Market Overview

Transvaginal Mesh Attorney Jeff Nadrich Responds to Johnson & Johnson Claim That Public Knew About Vaginal Mesh Risks

The first transvaginal mesh case is underway, and a Johnson & Johnson attorney reportedly claims that the company has been transparent about the potential side effects. Attorney Jeff Nadrich responds.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) February 24, 2013

The first of 1,800 vaginal mesh cases against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson is currently underway, in the case of Gross v. Gynecare Inc., Atl-L-6966-10, Superior Court of Atlantic County, New Jersey (Atlantic City). As Bloomberg reports, the case involves plaintiff Linda Gross, who received a vaginal mesh implant on July 13, 2006, in order to reinforce her pelvic muscles. Gross reportedly experienced chronic pain and other health problems as a result of the implantation.

“What we've established during this trial is this is something that shouldn't have been sold,” Gross's attorney, Adam Slater, said in his summation. “We know that there was a failure to warn, and there was causation as a result of the failure to warn. We know that tragic decision to put in the Prolift destroyed Linda's life.” Slater's statement was quoted by Bloomberg.

But Johnson & Johnson counters that the public was made well aware of the risks associated with vaginal mesh. Christy Jones, an attorney for J&J, was quoted by Bloomberg as saying the following in her closing argument: “Prolift has been studied and studied extensively. It is not a defective or unreasonably dangerous product. Our position is that Prolift is a safe and effective product, that Ethicon adequately warned doctors of the risks, that doctors knew of the risks.”

Jeff Nadrich, a transvaginal mesh attorney based in Los Angeles, recently responded to this claim, arguing that a 2011 FDA warning contradicts Jones's statement. According to Nadrich, “The risks associated with vaginal mesh are very real. In 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a warning about the use of vaginal mesh to treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence, citing more than 1,000 different reports of complications.”

Nadrich adds, “If you have experienced either of these conditions, speak to your health care professional about all of the options available. There are alternatives to vaginal mesh implantation.” He also encourages all transvaginal mesh side effect victims to contact a qualified vaginal mesh attorney right away, as litigation is currently ongoing.

About Nadrich & Cohen: Jeffrey Nadrich is a personal injury attorney with Nadrich & Cohen, a California based law firm with offices in 18 locations across California. The firm has offices in Arcadia, Bakersfield, Fresno, Irvine, Long Beach, Modesto, Oakland, Oxnard, Palm Springs, Redding, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Rosa, and Tracy. Nadrich & Cohen handles all types of wrongful death and serious injury accident cases, including auto, truck, bus, motorcycle, and bicycle accidents, pedestrian collisions, boating accidents, dog bites, defective product cases and nursing home abuse. Victims are encouraged to call 1-800-718-4658 for a free consultation with a Nadrich & Cohen attorney.

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/prwebtransvaginal-mesh/attorney/prweb10444762.htm

 

Around the Web, We're Loving...

Get Benzinga's Newsletters