I just read Harrison's post in the Article Library, "Court Weighs Medical-Device Liability" and the blog links cited. The argument the lawyers for Medtronic and the federal government is that state laws and juries should not be allowed to overrule FDA's judgment:
"...the government said, Congress meant to shield companies from suits because approved medical devices meet reasonable safety and effectiveness standards that have benefits to some patients even though the device may also have risks. "
Could this argument also be made with insurance companies when seeking coverage for ADR?
LBP, other lawyers, what do you think?
__________________
2001 MVA; C5-C6 disk extruded
ongoing physical therapy, exercise and massage
ESI's, oral prednisone, trigger point injections
foraminal and central stenosis C5/C6 and c6/C7
2007 EMG/nerve conduction shows pattern of chronic radiculopathy
January, 2008: Prestige ST Artificial Disk Replacement, C5/6
|