Brazil claims successful test of parasite vaccine

"Photo illustration. Brazilian researchers say they have successfully tested a vaccine against schistosomiasis, a disease caused by parasitic worms that afflicts more than 200 million people worldwide. (AFP Photo/Saul Loeb)" title

View the Original article

Juice Maker's Health Benefit Claims 'Deceptive,' Says Judge

Print

A federal judge ruled that the makers of Pom Wonderful pomegranate juice and supplements must stop making claims that its products can treat or prevent heart disease, prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction pending adequate scientific proof of the alleged health benefits.

The ruling came in response to a complaint by the Federal Trade Commission that Pom Wonderful’s manufacturers violated federal law by engaging in deceptive advertising.  In addition to the order that the drink makers stop making false statements, the agency also asked the judge to require that any claims of health benefits be approved by the Food and Drug Adminstration.

The judge found that several of the advertisements promoting the purported health benefits of several products interpreted by consumers to be true were “false and misleading,” according to the decision.

The judge did find, however, that requiring FDA approval would be “overreaching.”

But the decision also stated that several Pom ads were not deceptive, and “the preponderance of the evidence fails to demonstrate that such advertisements would reasonably be interpreted by consumers as containing such claims.”

Roll Global, the parent company of Pom Wonderful, claimed several victories after the judge handed down his ruling.

“While we are still analyzing the ruling, it is clear that we will be able to continue to promote the health benefits of our safe  food products without having our advertisements, marketing or public relations efforts preapproved by the FDA and without having to rely on double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies, the standard required for pharmaceuticals. We consider this not only to be a huge win for us but for the natural food products industry,” Craig Cooper, Pom Wonderful’s chief legal officer, said in a press release.

Cooper also said that the judge found only a few of the company’s ads made misleading claims, and while he disagrees with that finding, he said the company would “make appropriate adjustments if necessary to prevent that impression in the future.”

The order is in effect for the next 20 years.

SHOWS: Good Morning America 

View the Original article

Pomegranate juice claims deceptive, US rules

"This photo illustration shows a bottle of POM Wonderful pomegranate juice. Pomegranate juice has not been proven to be an effective treatment for cancer, heart disease or erectile dysfunction, US regulators said Monday, calling a company's ad claims deceptive. (AFP Photo/KAREN BLEIER)" title

View the Original article

Nutella Lawsuit Latest Reminder to Question Health Claims, Read Food Labels

This story comes from the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where individuals publish their unique perspectives on some of the world’s most popular websites.Do you have a story to tell? Become a Yahoo! contributor

COMMENTARY

View the Original article

US scientist claims to have found elusive G-spot

"A US gynecologist has claimed to have found the G-spot, a supposed pleasure center on the front interior wall of the vagina, but some critics say not so fast. (AFP Photo/Jay Directo)" title

View the Original article

Tenet to pay almost $43 million to settle false claims

"background-image:url('http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/2yfzzJPW_khblScKDHLNfg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MzAwO2NyPTE7Y3c9NDUwO2R4PTA7ZHk9MDtmaT11bGNyb3A7aD0xMjc7cT04NTt3PTE5MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2012-04-10T151934Z_1_CBRE83916KU00_RTROPTP_2_HEALTH-SUMMIT.JPG');" width

View the Original article

Doctors Detail High Costs of Fighting Malpractice Claims

HealthDay – 2 hrs 26 mins ago WEDNESDAY, April 4 (HealthDay News) -- For doctors defending medical malpractice claims, costs vary widely across specialties and can run into the tens of thousands, even when a patient did not receive a payout, new research shows.

The upshot: Patients end up paying the price in the end, the researchers concluded in their letter published April 5 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

"Higher defense costs and higher malpractice premiums are ultimately passed down to patients through higher physician fees," said co-author Dr. Anupam Jena, a physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and a senior fellow at the Schaeffer Health Policy Center at the University of Southern California.

According to Jena and his co-authors, cardiologists shell out the most when it comes to malpractice claims -- averaging more than $83,000 for paid claims -- while ophthalmologists spend nearly $24,000 for paid claims.

Expert witnesses, research costs, lawyers' fees and funding overhead costs, such as filing fees, are among the expenses that rack up bills, Jena said.

"The average malpractice claim in our study cost approximately $23,000," he said, adding that the claims that result in payments are more expensive because they take longer to defend, typically up to two years or more.

To come up with defense costs of paid and unpaid malpractice claims by specialty, the authors analyzed costs associated with nearly 27,000 malpractice claims that closed between 1995 and 2005. The claims involved nearly 41,000 physicians who were covered by a national liability insurer.

Jena and his colleagues had examined the same data in a 2011 NEJM study that compared malpractice risk by medical specialty, he said.

"We wanted to follow-up our earlier study by studying the magnitude of defense costs in medical malpractice and to explore how those costs vary by specialty," said Jena.

Why did some specialists rack up defense bills almost four times higher than others? Jena said the chart-toppers, heart and cancer physicians, are more likely to deal with claims linked to a failure to diagnose, and possibly death.

"The damages from malpractice vary, ranging from a missed diagnosis that delays treatment to the unexpected loss of life," he said. "Many cases are complex and those cases can stretch out longer," he said, noting that time is money.

Sonia Suter, an associate professor of law at George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C., said the letter contains useful information. "It helps inform the ongoing debate about health-care costs and whether or not medical malpractice is contributing to higher costs overall," she said.

"I don't think this letter tells me the whole story, though. It's only one piece of the puzzle," said Suter, adding that she thought obstetrics would have landed higher up on the list. (It's sixth of 25 specialties.)

Dr. Jeffrey Segal is a neurosurgeon and founder and CEO of Medical Justice, a for-profit company that helps physicians deter and manage frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits. He said the letter in NEJM points out not just costs of claims, but the significant number of cases that come through the legal system that aren't won by the patient.

"We see here many claims are coming through that don't have merit. In a perfect legal system, you'd have the dollars going to a patient who is injured by medical negligence," he said. "This reaffirms that it's a system that takes a lot of time and is very expensive."

Segal added, "We've proposed legislation in Florida -- I'm part of a nonprofit that suggests a better way of doing things -- that would help move cases through faster. I'm talking weeks and months instead of years."

Jena said there are some cases where the patient was clearly harmed and, in those cases, it's important that the patient is compensated and compensated early on.

"Waiting two years is not fair," Jena said, and added that a quicker resolution would reduce not just the financial cost to those injured, but the emotional expense as well.

Jena described another solution that might hold promise for reducing malpractice claim costs.

"The University of Michigan hospital system tested a program where they identified errors early on and proactively approached patients and said, 'This is an error that occurred and we apologize, and we'd like to compensate you,'" he said. "Malpractice lawsuits, defense costs, and the time required to resolve claims all went down." He added that this approach of early disclosure needs to be studied further.

Cardiologist Dr. Chip Lavie, medical director of cardiac rehabilitation and prevention at the John Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute in New Orleans, also weighed in on the new findings.

"I believe if there was substantially less threat of medical malpractice, physicians could practice medicine in a different way, trying to be cost-effective and trying to do the right thing with what is truly best for the patient as opposed to what is the best way to maintain a good defense against any potential subsequent lawsuit," Lavie said.

More information

Visit the Institute of Medicine to see its landmark report on reducing preventable medical errors.

View the Original article