Merck's Defense Struggling At Trial

August 1, 2005

Shortly into the first-ever Vioxx-related trial, commentators are remarking that the events have been disastrous for Merck. The New York Times published statements asserting that “Merck looks battered” and “Merck appears to be in a deep hole.” In contrast, plaintiff's attorney Mark Lanier, has been credited with doing a remarkable job exposing the shortcomings in Merck's case, including evidence suggesting that Merck misstated Vioxx risks to doctors, the FDA, and arthritis patients. Lanier has presented the case of a sympathetic widow who was misled by Merck’s agressive advertising campaign promoting Vioxx. After suggesting to her husband, Robert Ernst, that he speak to his doctor about Vioxx - just as the Merck ad told her to do - the widow must now contend with the guilt she feels regarding her role in her husband’s death.  Ernst died in his sleep after taking Vioxx for eight months. 

Lanier's performance is only one of the setbacks experienced by Merck. Earlier, Merck's request to block Maria Araneta, the coroner, from presenting her testimony to the jury was rejected. Araneta conducted the autopsy on Robert Ernst confirming that he died of a heart attack. Spectators were highly critical of two Merck defense witnesses, Dr. Alan S. Nies and Dr. Nancy Santanello, for their inability to refute the plaintiff's accusations that Merck hid the details of Vioxx risks. Lanier's case relies heavily on documents provided by Merck itself.  According to CNN, Lanier was able to get Nancy Santanello, Merck’s top researcher, to confess that Merck failed to change the Vioxx label despite Merck's awareness that higher cardiovascular risks existed. Officials comment that it is clear that Vioxx victims might actually be able to defeat the drug giant.