Shocking Ruling On Remdesivir – Manufacturer And Hospital Not Protected By Law
(greatgameindia.com)
🧠 SUDDENLY RECKONING🕳️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (74)
sorted by:
It took contamination of glass particles to get a liability ruling on the manufacturer of and hospitals using it? Is this some novel way of punishing the manufacturer, along with including the hospital? I don't quite get how the hospital would know about glass particles in the product. This would be like a grocery store being held responsible for contaminated cans of Campbell soup. Or is the hospital thrown in the ruling to provide a way out for overturning the case? I suspect it as being a poison pill that was included. What a strange twist to this horrendous saga about Remdesivir. Is this going to be the new cover-up story that it was the glass particles and not the Remdesivir that caused so many liver and kidney damage killing so many people.
If the grocery still sold the soup after they knew ....
Correct. If the grocery store was informed of the contaminated product, but failed to pull the product, then yes, it is a case of liability.
Collusion or conspiracy.
They don't know how the glass particles got in there, so the hospital is included at this point. Unfortunately for remdesivir antagonists, this changes nothing. This is solely about one dude we got contaminated medicine. That's it.
A fair amount of people on here won't remember the Tylenol contaminated scare. They do know the result though - OTC meds now have tamper-resistant packaging.
When the scare was happening people didn't know if the bottles were tampered with by shoppers at grocery stores or if they came that way from the manufacturer. Since the bottles with cyanide contamination came from 2 different manufacturing plants in 2 different states it was generally accepted someone was buying the Tylenol, lacing it with cyanide, and putting it back on the shelves at stores.
I assume that is why in the remdesivir case they would sue the manufacturer and the hospital.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tylenol_murders
I think the application could be extended. What about covid batches with contaminated DNA? Or the batches with 1/20 or 1/1000?
The covid shot needs to go in the mussel not the vein. Or if patients were not provided with informed consent before being jabbed. I think there's more than enough gross negligence claims to be made.
And when you can prove those, you might have a case. That's not an issue here.
Could this be why my brother in law ended up in intensive care after they gave him remsdesivir. He had excessive bleeding.
Probably should try to find out!
This does seem like a deflection from the blatant malpractice of using Remdesivir at all. Any plaintiff would have to prove, that the Remdesivir their loved one had was tainted with the glass, and that would seem to be very limited, and possibly not possible, which would leave all the people killed from Remdesivir, which was known to kill people, but given by the doctors anyway, without recourse.
It seems to me that glass particles may act similarly on the organs as Remdesivir. The case smells to me.
I don't know. I just know that if you can sue them, take it.
Yea, dates matter. He was treated with Remdesivir in November 2021 and recall seems to have been issued in December 2021 so hospital would not have known. But once recall issued I believe the argument is the hospital should have followed up in his instance based on the lot information as the glass as a cause would have changed his course of care and possibly resulted in a better outcome. Negligence or gross negligence.
Then, and only then is when the hospital could be liable. If the hospital failed to communicate the recalled lots (providing the manufacturer contacted all the hospitals that received the contaminated lots) to patients receiving the bad lots, then there is a case for liability.