31,581 femur fractures blamed on Fosamax and Alendronate use!

These drugs are enthusiastically promoted on New Zealand television by celebrities such as Judith Dobson to prevent fractures.  The evidence is growing that they INCREASE fractures (Please bear in mind that as few as 1% of cases are ever officially reported).

Total reported major side effects for these two "bone sparing" drugs exceeds a whopping 200,000! :

Most common side effects for patients taking FOSAMAX:
FEMUR FRACTURE (26988 patients) 
FALL (21241 patients) 
OSTEONECROSIS (15354 patients) 
OSTEOARTHRITIS (14625 patients) 
ANXIETY (14421 patients) 
DEPRESSION (14302 patients) 
HYPERTENSION (12928 patients) 
LOW TURNOVER OSTEOPATHY (12755 patients) 
ARTHRALGIA (11612 patients) 
TOOTH DISORDER (11082 patients) 

Most common side effects for patients taking ALENDRONATE SODIUM:
FEMUR FRACTURE (4593 patients) 
FALL (2879 patients) 
LOW TURNOVER OSTEOPATHY (2222 patients) 
OSTEOARTHRITIS (1728 patients) 
ARTHRALGIA (1680 patients) 
HYPERTENSION (1357 patients) 
PAIN IN EXTREMITY (1351 patients) 
STRESS FRACTURE (1293 patients) 
ANXIETY (1255 patients) 
BACK PAIN (1082 patients) 

Source: http://medsfacts.com/index.php

Is your doctor in the "health" business or the "drug-pushing" one?

Make sure that you choose a doctor who understands the business of health (unfortunately these are rare creatures).

About this website 

The advice in these articles is given freely without promise or obligation. Its all about giving you and your family the tools and information to take control of your health and fitness.

Candida and Fungal Infections? Gary Moller recommends you explore this programme: Click Here!

Lawsuits alleging harm by osteoporosis drugs are now being won!

I have been reporting for years about the horrible injuries that these anti-osteoporosis drugs (bisphosphonates) are causing - Bone death, disabling fractures, cancer, dementia and heart disease.  I was right all along:  These drugs cause enormous harm and are doping so on a scale that is scandalous to the extreme.  Just one brand alone, Fosamax, is now facing in excess of 4,000 lawsuits in the United States alone - mind-boggling!

Meanwhile, New Zealand is one of the few countries in the world that allows these drugs to be marketed directly to the consumer on prime time television using "personalities" like Judith Dobson, who's job is to lull the consumer into a state of dulled complacency.  Is anybody in New Zealand monitoring these drugs?  Or is it a case of the fox guarding the chicken coup?

Merck claims that it gave adequate warning of the risks associated with these drugs but still lost.  This claim of theirs is rubbish: If you can read the small print on that 30 second television ad as it flashes across the screen, then you are doing far better than me!  The family doctor is our reliable health professional who we trust is diligently working to protect our health; but this is no longer the case, since they are well and truly ensconced within the the drugs industry encampment nowadays and at their beck and call to promote their drugs.

You can no longer rely on your doctor to protect you from dangerous drugs such as bisphosphonates

Why do they keep selling these drugs despite losing hundreds of thousands per lost law suit?  Because they can make many millions more by still selling the poison to unsuspecting people, mostly elderly women who they know will never fight back.  In New Zealand it is harder to sue, by the way.

Here's the latest news.....

(Reuters) - A federal jury on Tuesday ordered Merck & Co Inc to pay $285,000 in a lawsuit over the risks of its osteoporosis drug Fosamax, the second loss for the company after several earlier trials. 

A federal jury on Tuesday ordered Merck & Co Inc to pay $285,000 in a lawsuit over the risks of its osteoporosis drug Fosamax, the second loss for the company after several earlier trials.
The eight-person jury in U.S. District Court in Manhattan found that Merck failed to warn plaintiff Rhoda Scheinberg's doctors of the risks associated with Fosamax. The jury rejected the plaintiff's argument that Fosamax was a defective product.
More than 4,000 lawsuits are pending in federal and state courts arising out of injuries allegedly caused by the one-time blockbuster medication. Seven cases have now gone to trial, and Merck has won five and lost two.
This latest trial was one of the so-called "bellwether" cases in the Fosamax litigation. Judges order bellwethers in mass litigation to assess trends and outcomes that could play out in similar lawsuits. A string of wins by plaintiffs could, for example, give them a stronger hand in settlement talks with defendants to end all of the cases.
Lawyers for Scheinberg, a 69-year-old New York resident, contended Fosamax caused her to suffer delayed healing and a bone disease of the jaw after a tooth extraction. The jury found that Merck's failure to warn of the drug's risks was a cause of her injury.
"With this victory, this litigation has a renewed purpose and a renewed focus," Tim O'Brien, a lawyer for Scheinberg who also represents other plaintiffs in Fosamax lawsuits, said in a statement.
Merck said in a statement that it disagreed with the verdict and noted that the jury returned a mixed verdict.
"Merck provided appropriate warnings, and the plaintiff was at increased risk for dental and jaw problems regardless of whether she was taking Fosamax," said Merck lawyer Chilton Varner of law firm King & Spalding.
The lawsuit, filed in 2008, was one of 975 pending before U.S. District Judge John Keenan in New York after a judicial panel consolidated Fosamax cases alleging jaw-related injuries.
Another 842 lawsuits alleging femur injuries are pending in the U.S. District Court in New Jersey. Other lawsuits are pending in state courts.
The only other Fosamax case that Merck has lost at trial resulted in a $8 million verdict by a federal jury in Manhattan in June 2010 for Shirley Boles, a Florida woman who alleged she developed osteonecrosis of the jaw after taking the drug.
In October 2010, Keenan reduced the verdict to $1.5 million. Merck is appealing the case.
Fosamax had annual sales of $3 billion until its U.S. patent lapsed in 2008 and generic versions flooded the market.
Merck shares were up 53 cents, or 1.3 percent, at $41.38 on the New York Stock Exchange in late afternoon trading.
The case is Scheinberg v. Merck & Co, Inc., U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 09-4119.
(Reporting By Nate Raymond in New York; Editing by Martha Graybow, Leslie Adler and Carol Bishopric)

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/05/us-merck-fosamax-idUSBRE91416H20130205

About this website 

The advice in these articles is given freely without promise or obligation. Its all about giving you and your family the tools and information to take control of your health and fitness.

Candida and Fungal Infections? Gary Moller recommends you explore this programme: Click Here!

Why do many women have osteopaenia or osteoporosis?

Modern eternal war is the perfect
business model.
The other "Eternal War" is the one
to enslave the bodies
of womanhood

One of the most frequent inquiries coming my way is from women mostly over 40 who have been told by their doctor that they have weak bones.

It is needless terrorism

Some arrive on my doorstep in tears after being told they have either osteopaenia or osteoporosis.  This is a very serious thing to drop on an otherwise healthy woman; especially when the only solutions offered condemn them to a life time of drugs, mega-doses of harmful synthetic vitamins and minerals (vitamin D and calcium) and constant worry that they may trip and break a bone.

In many cases this is irresponsible, alarmist rubbish!

If there is an osteoporosis epidemic, then where are the hospital wards full of women with broken bones?  There aren't.  Yes, there is osteoporosis and some women do unfortunately fall and break a hip; but there is not an epidemic of fractures.  If a woman has low bone density, as many may, this is actually a poor predictor of fracture risk (There are articles linked later in this article which explain this).  Being on heart medication is a better predictor of fracture risk than a Dexa Scan.  

Did you know that "bone sparing" medication actually increases fracture risk after two years use!  Did you know that there are now more than 2,000 law suits pending in the New Jersey courts alone for osteonecrosis and hip fracture, allegedly caused by the use of Fosamax?  (Fosamax is just one of many kinds of "bone-sparing" drug of the bisphoshonate class).

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=fosamax+law+suits&aq=f&oq=fosamax+law+suits&aqs=chrome.0.57j62.15154j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Hardly any woman over the age of 50 will not be declared anything less than being osteopaenic following a scan.  This is simply the way it works: It is a test that is based on dodgy science using a scaling system that almost guarantees a diagnosis of low bone density.

The motivation is purely for commercial gain: In my opinion:

• The Dexa Scan is a high value service for the clinic that is quick and easy to operate.
• It gives the "evidence" for justifying a woman sacrificing her body for the cause: The war on osteoporosis which includes subjecting oneself annually to yet another source of cancer-causing radiation consuming expensive patented vitamins and minerals which will actually accelerate bone loss, arthritis and fatigue!
• And has them enroll in the clinic's profitable "bone strengthening" programme (A waste of money and effort if not combined with a proper drugs-free nutritional balancing programme).
• It has them coming back for an annual screen (A captured population and ongoing profitability).
• When this does not work, as it surely won't, then the clinic can put them on an even higher value "bone-sparing" drug like Fosamax which is guaranteed to destroy a woman's health, thus requiring even more high value drugs and medical procedures.

Screening programmes like these are a form of costly medical entrapment that has nothing to do with health.  In my informed opinion. Where's the published peer reviewed evidence of long term benefits such as improved life expectancy and improved quality of life?  I haven't found it yet.  

Incidentally, the Dexa Scan is now being extended to measure body fat: Yet even more cancer-causing radiation.  As if there wasn't too much already! This is totally contradictory in terms of  good health practice.

Real health has been hijacked and distorted 

for the purposes of commercial profit

A parallel health issue with equally dodgy motives and lack of credible evidence is the cholesterol lowering industry: http://blog.garymoller.com/2013/05/can-statin-cholesterol-lowering-drugs.html.  A further outrageous example of the hijacking of health for profit is the highly successful seasonal flu vaccine: http://blog.garymoller.com/2013/04/is-seasonal-flu-vaccine-actually.html and here: http://blog.garymoller.com/2013/02/the-flu-shot-dr-oz-is-getting-his-are.html

The osteoporosis industry reminds me of the Halliburton model for the "Business of War".  The next obvious move in the war on osteoporosis is to target men, similar to what the cosmetics industry has done after exhausting its supply of women for business growth.

Sex sells: Terror sells even better!

Here are a series of articles that you will find relevant to this discussion:

• Does calcium prevent osteoporosis? http://blog.garymoller.com/2012/01/inconvenient-truth-about-osteoporosis.html
• Calcium and heart disease: http://blog.garymoller.com/2010/08/study-finds-link-between-calcium.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2010/04/i-am-60-year-old-woman-diagnosed-with.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2009/09/how-much-calcium-do-we-need-in-our.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2008/08/i-am-29-year-old-female-very-active.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2007/06/spontaneous-fractures-and-fossy-jaw.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2012/09/anti-osteoporosis-drugs-evidence-mounts.html
• http://blog.garymoller.com/2010/05/would-rebounding-be-counter-indicated.html
• Vit D articles https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=gary+moller+vitamin+d&aq=f&oq=gary+moller+vitamin+d&aqs=chrome.0.57j62l3.10025j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
• Fosamax etc https://www.google.co.nz/search?newwindow=1&q=gary+moller+bisphosphonates&oq=gary+moller+bisp&gs_l=serp.1.0.0i22i30.139412.141861.0.144294.4.3.0.1.1.0.255.694.2-3.3.0...0.0...1c.1.11.serp.7UwUBSByEao
• Gillian Sanson http://blog.garymoller.com/2012/09/the-myth-of-osteoporosis-revised.html  and http://gilliansanson.wordpress.com/ (Highly recommended!).

Cochrane Reviews on osteoporosis:

http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/details/browseReviews/577511/Osteoporosis.html?page=1

Sadly, I can't find convincing evidence of benefit from these drugs in terms of life expectancy or morbidity when adjusted for "all causes".

You will realise there is good cause to be cautious about any health matters in which Big Business has a controlling hand . You may also appreciate why I decided to separate myself from the "system" some years ago. 

I am not winning any popularity contests for calling out aloud that the Emperor has no clothes but it is difficult to remain silent following the tearful visit from a healthy woman who has just been told she has a terrible disease that, in her case, may actually be an unsubstantiated  concoction of myth for commercial profit and she is given little in the way of treatment choice other than spending the rest of her life on harmful drugs.

About this website 

The advice in these articles is given freely without promise or obligation. Its all about giving you and your family the tools and information to take control of your health and fitness.

New Australian Study Supports An Apparent Association Between Long-Term Fosamax Use And Certain Types Of Femur Fractures

The evidence keeps mounting that these so-called "bone-sparing" drugs are the complete opposite.

What these reports of terrible injury do not tell you is that most of these elderly women do not survive these fractures: They develop pneumonia and die.

It is outrageous that these drugs continue to be advertised on prime time television in New Zealand and doctors continue to dish these out like lollies to unsuspecting and trusting patients.

When there is so much increasing doubt about their safety there should be a moratorium on prescribing them.

If in doubt - Leave it out!

Researchers Find Increased Number Of Low-Energy Subtrochanteric Fractures For A Period Ten Years After Introduction Of Fosamax In That Country (Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com) At the Orthopaedic Proceedings section of the Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume, web site there is an item that presents some findings from a recent Australian study which supports the apparent link between Fosamax and atypical femur fractures. This new Fosamax research item is "Femoral Insufficiency Fracture Associated With Prolonged Alendronate Therapy".  From the Abstract for this item we get these five key findings about femur fractures in long-term users of Fosamax: Of the 41 patients with subtrochanteric insufficiency fracture, 40 (98%) had been taking [Fosamax (alendronate)] and one had been taking risedronate. Twenty-nine of the 41 (71%) complained of prodromal pain in the affected femur. The mean duration of [Fosamax (alendronate)] use in those with insufficiency fracture was 7.1 years. This is the largest study in the literature on subtrochanteric insufficiency fractures and [Fosamax (alendronate)] therapy. Confirming recent reports, [Fosamax (alendronate)] use was strongly suggestive of subtrochanteric insufficiency fracture. These Australian study findings seem consistent with two May 2012 Archives of Internal Medicine articles concerning a study out of Switzerland which found that the use of Fosamax as well as several other bisphosphonates seems to be associated with an increased risk of atypical fractures of the femur, which risk may be determined by the duration of Fosamax treatment. Those two medical journal articles are: "Increasing occurrence of atypical femoral fractures associated with bisphosphonate use"; and, "Atypical femoral fracture risk in patients treated with bisphosphonates". To date, more than a thousand Fosamax - femur fracture lawsuits have been filed against Merck, and more such drug injury legal compensation case filings are expected in the months to come.

Text

_______________________________________

About this website

The advice in these articles is given freely without promise or obligation.  Its all about giving you and your family the tools and information to take control of your health and fitness.

The Fosamax lawsuits are now in progress!

There are now almost 1,000 separate lawsuits in the USA alleging that Fosamax caused harm.  This harm includes osteonecrosis of the jaw - a horrific condition where the bone of the jaw dies, causing disintegration of the jaw - Horrific!  This is stuff right out of a horror movie.

This harm is not isolated to Fosamax alone, Fosamax is a member of the class of drugs known as "bisphosphonates".  These drugs are widely prescribed in New Zealand.  For more about these drugs, please read the long list of articles I have written here about these horrible drugs - there is nothing positive one can say about them.  Sadly, despite all the dire warnings, doctors continue to prescribe these to trusting patients.

Read on.....
_______________________________________

Jury Is Told Numerous Times By Her Attorney That Fosamax Did Nothing For Sessner, It Only Did Something To Her

(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)

During his March 5, 2012 opening statement the plaintiff's attorney, Tim O'Brien, told members of the jury numerous times that Fosamax did nothing for Jo Ann Sessner, it only did something to her.

It is alleged in this Fosamax lawsuit -- Jo Ann Sessner vs. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., ATL-L-3394-11 (MT), which is currently ongoing in a New Jersey state court, with Judge Carol Higbee presiding -- that the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) which Mrs. Sessner developed was caused by her six years of Fosamax use.   In medical terms, this condition is known generally as "bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw" (BRONJ).

To clarify what is meant by this contention that "Fosamax did nothing for Jo Ann Sessner, it only did something to her", the plaintiffs will introduce evidence during this Sessner Fosamax - ONJ trial that Merck's osteoporosis medication does nothing beneficial for a patient with osteoporosis after 36 months, or three years, of use in terms of preventing fractures.

Moreover, if that patient really only had osteopenia, and not osteoporosis, then there was never really any medical benefit gained from taking Fosamax, according to other evidence that the plaintiffs will put on during this Sessner trial.

Therefore, and this is presuming that Mrs. Sessner had osteoporosis (and not just osteopenia), after the first three years that she used Fosamax -- or, to put it otherwise, during the immediate three years before she was diagnosed with ONJ -- Fosamax was not helping Mrs. Sessner but only hurt her by causing the ONJ, which was vividly described by Mr. O'Brien in his opening statement as "a disfiguring, a disabling, and a life-changing disease".

Well, as it turns out (unfortunately), Mrs. Sessner has plenty of company in terms of the number of women who have been diagnosed with ONJ associated with Fosamax.  This evidence will be developed by the plaintiff's attorneys during the second week of this Fosamax - ONJ Sessner trial currently ongoing in a New Jersey state court.

Note: Courtroom View Network (CVN) has cameras that are webcasting the Sessner trial from Judge Higbee's courtroom in New Jersey to attorneys and other interested persons around the country.  I want to thank CVN for providing this remote access as it allows me to view and report on the Sessner trial without having to actually be there.

______________________________________________________________________________

DrugInjuryLaw.com: Legal Information And News About Prescription Drug Side Effects

Drug Injury Case Evaluation - Free & Confidential

_______________________________________

About this website

The advice in these articles is given freely without promise or obligation.  Its all about giving you and your family the tools and information to take control of your health and fitness.

Fosamax osteoporosis drug linked to atypical low-energy fractures

"On March 20, 2008, The New England Journal of Medicine published a physician group report of 15 women taking Fosamax who experienced "atypical low-energy fractures," which means their bones broke doing almost nothing – a serious kind of injury typically seen in very elderly individuals in declining health. The fact that the NEJM is reporting this is a major wake up call to anyone who hasn't figured out that Fosamax is dangerous to your health". ((http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/ful...)
Source: www.naturalnews.com
________________________________________
Gary Moller comments:
I have been warning readers about the dangers of bisphosphenate drugs for osteoporosis for more than a year now and every concern raised back then is being confirmed.

Here on Prime Time New Zealand television there is a reassuring celebrity named Judith Dobson who fronts a "Health Diary" advertising campaign. Right now she is pushing Fosamax-Plus with vitamin D "For added benefits". Yeah right! This advertising campaign is nothing more than misleading rubbish encouraging women to medicate with a drug that does nothing at all of benefit and much harm, including the much feared "Fossy Jaw" or bone rot in which the jaw bone literally falls to pieces. The same rotting process occurs in the rest of the skeleton, resulting in the kind of catastrophe that can be seen in the x-ray image above.

What the research report quoted above does not tell readers is that these bones have little or no healing capacity, so the prognosis for these poor women is not good.

How doctors can continue to prescribe these poisons beggars belief. Do they read? Please warn your family about these horrific class of drugs and please forward this article onto others.

Advice about dental work, osteonecrosis (Fossy Jaw) and Fosamax

"My oral surgeon just alerted me to the possible side effects of Fosamax, which I have been taking for 3 years. We are considering jaw surgery and orthodontic work to correct a severe overbite. He has ordered a CTX test (I believe that's what he called it) to help determine my risk level for such a procedure. I am not familiar with this test and am wondering if it is accurate at predicting a successful recovery and healing."
Margie

I asked women's health researcher, Gillian Sanson, for advice:

"The CTX test is a bone marker test measuring collagen cross links. Osteoclast activity is measured by the breakdown products of collagen. When bone is resorbed collagen is broken down and fragments that contain the cross-linking molecules are released and excreted in the urine. High levels can indicate high levels of bone resorption. My understanding is that these tests are not a particularly accurate way of measuring bone metabolism, fracture risk, healing or otherwise because of the great variability in bone turnover, and the day to day variability of metabolic processes. But I am not an expert in this area. I don’t know about the use or value of this test in relation to osteonecrosis of the jaw.
Best wishes
Gill"

"We recommend that patients about to start oral and intravenous bisphophonates should have an oral inspection by the rheumatologist, and if there are any doubts then the patient should be referred to an appropriate dental surgeon for further advice.

Secondly, we recommend that patients who are already taking oral bisphosphonates should not stop these when they go for dental surgery as the risk of ONJ is very small and the half-life of the bisphosphonates long.

Thirdly, we recommend that in patients who are already having intravenous bisphosphonates and who have planned dental surgery, the administration of the bisphosphonates should be delayed until after healing has been completed."
http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/46/7/1049
_____________________________
Gary Moller comments:
Margie, I am sorry that the following is rather grim; but best got out and understood.

Few adverse side effects ever get reported for a raft of reasons. So, if rates of complications are x/100,000 one can assume that the real rate is much higher. Claims that newer versions of these biphosphonates have fewer complications are rubbish. How can such claims be made when it takes ten or so years to really know? If I were to be taking medication from a particular class of drugs, I would probably prefer the one that has the longer track record - warts and all! None at all, if I could get away with it. If you troll the user support websites, you will see there is growing unease among the patients about this class of drugs and a disturbing number of reports of adverse reactions.

Bisphoshonates, including Fosamax, progressively kill off the little cells in the bone that are constantly working hard to remodel bone to withstand the stresses and strains of daily living on the skeleton. Killing these cells (osteoclasts and osteoblasts) gives just a couple of years of possible reduction of fractures. But this comes at a shocking cost.

Healthy bone is never more than about 7 years old regardless of age. The cost of taking bisphoshonates is the development of old and lifeless bone that, once damaged, will never again heal. Not only do these poisons kill off the cells that maintain the bones they remain in the body for an estimated 20 years (Estimated 1/2 life of 10 years) doing their damage.

The term "Fossy Jaw" is a play on Fosamax and refers to the horror of jaw bone death associated with the use of biposphonates. The reason why the jaw is so vulnerable is because it is constantly stressed by the chewing action and the pressure of teeth on the jaw bone. The rate of bone turnover in the jaw is very high so the poisoning effect of biphosphonates may be first seen in the jaw. Basically what happens is bone damage such as during orthodontic work and even simple extractions may result in non-healing lesions on the bone - ulcerations andf progressive loss of jaw bone. I will say no more, other than to say that this is one topic that makes my blood boil!

There may be similar processes of bone death caused by the use of blood thinners like Warfarin (rat poison). But this is another article!

Margie, that is the bad news over with; now for the good news.


The good news is that you are only a few years into it and the sooner you stop the better. You can stop right away; but I do recommend that you talk about your intentions with your doctor. The fact that your orthodontist felt required to carry out tests to try to assess your bone cell activity should be sufficient warning to you to take positive and assertive action. Get off the stuff!

Can you delay the orthodontic work for a couple of years? Surely it can wait? Talk frankly to your orthodontist about this. I think you should give your jaw bone time to recuperate from any effects of the biphospenates. The orthodontic work requires tip-top bone health.

Strengthen and revitalise your bones through natural health measures:

• Get your vitamin D levels tested and follow the guidelines on this website to aggressively get your levels up to about 120nmol (details on this site)
• Have a daily mineral rich cup of beef/lamb bone broth
• Take daily supplements of vitamin A rich cod liver oil
• If you can get full cream raw milk, do so and then have 1-2 cups per day (Keep and eye on this website because I am looking at publicising sources)
• Exercise daily including lifting light weights above your head (My book on back pain has suitable illustrated exercises for you.

Bone up on osteporosis: Go to the Search This Blog box in the upper right hand column of this website and do a search for terms like "osteoporosis" and "fosamax" and have look at all of the articles on this site, linked sites and the rest of the web.
Margie, the best response is ACTION! So get moving and please keep us posted about what you do and how it all goes.