Panama City Florida Injury Lawyer Blog

The 2,400 page Affordable Care Act, now known as Obamacare, is difficult to decipher not just because of its length but also because of the legalese it contains. 2011 included an attempted House of Representatives repeal of the act and several court cases challenging its constitutionality. Those cases are in disarray with some courts ruling it constitutional while others disagree.

This law is one of the most far reaching and profound pieces of legislation passed and signed into law in decades. In 2012 Medicare health care providers will be able to start affordable care organizations to cut costs and improve quality of care. Other major provisions won't be effective until 2014, but big changes in health care insurance have already been implemented. For example, senior citizens started paying 50% less in prescription drug costs under the new law. That was due to drug company discounts worked out under the law. Seniors can also receive annual exams and some screenings without having a co-pay.

Insurance for those with pre-existing conditions, a huge health care insurance gap in previous years, became available. Those patients could join the government's Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. Premiums dropped from an average of $390 a month to $234 a month. Older people weren't the only ones who were helped by the act. The law allows young adults between the ages of 19 and 25 to stay on their parents' health insurance policies. Proponents of the law say this has made it possible for young people to take jobs in fields they like rather than to take jobs mainly to get the benefits they want. Young people, too, are permitted by the law to maintain health insurance despite pre-existing conditions.

The Supreme Court is slated to consider the constitutionality of the law this year and has allotted an astounding 5 hours for oral argument.

The following is a guest post from Rick Console, a New Jersey personal injury attorney from Console and Hollawell, PC.

Who is going to the Superbowl this year? It's still way too early to tell, but that doesn't stop most of us from picking our favorites. If you're a Green Bay Packers, New Orleans Saints, Baltimore Ravens, or New England Patriots fan, you're in good shape. If you're a Miami Dolphins fan you're probably slightly more subdued around the water cooler. Still, February is a long way away, and anything can happen. And that's one of the reasons why football fans are so loyal, why they don't just watch the game--they live it. There are not that many other sports we would willingly give up three hours every Sunday afternoon for, or every Monday night.

What is it we love about football so much? For most of us, watching football feeds our competitive natures. Most of us will never get to prove our mettle on the gridiron, yet for those few hours on Sunday, we can pretend that we're in on the action.

Football is an aggressive, action-oriented sport. And maybe a part of us, even if it's just a small part, enjoys that aspect of the game as well. We can afford to, sitting on the sidelines. Professional football players, on the other hand, experience a high rate of injury. Despite wearing helmets head injuries are prevalent among the pros, many of whom sustain multiple concussions throughout their careers. Several studies have proven that multiple concussions lead to long-term damage. This long-term damage has even been given a name--concussion syndrome.

Who is responsible for these injuries? The players themselves, who willingly participate? The NFL? Or could it be Riddell, the manufacturer of the helmets worn by pro football players? A lawsuit, brought by more than 125 players against both the league and Riddell, may eventually help us answer that question. In addition to this class action suit, there are three personal injury cases against the NFL being brought in California, and one in Pennsylvania.

The players are suing the league and helmet manufacturer due to five complaints brought in state and federal court over the past few months. They say the NFL was aware of the dangers of head injuries, fraudulently concealed the long-term effects of concussions, and should have done more to protect and help retired players. Plaintiffs are seeking league changes so others don't suffer from the same damage, a medical process that ensures those who have head injuries related to professional football receive medical attention for the injury for as long as they need it, and compensation.

The NFL is countering that they are not responsible for the medical issues that some of the players are facing, because the players knew there were risks of injury when they decided to play football.

After a hearing on Wednesday, October 19, in which a Senate committee discussed whether manufacturers of sports equipment make fraudulent claims, the NFL did make several changes, including changing its return-to-play policies and the co-chairmen of its committee on concussions.

While exact figures are unknown, the plaintiffs are collectively seeking millions of dollars in damages. The suit could take years to be resolved.

Continue reading "Who's Really Responsible for Superbowl Injuries?" »

Understaffing a nursing home puts patients at risk. If any business, whether it be a nursing home or a hospital or a factory, does not have enough employees to do a job, that job cannot be done properly. Understaffing in health care settings is catastrophic. Yet, it has become a way of life, or death, in nursing homes as their corporate owners put profits ahead of patient safety.

Neglect and abuse are rampant in nursing homes because of understaffing. In nursing homes, staff time is directly related to the ability to provide minimal care. Statistics show that higher staff levels and lower nurse turnover are linked to fewer medical complications like pressure ulcers, infections, and deaths. I will give you this example. Poor nutrition due to inadequate food intake is a major reason for death in nursing homes. This should never happen. Feeding patients who need assistance, encouraging patients to remain independent in feeding themselves, and supervising patients at mealtimes require staff time. When it is inadequate, patients suffer, and they die or they suffer from bad problems like pressure ulcers which are in large part the result of poor nutrition.

Government regulators have recognized the danger of understaffing in nursing homes. Regulations exist, but they are not followed in too many cases. Nursing homes are required to have enough staff to provide all necessary care to all patients on a 24-hour basis, but in practicality, I don't see this level of staffing happening in many nursing homes. During depositions or in private conversations, many nurses have cried and told me that they despise not being able to provide conscientious care to their nursing home patients. Their staffing is so sparse that they run from patient to patient without having the ability to provide good care.

As an attorney representing patients, I can file suit, but what can you as a family member do immediately? Contact the Agency for Health Care Administration in Tallahassee. That agency will direct you without delay to the people who can provide prompt assistance.

Summer officially starts on June 21st, however, the high temperatures we've reached in Panama City tell us summer is already here. Temperatures are reaching the upper 90's with the heat index of 100+. You need to take precautions to make sure you and your family stay cool to avoid heat stroke or other heat related illnesses.

About 400 people die annually from heat stroke. Heat stroke is not necessarily caused by over-exertion, although if not properly hydrated, you can become ill. Heat stroke is caused when your body is unable to regulate its temperature. This could easily occur while sitting in your non-airconditioned living room. Heat-related illnesses can affect people differently. Certain medical conditions as well as medications can contribute to a higher risk of illness. Those with chronic health conditions, such as cardiovasular diseases, diabetes, as well as the elderly, may find their tolerance to heat is much lower.

To avoid heat stroke, take precaution to keep your body temperature regulated. Your body will cool itself, however in extreme heat such as what we are currently experiencing, it may need a little help.

• Avoid going outdoors at the hottest time of the day, if possible. If you have yard work or other chores, plan to do them first thing in the morning or after 4pm when the sun is not directly on you.


• Drink plenty of water and avoid carbonated beverages and alcohol. Gatorades or other mineral replenishing beverages are good.


• Increase your intake of foods rich in potassium, which is said to reduce your risk of strokes and help to reduce your blood pressure.

Signs of heat stroke include dizziness or fainting, heavy sweating, muscle cramps, cold or clammy skin, headaches, rapid heartbeat and nausea. If you experience these symptoms, you should immediately take steps to reduce you body temperature. Drink cool fluids and a cool, not cold, shower will help reduce your body temperature without the shock of cold water. A cool rag on your head and neck will also help. If these methods do not help, seek medical treatment immediately.

Also, if you have elderly family members or neighbors, be sure to check on them throughout the summer season since they are a high risk to heat-related illnesses. Stay cool and enjoy the summer.

Plastic surgeries have risen in record numbers across the country and in Florida. Over 8 million cosmetic surgery procedures were performed in 2003 according to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Of those procedures, 7 million were minimally invasive, non-surgical in nature. The top procedures were Botox injections followed by chemical peels and microdermabrasion. In 2010, there were 13.1 million cosmetic procedures performed. That's more than a 49% increase in 7 years.

It's important for you to do your homework regardless of the type of surgery you plan to schedule. Understanding the full scope of the procedure, including risks and recovery time, is critical to establishing practical expectations and your satisfaction with the end result. It is appropriate for you to ask to see before and after photos of patients who've had the same cosmetic procedure.

Many cosmetic procedures are considered elective and are not covered by insurance. Be sure you review the financial responsibilities before you proceed. Your doctor can submit a summary of the procedures to your insurance company for approval and an estimate of what they will pay. Costs of procedures vary by doctor, but don't make a decision solely on cost. Make sure you select your doctor based on qualifications and experience and not by the discounts he or she offers.

Confirm the doctor you're considering is licensed to perform the surgery. In Florida, as well as many other states, online resources are available to research your physician. Many sources will also tell you if the physician holds professional liability coverage.

Not everyone is happy with their results. Check for complaints or any lawsuits that may have been filed against the doctor and the outcome. Understand, however, that an outcome less pleasing than you had hoped does not necessarily mean the doctor is guilty of medical malpractice. Doctors cannot guarantee a perfect cosmetic result. In general, to constitute malpractice, the doctor must have departed from an acceptable standard of care under the circumstances.

Pain after an auto accident is expected, especially if bones are broken and surgery is required. However, when the injury is to the muscles and connective tissues of the body, the accident victim expects the pain to go away within a few days. Sometimes it doesn't, so what is going on in those victims in whom pain lingers and becomes permanent? Frequently, the answer is fibromyalgia. The accident victim who has developed fibromyalgia usually experiences pain in multiple muscles throughout the body. It is not uncommon for the victim's family and friends and even some doctors, who are not well versed in trauma medicine, to question the truthfulness of the person in pain or to suspect the existence of a mental condition. Fibromyalgia, however, is real. It's manifestation of pain in precise areas of the body is so constant regardless of whom is complaining of the pain that charts showing these trigger points have been developed by neurologists and pain management doctors. While the underlying cause of fibromyalgia remains a mystery, most researchers agree that fibromyalgia is a disorder of central processing in which the accident victim experiences pain amplification due to abnormal sensory processing in the central nervous system.

According to Mayo Clinic staff, it is likely that genetic factors make some people more susceptible to developing the disorder after an accident or a stressful event and that once it develops they have increased sensitivity in the brain to pain signals. The brain's pain receptors seem to develop a memory of the pain and become more sensitive, in effect causing an overreaction to pain signals. Researchers have also concluded that the repeated nerve stimulation causes the brains of people with fibromyalgia to change. This involves an abnormal increase in neurotransmitter chemicals that signal pain. There, in fact, is the explanation for muscle pain that becomes permanent after an auto accident. Fortunately, there is hope.

If you want information about a website that can give you some help if you suffer from this pain, or if you want the names of doctors in this area who provide helpful treatment for this disorder, just call my office, and while you are at it, ask for a free copy of my DVD that answers accident victims' most frequently asked questions.

A couple days ago, I was thinking about the recent fire at the landfill at County Road 390 and Pipeline Road in Bay County. It was a nuisance to many who lived in the area. They became sickened by the smoke from the fire that burned for weeks from below tons of debris. I didn't use the word "nuisance" lightly. One of the legal theories under which cases can be brought against individuals and corporations is called nuisance. In the landfill matter, suit was impractical since the owner of the landfill had died, but in other instances, suits can be highly successful to obtain compensation for harm that results from another's interference with property or health rights. I'll give you some examples of claims that have been made.

In 2002, two property owners in Connecticut brought a nuisance action against operators of a dairy farm located less than a third of a mile from their property. They claimed that the decline in the value of their property was due to the offensive odors produced by the operators' dairy farm. In 1990, the owners of the dairy farm built a forty-two thousand square foot barn and milking parlor on their land to house a herd of dairy cows and a pit in which to store the manure from the herd. The plaintiffs noticed odors from the farm in early 1991, but they were nothing more than typical odors generated on a livestock farm. With time, however, the odors became overpowering. They awoke the plaintiffs from their sleep and forced them to close the windows of their home. They sued, alleging that "the defendants' dairy farm generated offensive odors that unreasonably interfered with their use and enjoyment of their property." An important part of their allegations was that the odors could have been reduced or eliminated if the defendants had used reasonably priced technology that was readily available to them. The jury found that the dairy's operators had been negligent, so the landowners were compensated for the diminished value of their property.

Other cases are also typical of nuisance claims such as claims against the owners of landfills for locating them near housing projects and then permitting hazardous waste to be dumped in them; claims against factories for creating soot, smoke, and odors that interfere with the enjoyment of nearby private property; cases against various industries for causing so much noise that nearby residents cannot sleep; claims against paper companies for emissions of smoke that is alleged to be harmful to the lungs, to cause cancer, or to damage the paint on vehicles.

A comment by the court in the dairy farm case provides some guidance to anyone who is thinking about bringing such a case. The court said, "It is the duty of every person to make a reasonable use of his own property so as to occasion no unnecessary damage or annoyance to his neighbor." I hope that today's discussion will be useful in some way instead of being, well, a nuisance.

Most hip implant surgeries are uneventful, but last week I told you about problems associated with one brand of hip implants often used by orthopedic surgeons in this area and promised to go into more detail this week. Hip replacements are usually done to cure the pain of painful arthritis that occurs naturally or after trauma like that experienced in auto accidents. One manufacturer has had considerable trouble with its implants because of the way they are made.

Depending on where you come from its name is pronounced "De-pwee" or "De-pie." Either way, it's a Johnson & Johnson company whose product is a metal on metal design that has a cup that's too shallow for the ball. The result is loose fragments of metal floating in the joint and loosening of the implant. The loosening and the metal fragments cause damage that often result in another painful and very costly surgery to replace the DePuy implant with a better designed implant.

Patients who have the DePuy ASR or ASR XL models can have crunching or popping noises in the hip, difficulty standing or walking, hip fracture or dislocation, unusual fatigue, muscle inflammation or infection, and death of some of the muscle tissue around the implant.

That's not the whole story. Excessive friction between the metal cup and the metal ball release cobalt and chromium ions into the body causing, among other things, heavy metal toxicity or aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis associated lesions resulting in bone loss. Metallosis causes its own unpleasant consequences. Among them are spontaneous dislocation, nerve palsy, groin and thigh pain, fatigue, and intense pain at the site of the hip replacement.

An orthopedic center at the University of Oxford, England, found that benign tumors called pseudotumors can form around the hip prosthesis. Additionally, progressive bone deterioration is not uncommon. Metalosis can also result in muscle necrosis, that is, muscle death, around the site of the surgery. The release of metal ions in the blood stream, caused by the metal on metal construction of hip implants, is of great concern due to potential long term toxicology including immune system changes, chromosomal damage, and cancer according to researchers at Cambridge University. It is known that the metal ion levels from this type of prosthetic design are significantly higher than normal values in the body, and changes in the immune system to cobalt and chromium ions were in fact detected by researchers at the Rush University Medical Center in Chicago. Surgery for a fractured thigh bone or other bones and accelerated future revisions nearly completes the list of problems, so if you have one of these implants and are having any adverse symptoms, it is in your best interest to consult with your orthopedic surgeon as soon as possible.

Is there such a thing as the "right" nursing home? Not if you or I are going there. We will pitch a fit. But let's be realistic. Sometimes we have to choose the best option for ourselves or for a family member. When we have to, how will we make the hard but necessary decision?

In my last post, I gave some statistics that should make us think a lot about how to make the right decision. Recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gave one in five certified nursing homes only one star of five based on quality of care, staffing, and health inspections. For profit homes, contrary to our expectations, have the worst performance according to the Government Accountability Office. My research in cases that I've been asked to investigate show that reported deficiencies in nursing homes are only the tip of the iceberg and that substantial histories, documented in the medical records, show that untreated pressure sores, malnutrition, falls and other problems occur regularly. So what is one to do?

One source of information is attorneys in your neighborhood. We may have a useful perspective on who we are regularly asked to sue and who we are never asked to sue. That in itself may provide a lot of guidance for nursing home selection. When we investigate alleged nursing home malpractice cases, we look at common financial, administrative, medical and quality of life concerns that typically arise in nursing home settings. We closely examine inspection reports, medical records, and staff logs for evidence of failures in staffing, training, supervision, equipment, and oversight, but your problem is to look for red flags before you decide to sign the agreement to admit your family member there.

Here are some simple suggestions developed after a long time of looking at nursing homes that provide good care and those that don't. Consider the family member's special needs, for example, respiratory therapy. Make sure the facility offers that service and has a history of compliance with the necessary certification standards. Also, make sure the facility doesn't regularly reject appropriate patients simply for staffing convenience or cost control. Check the records about the nursing home in places like Nursing Home Compare or similar sources. Those records should document the facility's record on key quality measures like infection control, pressure sores, weight loss, bladder control, use of restraints, daily living skills, and pain treatment. The records provide a good snapshot of each home in comparison to others.

Continue reading "Using Reasoned Judgment to Choose the Right Nursing Home " »

If you are going to a nursing home or choosing one for a family member, there's no such thing as the "right" nursing home, because going there will always signify a frightful change. But just maybe there is a right nursing home where life will be pleasant, and the care will be given with kindness.

Since I handle nursing home cases, as do many other attorneys who are experienced in personal injury and malpractice law, I am often asked for advice about how to choose a nursing home. Decisions like this can affect every one of us, so I take the questions seriously and give the best advice I can. That's because I've had a look at the dark side of nursing home care - pressure ulcers that penetrate to the bone, blood infections caused by dislodged feeding tubes, broken bones over and over again from unattended falls, restraints that entangle and cause terror or, even worse, strangulation - all compounded by malnourishment, dehydration, untreated depression, and chronic inattention from inadequate staffing.

Recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gave one in five certified nursing homes only one star of five based on quality of care, staffing, and health inspections. These are common problems for the 1.5 million Americans in nursing homes, but they don't have to happen. For-profit homes, contrary to our expectations, have the worst performance according to the Government Accountability Office. Even those statistics don't offer a reliable picture of the problem. The Medicare/Medicaid star system, for example, is partly based on unaudited self-reports about staffing and quality of care criteria. My research in cases I've been asked to investigate show that reported deficiencies are only the tip of the iceberg and that substantial histories, documented in the medical records, show untreated pressure ulcers, malnutrition, falls and other problems that regularly happen in advance of these investigative findings.

So how do you come to the point of selecting the best nursing home for yourself or a family member? Whether it's someone else or me who typically represents nursing home residents against the homes they hire to provide quality care, we have to say at the outset that we are not social workers, physicians, or nursing home case managers. With that caveat, we can say that we offer someone looking for a nursing home one thing, that is, an attorney's perspective on common financial, administrative, medical, and quality of life concerns that arise in nursing home care. And we as a group can offer some tools for evaluating how well a specific nursing home evaluates them. Considerations about which nursing home to select are so important for end of life decisions that any attorney practicing in this area of law, who is worth his or her salt, should give this advice without charge. Next week, I will suggest some things for you to consider.

Last week while discussing our civil justice system, I talked about corporate pollution. I said that corporations have consistently responded to the environmental disasters they have caused by passing the buck for as long as possible. They know the initial outrage will dim, media coverage will diminish, and political administrations will change. Full accountability for their harm cannot be obtained by government agencies. The job is too large since our agencies are underfunded and understaffed. Yet, more accountability is exacted from these corporations than one would expect. The force behind that comes from the private sector.

Into the void that existed in the government's ability in the 1960s to enforce environmental laws to keep our air, water, and lands safe from toxins came unexpected allies, the workers in the American civil justice system. They were the attorneys who advocated for clean air, clean water, and monetary punishment for those who endangered our lives by creating environmental mayhem. With them, but in different roles, were the judges and juries who sat on the groundbreaking cases.

In 1965, private attorneys took on one of the huge energy company, Consolidated Edison, to stop construction of a power generator at Storm King Mountain in New York. Con Ed planned to cut away part of the mountain and turn the nearby forest into a reservoir. The case forced Con Ed to abandon the project. The mountain still stands. This landmark case, which bolstered the government's ability to take environmental and esthetic concerns into consideration when granting permits to corporations, signaled that the civil justice system would become a critical vehicle for progress in environmental issues. Another illustration is worth giving.

In the 1940s and 50s, Hooker Chemical & Plastic Corporation dumped twenty thousand tons of hazardous chemical waste in the abandoned canal that was the centerpiece of the Love Canal neighborhood of Niagara Falls. It later covered the dump with dirt and sold the property to the school board for one dollar. During the next decades, the chemicals leached out of the drums and into the surrounding soil. In the 1970s, the EPA learned of the problem. An EPA administrator reported, "Trees and gardens were turning black and dying. The air had a choking smell. Children returned from play with burns on their hands and faces. And then there were the birth defects."

Attorneys representing those citizens forced the corporation to pay restitution, and, eventually, nearly a thousand families were evacuated to safe areas. The national outrage sparked by this case in our civil justice system paved the way for the liability act known as Superfund. It empowers federal agencies to hold polluters accountable for their damages and compel cleanup. Our civil justice system worked there, it worked to require cleanup in the Exxon Valdez spill, and the threat of litigation in it spurred BP to clean up our beaches.

Our civil justice system is David. Corporate America is Goliath. Mark another point for David. History has repeated itself.

New federal standards unveiled in June require doctors to start using electronic medical records routinely, including logging patients' diagnoses and visits, ordering prescriptions, monitoring for drug interactions and making records accessible to other medical providers. Advocates say meeting the "meaningful use" standards will save lives, prevent errors, reduce waste and save money.

Doctors who use electronic record according to the standards by 2015 can collect as much as $64,000 each in federal stimulus funds to help them buy hardware and software. Those who don't comply by that date will see their Medicare or Medicaid payments trimmed by one percent per year.

Health care experts have estimated the cost of not having electronic medical records at nearly $78 billion a year. This includes such costs as sending lab results between hospitals and outside laboratories, needlessly duplicating medical procedures and shuttling paper charts among doctors. It is also estimated that just eliminating the phone calls between doctors and pharmacists alone would save nearly $2 billion each year.

Having immediate access to patient prior medical history could also save lives. In an emergency situation, knowing prescribed medications a patient is taking who has never been to that particular hospital before may prevent prescribing counter-effective drugs or performing procedures on someone who may be on high doses of blood thinners without taking the necessary precautions.

But purchasing the system and maintaining it annually is not cheap and many beilieve the stimulus grants will not always offset the costs. Some are concerned older doctors may not want to spend the amount it will take or may not want to learn the new technology opting to retire or close their practice. Other concerns of whether the systems can protect patients privacy have been raised as well as how often systems may become outdated but many doctors are still focusing on the positive and are embracing the change.

After reading over two thousand pages of the new health insurance law and committee reports about it, in an earlier column I started telling you about some of the new law's benefits. If you are an elderly person, these benefits are important, maybe crucial. Let me tell you more about how this law that became effective in March will help you.

Some health care insurance companies have imposed yearly caps on the amount of medical or hospital care they will pay. Since that seems to be contrary to the idea that in exchange for a premium paid, an insurance company will accept the risk and pay for whatever care is needed, the new act in September will tightly restrict the refusal of payments by insurance carriers and will limit their restrictions to those defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Better than that, effective in 2014, all plans are prohibited from setting those caps.

Next, the new act makes preventive care free. The idea is that if we can catch disease and illness early, the cost of treating the problems will be so much lower that the health insurance law will actually lower health care costs and save money for businesses, consumers, and the government. Hopefully, it will. Under the act, new plans are required to cover preventive services with absolutely no co-pays and deductibles. This section of the plan, too, will go into effect in September.

A lot of people who are uninsured now because of pre-existing conditions have hope, because in about a week, those people will have immediate access to insurance through a temporary, high risk pool. This law helps young people, too. Think about those who aren't insured by an employment policy because they are still in school, or they can't find a job because of a weak economy. Under old concepts, they might have been covered until age 21, but under this law, they will have medical insurance under their parents' policies until they are 26. That is if the parents agree that they will be covered.

Continue reading "More About What You Need to Know About the New Health Insurance Law" »

Most laws are imperfect as they are written or as they are applied, but some good can be found in most of them. The new health insurance law is no exception. Despite the doom and gloom predictions by some, it has some very good parts, and some of them go into effect quickly. Here's a rundown on some of them.

The act provides for small business tax credits. Why is that important? Because tax credits reduce the cost of insurance for the business which means that a business is more likely to provide good insurance for its employees. Under the new law, tax credits of up to 35% of premiums will be immediately available to companies that offer insurance to their employees. Better yet, in 4 years, the tax credits will climb to 50% for small businesses.

You've probably heard about the Medicare Donut Hole that keeps some people from getting Medicare benefits for drugs. The new law starts to close that hole. People who hit it this year get a $250 rebate. Beginning next year, there will be a 50% reduction in the price of brand name drugs in the donut hole, and the hole will be completely eliminated by 2020.

A wonderful benefit of the law beginning only 6 months from now on January 1, 2011, is the elimination of co-payments for preventive services and the complete exemption of preventive services from deductibles under the Medicare program. Health insurance plans are notorious for dropping the coverage of people who are sick, just when they need coverage the most. The new law prevents that practice. This provision will take effect before the end of the year. Insurance companies have been just as notorious about refusing to insure children with pre-existing conditions like leukemia. Before this year is over, that practice will be banned, and 3 years from now, it will be banned for everyone.

Continue reading "What You Should Know About the New Health Insurance Law" »

Please read the press release published if you have children or grandchildren and have given them any of the medicines listed in the article. Also check your medicine cabinets to see if you have any of these medication on hand. For your families safety, follow the FDA advise and stop using these medications as a precaution. For more information, call the number listed at the bottom of the article.

The Associated Press
Saturday, May 1, 2010
WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration said Saturday it was investigating a health-care company for possible other problems following its recall of more than 40 over-the-counter infant's and children's liquid medications.

McNeil Consumer Healthcare, based in Fort Washington, Pa., issued the voluntary recall late Friday in the United States and 11 other countries after consulting with the FDA. The recall involves children's versions of Tylenol, Tylenol Plus, Motrin, Zyrtec and Benadryl, because they don't meet quality standards.

The FDA said it was reviewing procedures at McNeil, which appears to be the sole source of the problems. "We are following through with the facility to make certain that everything has been checked," said FDA spokeswoman Elaine Gansz Bobo.
According to McNeil and the FDA, some of the products recalled may have a higher concentration of active ingredient than is specified on the bottle. Others may contain particles, while still others may contain inactive ingredients that do not meet internal testing requirements.

The FDA called the potential for serious medical problems "remote," but it advised consumers to stop using the medicine as a precaution. It said a health care professional should be consulted if a child has recently taken any of the recalled products and is exhibiting unexpected symptoms.

The FDA also says parents in the interim should consider substitute child medications, such as generic versions. It does not recommend that children be given adult-strength Tylenol or Motrin because they are not intended for younger age groups.
The medicines were made and distributed in the United States, and exported to Canada, the Dominican Republic, Dubai, Fiji, Guam, Guatemala, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Panama, Trinidad and Tobago and Kuwait.

Details are available by telephone at 1-888-222-6036 or on the Web at www.mcneilproductrecall.com.