Skip to content

Internet Explorer is no longer supported by this website.

For optimal browsing we recommend using Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Publications

Biologics and the Heeding Presumption

January 2015 - IADC Drug, Device and Biotechnology Newsletter

Publications

Biologics and the Heeding Presumption

January 2015 - IADC Drug, Device and Biotechnology Newsletter

Prescription medications all carry potential risks—risks the prescriber must weigh against the benefits associated with the therapy as well as the risks associated with not prescribing it. Where there are no risk-free alternatives and leaving the disease untreated exposes the patient to substantial harm, prescribing the medication may be the lowest-risk option. Nonetheless, courts in several jurisdictions apply a presumption that if a pharmaceutical manufacturer had provided an “adequate” warning, the physician would not have prescribed the medication. Cases involving biologics, which have revolutionized the treatment of many serious diseases, offer a particularly compelling illustration of why there is no place for such a “heeding” presumption in prescription drug cases, and present significant opportunities to fight it. To read the article, click here.

Authors

Related News

COVID-19 and Ivermectin Lawsuits

DeAngelo A. LaVette, Nathan P. Nasrallah, published in American Bar Association, Section of Litigation, Mass Torts Litigation More