Bill Ardolino has a pretty long and thorough post discussing attempts to spin the number of fatalities related to RU-486.
Reader Interactions
13Comments
Comments are closed.
by John Cole| 13 Comments
This post is in: Politics, Science & Technology
Bill Ardolino has a pretty long and thorough post discussing attempts to spin the number of fatalities related to RU-486.
Comments are closed.
Steve
Very good post. I think we all know no one would be going into hysterics over a mere four deaths from a widely used drug if abortion wasn’t the issue.
Particularly amusing was Hugh Hewitt’s suggestion that something is sinister about the lack of a class action to date. He is apparently so blinded by the Right’s demonization of trial lawyers that he believes every class action lawyer in the country is part of some pro-abortion cabal. I used to work as a class-action lawyer myself and I can assure you that their primary motivation is exactly what you think it is.
DougJ
I just saw on Fox a medical expert stating that more women died last year from RU-486 than died from all the “back alley” abortions the libruls are always whining about in the nearly 30 years from 1945 until Roe v. Wade became the “law” of the land.
It’s pretty clear why the trial lawyers won’t handle this one: there so teed off about tort reform they won’t touch a case that will help president Bush. It’s a shame because RU-486 is becoming a huge health concern for this country; the FDA never should have approved it and wouldn’t have if NARAL hadn’t pushed them so hard.
Steve
I’m afraid DougJ has given away the game of late. :(
Dave Ruddell
Yeah, ever since he started using the word ‘libruls’; it’s like he’s not even trying anymore. Maybe it’s one of those people at his work, who posts while he leaves his computer unattended?
DougJ
I think I’ve had some pretty good posts lately. I refuse to comment on Sheehan, because I think that it’s a terrible issue for us. And I’m sorry, but if I sound a little over-the-top on Schiavo and Clinton, that is because I feel very strongly about those issues.
pfrets
The lawyers wont touch it for one simple reason…they’d have to gamble that their jury would consist of 12 white neocon men to have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting a verdict. The company would not settle…the drug’s safety and efficacy have been proven all over the world.
“But, what about those four dead women?”
According to the article, they died from an infection and not a reaction, and that was caused by using the drug in an “off-label” manner. Who gave them that information? Not the drug manufacturer, that’s for sure.
pfrets
And when I say white, neocon men, I mean of the Dobson/Randall variety. No offense to non-Dobson/Randall white neocons intended.
Geek, Esq.
Is Hugh Hewitt really THAT stupid? I mean, you’d think that an attorney would be familiar with the concept of damages.
Steve
What the devil does being a neocon have to do with abortion?
Bill from INDC
Methinks “pfrets” doesn’t have a good handle on what the word “neocon” means.
Mike S
No, just completely disengenuous.
Sebastian Holsclaw
I have dealt tangentially with PL suits, and I will assure you that having a safe product doesn’t mean you won’t have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in court defending yourself from people who correctly understand that basic scientific understanding isn’t always available in court.
Geek, Esq.
I’ve dealt directly with them, and I can affirm this.
However, Hewitt’s suggestion that a class action suit be filed on behalf of people who haven’t even suffered an injury that could be conceivably traced to the product is, well, interesting to be charitable.