00e9n se ha asociado con:<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado cerebral<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado gastrointestinal<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado interno<\/p>\n
\u25cf Da\u00f1o a la m\u00e9dula \u00f3sea<\/p>\n
\u25cf \u00dalceras recurrentes<\/p>\n
\u25cf Ataques al coraz\u00f3n<\/p>\n
\u25cf trazos<\/p>\n
\u25cf P\u00farpura trombocitop\u00e9nica tromb\u00f3tica (PTT)<\/p>\n
\u25cf muerte<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
CUANDO UN MEDICAMENTO DEFECTUOSO CAUSA DA\u00d1O AL PACIENTE<\/h2>\n
Los medicamentos que se toman para mejorar la salud y la calidad de vida de un paciente deber\u00edan hacer precisamente eso; cuando un medicamento es defectuoso, poniendo al paciente en un riesgo indebido de da\u00f1o y complicaciones de salud graves, alguien debe ser responsable. Debido a que Plavix fue dise\u00f1ado de manera defectuosa y puede conllevar mayores riesgos que beneficios para un paciente, se puede responsabilizar a Bristol-Myers Squibb por da\u00f1os y perjuicios.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"hombre](\"https:\/\/www.napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/lawsuit-image-1024x680-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
SOBRE EL CASO PLAVIX<\/h2>\n
The safety of Plavix has been questioned for a while now. In fact, The New England Journal of Medicine published a study in 2005 that confirmed that users of Plavix have a higher rate of developing ulcers, internal bleeding, hemorrhages, strokes, and other serious conditions than patients who took other forms of medication.<\/p>\n
The following year, another study startled the community as the journal proved once again that Plavix combined with aspirin offered no additional benefits to taking aspirin alone. These findings encouraged FDA\u2019s warning in 2009 and 2010, stating that Plavix may have a reduced effectiveness for certain patients.<\/p>\n
All of these claims began to unravel when Hawaii officials filed a suit against Bristol-Myers and their Sanofi partners in 2014. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claimed both companies failed to disclose the lack of Plavix\u2019s effectiveness on 30% of the population, as well as the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding.<\/p>\n
This course of action inspired the chain of lawsuits, once the New Jersey federal judge reinstated a Plavix whistleblower lawsuit after U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is a basis for liability in such cases.<\/p>\n
Efectos secundarios de la demanda de Plavix<\/h2>\n
Plavix se ha relacionado con efectos secundarios da\u00f1inos como dolor abdominal, dolor de pecho, neumon\u00eda, latidos card\u00edacos irregulares, dolores de cabeza e inflamaciones. Sin embargo, los efectos m\u00e1s siniestros de Plavix incluyen:<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado cerebral<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado gastrointestinal<\/p>\n
\u25cf Sangrado interno<\/p>\n
\u25cf Da\u00f1o a la m\u00e9dula \u00f3sea<\/p>\n
\u25cf \u00dalceras recurrentes<\/p>\n
\u25cf Ataques al coraz\u00f3n<\/p>\n
\u25cf trazos<\/p>\n
\u25cf P\u00farpura trombocitop\u00e9nica tromb\u00f3tica (PTT)<\/p>\n
\u25cf muerte<\/p>\n
Actualizaci\u00f3n de la demanda de Plavix<\/h2>\n
This June, the Supreme Court of California made a final ruling and stated that California Supreme Court doesn\u2019t have the jurisdiction to oversee a case involving out-of-state plaintiffs. In other words, 575 of Plavix victims are left wondering what this means for their cases.<\/p>\n
But the only hope to finally put a stop to Plavix is by joining forces as the Supreme Court opinion closes by offering specific options in which legislation could proceed in spite of the court\u2019s decision:<\/p>\n
\u201cOur decision does not prevent the California and other out-of-state plaintiffs from joining together in a consolidated action in the States that have general jurisdiction over BMS. \u2026. Alternatively, the plaintiffs who are residents of a particular State\u2014for example, the 92 plaintiffs from Texas and the 71 from Ohio\u2014could probably sue together in their home States. In addition, since our decision concerns the due process limits on the exercise of specific jurisdiction by a State, we leave open the question whether the Fifth Amendment imposes the same restrictions on the exercise of personal jurisdiction by a federal court.\u201d<\/p>\n
YA NO ACEPTAMOS CASOS DE PLAVIX<\/h2>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
WE ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTING PLAVIX CASES PLAVIX LAWSUIT attorneys Plavix\u00ae is taken to reduce the risk of heart attack or stroke. The anticoagulant medication, active ingredient clopidogrel, is recommended…<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":5644,"menu_order":184,"template":"","practiceareas_category":[743],"class_list":["post-5640","practiceareas","type-practiceareas","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","practiceareas_category-pharmaceutical-litigation"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practiceareas\/5640","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practiceareas"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/practiceareas"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practiceareas\/5640\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5644"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5640"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"practiceareas_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practiceareas_category?post=5640"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Plavix](\"https:\/\/www.napolilaw.lemonadestand.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/doctor-with-prescription-1024x256-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n