by Ronald R. Benjamin (lead attorney in law suit against diet drug companies)

This letter will serve as a summary of the types of legal options available to anyone who had been taking the so-called diet pill Redux (dexfenfluramine) or what has been popularly know as the fen/phen regimen (phentermine, sold as Adipex, Ionamin and other brand names, and fenfluramine, sold as Pondimen). I want to begin be telling you that these drugs are dangerous, and the only available reliable evidence out there on long term use (more than 90 days) points to serious side effects ranging from permanent damage to the cardiovascular system to brain damage.

I am aware that many people have lost weight with these drugs, but that is by and large only on a temporary basis, and when the weight came back it was usually "and then some." So, in addition to being downright dangerous, these pills really do not work. For anyone who is interested, I have a substantial amount of information by way of scientific studies already completed which demonstrate the above.

Although the law will vary a bit from state to state, it is clear that anyone exposed to these pills, especially if they were given for cosmetic reasons, will be able to file a claim against not only the manufacturer of the drugs, but in many instances, the doctor who prescribed it, the weight loss center, if one was involved in your experience with the drug, as well as others who may have had a role in your receiving the drug.

I am aware from speaking to numerous people who have called for advice that there is a great deal of emotional stress being suffered just from the fear of getting one of the illnesses that have been linked to these drugs. If you have suffered stress or fear of sustaining harm in the future you may have a claim for damages stemming from emotional stress regardless of whether you sustained one of the illnesses linked to these drugs:

1. Pulmonary hypertension is the most serious illness linked to these drugs. It is not a single disease, but a description of the hemodynamic consequences that lead to chronic increase in pulmonary arterial pressure. If the cause is not known it is referred to as primary pulmonary hypertension. If known, e.g. such as when drug induced, it is referred to as pulmonary hypertension secondary to ingestion of Redux, of Fen/phen etc. Fortunately it is believed that this disease is not common, leading many scientists to believe one must have some genetic predisposition that brings about the condition upon exposure to these drugs. (This does not, however, let the drug companies off the hook, since they knew that a high percentage of persons exposed to the drugs developed or showed signs of developing this condition.

2. The other disease relating to the heart is valvular heart disease. The FDA and the drug companies are claiming this problem was only recently discovered which probably shows they have at least as many spin doctors working at this as regular physicians and scientists. Anyone who has taken these drugs should be checked to see if there has been any damage done to the valves as a result of taking this drug.

3. Neurotoxicity is the other disease linked to these drugs. Brain damage - the full extent of which is not yet known - is clearly a matter of concern. The manifestations of this type of harm includes memory loss, depression (which the drug companies will try to blame on some preexisting problems no doubt), anxiety, and behavioral changes. In many instances some of the symptoms described above will disappear when drug use is stopped.

My firm is representing NAAFA in the federal lawsuit brought in Washington D.C., which was instrumental in getting these drugs withdrawn. In that lawsuit, we are seeking to have the pharmaceutical companies pay the cost of any medical expenses incurred in testing or other necessary monitoring stemming from being exposed to these drugs. If you need to be tested and cannot afford it you should contact NAAFA for advice.

In addition, our firm has filed individual lawsuits on behalf of persons exposed to these drugs. The types of individual claims we have brought against the drug companies include failing to properly test ;these drugs before marketing them for human consumption to failing to warn about the known dangers that were linked to these drugs, not to mention the all important fact that they could only produce a temporary weight loss. Compensatory damages are for the purpose of compensating the injured party for the harm they suffered. To be sure money is an appropriate remedy for the purpose of paying medical expenses incurred as a result of the exposure to these drugs, to cover wages lost form illness caused by these drugs, or to refund the money spent on prescriptions for what are essentially useless drugs (strangely enough called an action for redhibition), under the theory that the law operates in a way to make the injured party whole again. Yet it is clear, if you sustained one of the very serious illnesses that these drugs bring about, financial compensation is small comfort in light of the physical and emotional harms caused by these drugs.

Here the drug manufacturers did little if any testing, apparently because in their rush to get these drugs to market the prospect of huge profits counted more than the serious health risk to millions of Americans. There is ample evidence to establish that the drug companies were well aware a chemically similar drug was released in Europe around 1967 and had to be taken off the market in 1970 because it caused an epidemic of pulmonary hypertension there. (It is not surprising then that a senior FDA official who played a major role in bringing about the FDA approval of Redux in 1996, Dr. James Bilstead, has stated he would not use the drug himself.) Punitive damages are essentially financial punishment for that kind of reckless conduct.

Doctors and weight loss centers are likely to be subject to negligence and malpractice claims as well as failing to warn people of the risks of taking these drugs. Those of you who were given the drug for cosmetic reasons may have a claim for punitive damages as well since it was outrageous for any health care provider to use this drug on someone for cosmetic reasons given the dangerous side effects that were well known and heavily documented throughout the scientific community.

I believe some lawyers have filed class actions around the country. My own view is that each case should proceed on its own merit in a separate lawsuit. Everyone is different, each injury is individual to the person suffering the harm. I believe lumping people together is only helpful to the drug companies and promotes the ugly notion that the more people you hurt with your product the greater the chance you escape liability -- witness the ugly fiasco with the tobacco industry.

I also believe that the principle of first come first serve will come into play because if enough cases are brought around the country efforts will be made to group matters so that all injured parties can ultimately argue over a single pool of money while the drug companies go on about their business -- one group of people heading in that direction are the women victimized by the makers of breast implants. In short, my own view is that time is of the essence.

My firm is available to represent anyone interested in pursuing this further. I presently represent people who have suffered the injuries discussed above, and will continue to do so under the traditional contingency relationship which means you pay no fees unless there is a recovery on your behalf.

If you are interested in discussing the matter further or just want some more information I have a toll free number you may dial from anywhere in the United States (1-800-493-2700), or call 212/493-2700 (New York City office) or 607/772-1442 (upstate New York office).

Ronald R. Benjamin

Return to Diet Drug Info