During the investigation, the Senate finance inquiry reviewed internal Medtronic documents.  The Senate finance inquiry found that the company paid nearly $210 million between 1996 to 2010 in consulting fees, royalties, and other payments to physicians involved in conducting outside research on Infuse.  The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, said in a statement that, “Patients everywhere will be better served by a more open, honest system without this kind of collusion.”

The release of a special issue of a medical publication, The Spine Journal, helped spur the Senate inquiry.  A group of spine specialists publicly repudiated the studies performed by the Medtronic-financed researchers in that report.  The specialists claimed that the studies in question had understated serious adverse effects connected with Infuse, including sterility in males.

Critics of Infuse have long accused Medtronic of overplaying its benefits and playing down its risks in studies published in medical journals.  The Medtronic officials are also accused of inserting claims that their product was superior to a competing one into the studies. Internal Medtronic documents seemed to indicate that the company had put language claiming that Infuse was superior to a bone graft into some reports.

Medtronic released a statement saying it disputed any suggestion that its employees had written or improperly influenced any of the medical journal reports.  The company stated, “Medtronic does not agree with many of the findings” in the report.  The company also said that the payments to researchers had been largely royalty fees that were in line with industry practice and the studies in question had accurately represented the risks of the treatment procedure.

Perhaps the most discussed topic has been the dispute between the referees and the league office. While both sides struggled to resolve their labor issues, replacement officials were brought in to work games. Many had no experience on this level, often coming from high school and Division II or III. The inexperience came to a head in a Week 3 Monday night game between Seattle and Green Bay. Seattle QB Russell Wilson threw a “Hail Mary” pass into the end zone, and replays showed the Green Bay defensive back with possession of the ball. However, officials ruled it to be a Seattle touchdown, giving the Seahawks a much-disputed victory, and those Green Bay fans into sports betting a sleepless night.

As usual, quarterbacks have provided many memorable moments of the season so far. Saints QB Drew Brees set a new NFL record by throwing a touchdown pass in his 48th consecutive game, breaking Johnny Unitas’ long-held mark. Green Bay QB Aaron Rodgers had a great game in Week 6, throwing for 338 yards and 6 touchdowns with no interceptions against the Houston Texans.

The emergence of the rookie quarterbacks has also been a big story this season. The top two picks in the draft, Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III, have had stellar rookie seasons to date. Luck has led the Indianapolis Colts to a winning record and in the hunt for a wild-card berth, while RG III has had many scintillating moments with the Redskins, including a wild opening-day victory over New Orleans.

Not to be outdone, a running back has emerged as a big surprise this season. Tampa Bay RB Doug Martin exploded onto the scene with a 251 yard, 4 TD game against the Oakland Raiders, giving fantasy team owners a new name to consider. With the season only half over, there will be many more great moments to come.

Researchers expressed a mix of enthusiasm and skepticism for the plan.  Some of the researchers said that the company is taking a step in the right direction and might set a precedent in an industry that could use more transparency.  Dr. Harlan M. Krumholz, a cardiologist at the Yale School of Medicine, said, “This is a reason to celebrate a company stepping forward to make a public commitment to sharing their data at the individual patient level and fostering open science.  The hope is that it would make it untenable for other companies not to follow suit.”

After experimenting with disclosure for treatments for tropical diseases like malaria, Glaxo has found those efforts to be successful and is ready to move forward with more disclosures.  The company also plans to release information about 200 of its experimental drug compounds that have shown signs of fighting tuberculosis.  Joshua M. Sharfstein, Maryland’s health secretary, said, “Making data available, particularly on the products that didn’t succeed, could avoid others having to learn the same lessons.”

Whether more disclosure will lead to more effective, safer drugs remains to be seen.  Dr. Patrick Vallance, president of pharmaceuticals research and development at GlaxoSmithKline, said, “We’re increasingly realizing that the more you can make this an open enterprise, the more likely you are to be able to get an advance which allows you to make a medicine.  I think we recognize that you learn as much about the medicine after it’s launched as you knew before.”

The settlements resolve charges that subsidiaries of Pfizer and Wyeth bribed overseas doctors and other health care workers to increase sales of their drugs.  S.E.C. enforcement division official Kara Brockmeyer said, “Pfizer subsidiaries in several countries had bribery so entwined in their sales culture that they offered points and bonus programs to improperly reward foreign officials who proved to be their best customers.  These charges illustrate the pitfalls that exist for companies that fail to appropriately monitor potential risks in their global operations.”

Pfizer said in a statement that it had reported the activity to the federal government in 2004 after the discovery of improper payments by employees of a recently acquired Croatian affiliate.  A multiyear investigation was conducted, with Pfizer briefing federal officials along the way.  Pfizer learned of the improper payments involving Wyeth soon after closing the deal and reported that activity as well.  However, in the case of Wyeth, the issues are said to have continued after Pfizer’s acquisition of the company.  Pfizer acquired Wyeth in 2009.

Amy Schulman, executive vice president and general counsel for Pfizer, said, “The actions which led to this resolution were disappointing, but the openness and speed with which Pfizer voluntarily disclosed and addressed them reflects our true culture and the real value we place on integrity and meeting commitments.  We expect every colleague across Pfizer to adhere to the highest standards of conduct, and we will continue to hold ourselves and our colleagues accountable for maintaining these standards.”

Bristol-Myers is teaming up with AstraZeneca to finance the transaction.  AstraZeneca will pay about $3.4 billion in cash and receive a share of the profits from Amylin’s sales.  Besides Bristol-Myers and AstraZeneca, others that had made bids included Novartis, Merck and Sanofi-Aventis.  Amylin put itself up for sale in April.

Major drug companies are scrambling to create deals that will refill their product pipelines with new treatments as older blockbuster products lose their patent exclusivity.  Amylin Pharmaceuticals is the maker of a promising new diabetes drug, Bydureon, a treatment for Type 2 diabetes that is injected once a week.  Amylin won approval to sell Bydureon in January.

Bydureon is a refinement of Byetta, which requires twice-daily injections.  Both are created from a hormone in the saliva of the Gila monster, a poisonous lizard native to the Southwestern United States and in Mexico.  The two drugs are classed as GLP-1 receptor agonists, which mimic the effect of glucagon-like peptide, a hormone that increases insulin production when blood sugar is high.

Byetta was originally introduced in 2005.  Since 2008, Byetta prescriptions have been declining, in part because of safety concerns about pancreas inflammation.  Competition from Victoza, a similar drug from Novo Nordisk that requires an injection only once a day, has also affected the number of prescriptions written.

Elliott Sigal, Bristol-Myers’s chief scientific officer, said in an interview, “This is about expanding our diabetes franchise.  It’s important to have different medical options.”  Mark Schoenebaum, an analyst at ISI Group, said the purchase made sense for Bristol-Myers.  He said, “I like it as a really creative way to do it.  I like the fact that they split the deal with AstraZeneca.  I can’t remember seeing that before.”

Inspectors found that Animas never reported to authorities on one complaint about a serious patient injury and delayed their reporting on two other incidents.  The patients affected were hospitalized with dangerously high blood sugar, respiratory failure, coma, and a life-threatening complication called diabetic ketoacidosis, caused by lack of insulin to break down blood sugar.

Erik Gordon, a professor and analyst at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, said, “Any company can have one of these things pop up and smack them, and you can have a bad coincidence when two of them come and smack you three weeks apart.  But it’s not bad luck when you have this many.  The amazing thing is that Bill Weldon (Johnson & Johnson CEO) still has a job.”

The quality problems at the health giant have regulators and analysts bewildered.  This is at least the seventh Johnson & Johnson business to come under scrutiny in recent years.  The company set the standard for protecting public safety decades ago with a nationwide recall of Tylenol bottles that an unknown assailant had poisoned.  The corporate credo that is prominently displayed at the company’s headquarters stresses the company’s responsibility to the doctors, patients, and parents who use Johnson & Johnson products.

Johnson & Johnson has announced nearly 30 product recalls since September 2009.  The recalled products have included millions of bottles of Tylenol, Motrin and other nonprescription medicines, prescription drugs for seizures and HIV, faulty hip implants, and contact lenses.  The recalls have occurred for various reasons, including contamination with metal shards, glass particles, nauseating odors, and inaccurate levels of active drug ingredients.

The FTC released a statement saying, “After a thorough and comprehensive review of other consumer protection and competition issues in this matter, the F.T.C. issued a letter closing the investigation.”  The decision comes after more than two years of investigation.

The agency looked into CVS Caremark in 2009 after some legislators, labor unions, pharmacies and consumer groups raised concerns about potentially anticompetitive and anticonsumer business practices by the company.  The F.T.C. opened an investigation early that year into whether the merger of CVS, one of the largest drugstore chains, with Caremark, one of the largest pharmacy benefits managers, had given the company an unfair market advantage in directing customers to certain drugs and obtaining information about competing pharmacies.  The more serious allegations of anticompetitive behavior were dismissed by the agency.

Only one violation was found.  One of the company’s Medicare drug plans was found to have misled some consumers about drug prices.  CVS said in a statement that the settlement was related only to the business practices of RxAmerica, a subsidiary of Longs Drug Stores, that occurred before the company was acquired by CVS Caremark in October 2008.

According to CVS, the subsidiary posted inaccurate prices for certain generic drugs on a Web site maintained by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.  CVS said that the company rectified the pricing problem upon learning of it.  The F.T.C. asserted that while much of the incorrect pricing did occur before the purchase, some continued after the acquisition by CVS.

Larry Merlo, the chief executive of CVS Caremark, said, “CVS Caremark is pleased to have reached an agreement with the F.T.C. that ends the investigation and enables us to continue our focus on offering unique, innovative products and services that differentiate us and benefit consumers.”

AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb have announced that they are working with the FDA to determine their next steps and are in ongoing discussions with health authorities in Europe and other countries where they are seeking approval for the drug.  Shares of both companies fell more than 2% on the news.

The FDA decision cited elevated rates of bladder and breast cancer seen in clinical studies.  There were also concerns about infections and possible liver damage.  The FDA requested data from ongoing studies and may require new studies to be performed in the future to better evaluate the benefits and risks of the drug.  Expert FDA advisers recommended that dapagliflozin not be approved back in July.  Dapagliflozin has been tested in more than 5,000 patients in 19 clinical studies.

The decision by the FDA is likely to delay approval of dapagliflozin by a couple of years and spell trouble for other drugmakers developing the new type of diabetes pill.  Dapagliflozin is considered to be an important new drug in the fight against diabetes because it works differently than other diabetes medications.  Dr. Tim Anderson, an analyst for BernsteinResearch, forecast that sales of the drug could potentially reach about $1.2 billion a year by 2020.

Dapagliflozin belongs to a new class of drugs for Type 2 diabetes called SGLT-2 inhibitors.  SGLT-2 inhibitors reduce blood sugar by increasing the amount that is excreted in the urine.  Type 2 diabetes accounts for at least 90% of diagnosed cases of diabetes in adults.  SGLT-2 inhibitors have also been found to help patients lose weight.  Type 2 diabetes is typically related to obesity and a lifestyle that is sedentary.

Both Bristol and AstraZeneca have blockbuster drugs facing generic competition this year and in the near future.  Bristol’s blockbuster blood thinner Plavix is the world’s second best selling drug but loses patent protection in the U.S. this May.  AstraZeneca loses patent protection in March for its popular drug Seroquel, for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, which is currently the world’s third best selling drug.

Lipitor, considered to be the best selling drug in history, lost patent protection at the end of November 2011.  Before the release of the generics, Lipitor generated nearly $7.9 billion in annual sales in the U.S. and around $11 billion worldwide.  Sales of Lipitor accounted for around 16% of Pfizer’s annual revenue.

Pfizer has been fighting to retain as much market share for Lipitor as possible by aggressively discounting the drug for loyal patients, insurers, and pharmacies.  Insurance companies that agreed to Pfizer’s request that they only cover branded Lipitor, not any of the competing generics, were told that they would receive the difference between what they had been paying for the brand and what they would pay for cheaper generics in return for their agreement.  Insurers initially prepared to switch all of their patients on Lipitor to the generics automatically because of the chance for health insurers, plan sponsors and patients to save a significant amount of money.

Patients were offered discount cards from Pfizer that allowed them to purchase Lipitor for a $4 co-payment, a co-payment amount that is less than the co-payments of many generic medications.  The goal was to entice these patients to continue taking Lipitor instead of switching to the cheaper generics.  Pfizer had been running ads for the co-payment program, called “Lipitor For You,” heavily for months before the generics were available for purchase.

The new cholesterol-lowering generics on the market are atorvastatin pills from Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. and an authorized generic from Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. that is manufactured by Pfizer and marketed by Watson.  Chuck Caprariello, spokesman for Ranbaxy, said the company is “delighted that we are able to market atorvastatin and we anticipate increased market share over time.”  Ranbaxy has grabbed about 35% of market share.

Novartis expects the job cuts to save the company around $450 million per year beginning in 2013.  The layoffs will cost the company a one-time charge of $160 million.  No mention of the recent recall in the U.S. of several over the counter drugs manufactured by Novartis was made with the announcement.  The recall was initiated after reports surfaced of a possible mix-up with powerful prescription pain medications at a manufacturing plant in Nebraska.

The restructuring is due in part to the anticipation of lower sales for two of the company’s hypertension drugs: the expiration of the patent for Diovan, a best seller, and the failure of a clinical study into Tekturna, another hypertension drug.  The expiration of the patent for Diovan and increased competition from generics are expected to dramatically reduce the income from Diovan in the near future.  Diovan increased Novartis’ net pharmaceutical sales by $1.43 billion, to 8.16 billion, in the third quarter.

The company announced that a reassessment of Tekturna’s future sales potential after the termination of the clinical trial into expanded usage of the drug would result in a $900 million charge in the fourth quarter.  The clinical trial was canceled after the drug was found to increase complications in patients taking other common hypertension medications.  Two other experimental medications will also be dropped.

Head of Novartis’ pharmaceuticals division, David Epstein, said in a statement, “We recognize that the next two years will be challenging in the Pharmaceuticals Division and we are proactively making these changes to further focus our pipeline on the best opportunities and align our market position on our growth brands.  These are difficult but necessary decisions that will free up resources to invest in the future of our business which we view as well suited to bring new valuable therapies to patients and payors.”

The deal with Express Scripts brings Walgreens $5.3 billion in revenue annually.  Walgreens said that it would rather give up that revenue than continue to fill prescriptions that are unprofitable.  WellPoint, the largest health insurer in the United States based on membership, and TriCare, a health plan that serves military members and their families, are Express Scripts clients.  Walgreens is the biggest drugstore chain in the United States with 7,812 locations.

Walgreens’ split from Express Scripts is a multibillion-dollar dispute that appears to have no end in sight.  Greg Wasson, President and CEO of Walgreens, said the company made attempts to reach agreeable terms with Express Scripts.  The two sides have been unable to resolve their differences, but Walgreens remains open to another offer, Wasson said.

As the Express Scripts stalemate continues, Walgreens is making its own arrangements with companies and health plans to hold on to as many prescriptions as possible.  The company said it expects to keep between 97% and 99% of its 2011 prescription volume.

Net income fell to $554 million from $580 million a year ago, working out to $0.63 per share.  Revenue grew 4.7% to $18.16 billion.  Analysts expected earnings of $0.67 per share and $18.24 billion in revenue.

Selling, general, and administrative expenses climbed 5% due to Walgreens’ acquisition of drugstore.com and other items.  The lack of a traditional cough, cold, and flu season has also weighed heavily on Walgreens’ earnings.  Walgreens administered 5 million flu shots through November 30, down from 5.6 million a year ago.

Amgen executives indicated earlier this year that a biosimilar business might make some sense for the company.  Scott Foraker, head of biosimilars at Amgen, said in an interview that Amgen has always said biosimilars have a role as long as the patent protection on the innovative drug was respected.   Mr. Foraker said, “We have purposely been keeping it under wraps as long as we could.”

The cost of developing the biosimilars will be split roughly in half between Amgen and Watson, with Watson putting up as much as $400 million in cash or in-kind services.  The drugs that will be developed have not been specified by the companies, but some believe that the most likely ones would be the blockbuster products sold by Roche and its subsidiary Genentech.  These include Herceptin for breast cancer, Rituxan for lymphomas and Avastin for various cancers.  Watson will receive royalties and milestone payments on the sales of the drugs.

Some biotech companies are starting to view the creation of generics of other companies’ drugs as a natural extension of their business.  Watson looked at more than 150 potential partners before agreeing to the deal with Amgen.  Paul M. Bisaro, chief executive of Watson, said, “We structured the deal with the pre-eminent biologic development company in the world.”  It is planned for the drugs to reach the market in the United States around 2018 or 2019, when patents expire.

Amgen would do most of the development, manufacturing and commercialization initially, but over time, the biosimilar market could become more like the market for conventional generic drugs, allowing Watson to play a greater role.  Mr. Foraker stated that the partnership would allow Amgen to create biosimilars “in a way that was smart, that didn’t distract the organization from our main innovative business.”  Mr. Bisaro, said, “Over time, the commercial relationship modifies.  We both have strengths that make sense for each other no matter how the markets develop.”

Covidien is a health care company that was spun off from Tyco International in 2007.  The company began as Tyco Healthcare, but after Tyco’s chief executive, L. Dennis Kozlowski, was embroiled in a major scandal that led to his conviction for fraud, his successor started to separate the company’s businesses, believing that they were worth more as separate entities than as a large corporation.  Covidien held the company’s health care businesses.

José E. Almeida, the chief executive of Covidien, said, “We’ve evaluated whether to separate these businesses for several years, due to the major differences between the medical products and pharmaceutical industries.  We believe that now is the right time to do so because we have significantly improved the operations, performance and pipeline of our pharmaceuticals business.”

Covidien’s performance has been mixed as an independent company.  The pharmaceutical unit has been a drag on earnings.  Covidien attempted to sell the pharmaceutical unit to another health care company, but those talks reportedly broke down.  Covidien expects the spin off of the pharmaceutical unit to take up to 18 months.

Approximately two-thirds of the pharmaceutical unit’s products are sold in the United States.  Covidien’s remaining medical products business would have annual revenue totaling around $9.6 billion.  Covidien products include medications, like acetaminophen, as well as surgical supplies and radioactive isotopes used in medical procedures.

Mr. Almeida said on a conference call with analysts that spinning off the unit would allow the rest of the company to flourish.  Covidien has 41,000 employees worldwide.

This is the second wave of redundancy cuts in the past three months.  The cuts come on top of the 400 jobs lost in the US divisions of the company in October.  The positions being eliminated are in addition to the wide-ranging program of job cuts announced by AstraZeneca in January 2010 totaling 8,000 jobs and designed to be implemented over a period of several years.

A company spokeswoman said AstraZeneca was looking for ways to make greater use of alternative methods for promoting its medicines, such as online tools.  The reductions in the sales force represent about 24% of the US sales organization.  This latest round of job cuts is expected to be finalized by February of 2012.

Analysts are expecting a steady decline in sales for the company as patents expire on popular medications like Nexium for heartburn and Seroquel for schizophrenia.  The company is also expecting major challenges as generic versions of leading cholesterol pill Lipitor come onto the market and take market share from AstraZeneca’s Crestor.  The company has few drugs available that could potentially match the success of these blockbuster drugs, leaving management under pressure to cut costs and the sales force exposed to reductions.

Rich Fante, president of AstraZeneca U.S., said it was a difficult decision to make, but “The changes we are making, however, will help us deliver better results for our business and, most importantly, continue delivering on our mission of patient health.”  Pfizer, Merck, and Novartis have also announced major job cuts in recent months.

The FDA’s expert panel voted 21-5 to declare the labeling for the birth control pills inadequate and to require that more information about the risks of blood clots in the legs and lungs be included in the labeling for the pills.  Yaz was the best selling birth control pill in the United States in 2008 but safety concerns have caused the number of prescriptions written for Yaz to fall by more than 80% over the past two years.

The birth control pills in question use a manmade hormone called drospirenone that mimics the naturally occurring female hormone progesterone.  Since 2009, five studies have indicated that pills containing drospirenone carry a slightly higher risk of blood clots than older birth control pills.  A slightly higher risk can be critical because blood clots can trigger heart attacks, strokes and blockages in lungs or blood vessels.

During a nine-hour deliberation, panelists discussed the conflicting data about the risk of blood clots associated with drugs containing drospirenone and comparing it to the risks with older medications.  A majority agreed that information about the risk of blood clots, including their potentially fatal nature, should be clearly stated on the label.  Dr. Richard Bockman of New York’s Hospital for Special Surgery said, “Clearly the wording is inadequate and incomplete.  Adverse events have to be made graphic so physicians and patients are aware of the consequences.”

The panelists voted their confidence in keeping the drug on the market, showing that they believe that the pills remain a beneficial option for preventing pregnancy, but more than 1/3 voted against the drug’s overall benefit, most citing the numerous alternatives available on the market.  Mark Woods of New York University School of Medicine said, “I can see no real group of patients that this drug benefited over existing alternatives.  Without any clear benefit, and given the potentially catastrophic risk, I voted no.”

The letters from the senators were directed to Pfizer, UnitedHealthcare, Coventry Health Care, Express Scripts, Medco Health Solutions, and Catalyst Rx.  Senators Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat; Charles E. Grassley, an Iowa Republican; and Herb Kohl, the Wisconsin Democrat, said that their concern was about the long term impacts on employers, Medicare, and health care costs.

The senators were also concerned that pharmacy benefit managers might pocket the Pfizer discounts while charging employers and Medicare the full price for Lipitor.  The companies that signed onto the agreement with Pfizer said that they would pass the Pfizer discounts on to employers, consumers, and Medicare.

Senator Baucus, the chairman of the Finance Committee, said in a statement, “We need to take a close look to ensure we’re protecting both taxpayer dollars and access to the medicine patients need.”  Senator Kohl said in the statement, “Consumers and taxpayers foot the bill when drug benefit companies and insurers manipulate the marketplace to prevent access to generic drugs for millions of Americans.”

Lipitor is considered to be the best selling drug in history.  The unprecedented actions taken by Pfizer are intended to preserve market share while generic competition is limited and prices for the medication remain high.  The agreements were made as the patent for Lipitor expired.

Pfizer released a statement that said, “Our intent is to offer Lipitor to payers and patients at or below the cost of the generic during the 180-day period.”  MacKay Jimeson, a Pfizer spokesman, said in an e-mail that the senators’ concerns were based on incomplete or incorrect information and that “Participation in Pfizer’s programs by a health plan is entirely voluntary.”

The plan is to create a full spectrum of energy and after-workout “recovery” products, including energy bars, gels, protein shakes, and other energy boosters, for the brand.  This will help the brand jump into the $20 billion sports nutrition market from the $7 billion sports-drink market.  Recent years have shown tepid sales results for Gatorade and sales nearly collapsed during the US recession.

The new strategy requires the company to come up with new ideas for everything from advertising to in-store displays.  Gatorade’s simple “G” logo was chosen to appeal to a new generation and to have a logo that could appear on a wide range of goods.

The company has already repackaged its three core product lines to contain pre-, during-, and post-workout products.  Now, the G Series, G Series Fit, and G Series Pro lines contain additional labeling for 01 Prime, 02 Perform, and 03 Recover.  To get the best results, athletes are expected to consume the products in the recommended order.

The company has also begun selling the products at retailers outside of grocery and convenience stores.  The brand’s chief, Sarah Robb O’Hagan, said, “The huge aha! for me was, ‘We’re an athletic performance brand, we’re selling in convenience stores, grocery stores, Wal-Mart, but we don’t even show up in a sporting goods store, in a cycling store, in a place where an athlete actually goes to equip themselves to play sports.”

Gatorade products can now be found at GNC vitamin shops, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Whole Foods Market, and specialty sports stores.  Andrea Fairchild, vice-president of brand marketing, says, “It’s about being where athletes shop and sweat.”

The Justice Department charged that Merck marketed Vioxx as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis before getting approval from the Food and Drug Administration.  The Justice Department also claimed that Merck made false, unproven or misleading statements about Vioxx’s safety to increase sales and made false statements to Medicaid agencies about the safety of the drug.

Vioxx was approved as a painkiller by the FDA in 1999, but was not approved for use in rheumatoid arthritis, meaning that Merck could not advertise the drug for that use.  Vioxx was promoted by Merck for rheumatoid arthritis for three years, even after getting a warning letter from the FDA in 2001.  The FDA approved the drug for the treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in 2002.

The sale of Vioxx was stopped after evidence showed the drug doubled a person’s risk of heart attack and stroke.  Merck paid $4.85 billion in 2007 to settle around 50,000 lawsuits related to Vioxx.

As part of the settlement, Merck also entered into an agreement that strengthens oversight of the company’s sales, marketing, publication, and government pricing activities.  Top officials will be required to complete annual compliance certifications and information about physician payments will be posted on the company’s website.  To cover the anticipated settlement payments, the company took a charge of $950 million in the third quarter of 2010.

The move comes in response to complaints about the potentially carcinogenic, formaldehyde-releasing preservative being used in the manufacturing of the company’s baby shampoos.  Quaternium-15 is added to cosmetics and toiletries to prevent contamination and spoiling, releasing formaldehyde to kill any bacteria in the product, and is considered to be a trigger for some skin allergies and cancers.

The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics first raised its concerns with the company in 2009.  Since then, Johnson & Johnson has been gradually phasing out the use of preservatives that release formaldehyde from its products intended for infants and children but provided a more concrete timetable in the letter from Mr. Weldon.  The company also makes Band-Aids, medical devices, and an array of prescription drugs.

The letter noted that Johnson & Johnson has begun providing “alternatives to formaldehyde-releasing preservatives and expect(s) to finish this process in our hundreds of baby products around the world within about two years, and sooner for our baby shampoos.”  The letter also stated that the trace amounts of formaldehyde found in the products pose little risk, saying that an entire bottle of baby shampoo creates a formaldehyde exposure equivalent to the amount a person would encounter “by eating an apple or pear, in which it occurs naturally.”

In the past two years, Johnson & Johnson has had to recall hundreds of thousands of packages of over-the-counter medicines due to quality-control lapses.  The recalls have harmed the company’s image and hurt its sales and earnings since late 2009.  Johnson & Johnson is revamping its factories under U.S. government supervision to correct the issues and restore the recalled products to retailers’ shelves.

The acquisition will expand the company’s Medicare and senior care business, adding 340,000 Medicare Advantage customers in 11 states and Washington, and a Medicare prescription division with more than 800,000 customers.  Medicare Advantage plans serve around 25% of the nation’s 46 million Medicare beneficiaries.  The additions will help Cigna compete with UnitedHealthcare and Humana, the biggest companies in the industry.

HealthSpring, based in Nashville, was established and grown by G.T.C.R. Golder Rauner, a Chicago private equity firm.  The firm took HealthSpring public in early 2006 with an initial public offering priced at $19.50 a share.  The head of G.T.C.R.’s health care services team, Joseph P. Nolan, remains on HealthSpring’s board.

HealthSpring’s specialty is providing private insurance plans that combine traditional Medicare coverage with additional services.  Since going public in 2006, HealthSpring has reported steady profit growth and continuously added customers to the business.  In 2010, the company disclosed that it had earned $194.2 million in net income on $3.1 billion in revenue.

Cigna said it expected the deal would begin adding to its earnings per share in the first full year after closing.  Cigna negotiated for several months before striking the deal and the deal is estimated to close in the first half of 2012.  Shareholders in both companies appeared to like the deal, as HealthSpring’s shares jumped 33.6 percent to $53.66 and shares in Cigna rose 0.7 percent to $45.03 after the deal was announced.

One of the new companies will focus on diagnostics and medical devices, such as heart stents.  Current chairman and chief executive Miles D. White will lead this company, which will retain the Abbott name.  The medical device company is expected to generate around $22 billion in sales annually.

The other company will be focused on “research-based pharmaceuticals,” like the rheumatoid arthritis drug Humira.  Longtime Abbott official Richard A. Gonzalez will head this company, which has yet to be named.  The pharmaceuticals company is expected to initially have about $18 billion in annual sales.

Richard M. Gordon, a pharmaceutical analyst and clinical assistant professor at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, said, “The split makes sense for stockholders who today want to invest in one line of business but not the other.”  The pharmaceuticals business is generally higher risk than the medical devices business.

Mr. White said Abbott was committed to remaining diverse and the new company would be like others that have gotten rid of their non-pharmaceutical businesses, with plans to profit from a strong blockbuster drug pipeline driving sales.  Mr. White stated, “We have two long-term, sustainable companies.  We have no interesting in selling.  We’re not looking to sell or merge it or anything else.”

The moves by pharmaceutical companies to sell or spin off parts of their business to increase share value and capital efficiency is seen as a cyclical development after years of mega-mergers.  Other recent spin offs include: Bristol-Myers Squibb selling its baby formula company, Mead Johnson Nutrition, in 2009 and its medical device and wound care business, Convatec, in 2008; and Pfizer planning to sell or to spin off its infant nutrition business and planning to sell its animal health division.

Rick Perry calls his stem cell procedure innovating and ground breaking. His critics call it dangerous and risky. Governor Perry under went treatment for a bad back last month. His procedure was not your typical back surgery. The doctors used stem cells to help heal the presidential candidate.

Perry has access to some of the best doctors in the world. Despite this fact, Perry decided to choose an alternative method for treating his bad back. He had stem cells taken from the fat in his body. After they withdrew the cells, they had to grow it in a laboratory. After they cells were grown, they re injected them in to his lower back to fuse with part of the spine. This procedure was finished on July 1st.

This treatment does have risks. Some of them are blood clots, infection, and even cancer. Federal laws regarding stem cell procedures are very strict. Some believe the procedure Perry underwent might be illegal.  There is one patient documented dying due to the procedure. He suffered a clot hours after the procedure

Perry’s doctor, Stanley Jones, was unable to be reached for comment. However, Dr. Jones did talk to the Texas Tribune regarding the issue. He went over to Japan to have a stem cell treatment for his arthritis. Perry was his first patient he used a stem cell on. Dr. Jones also told the Texas Tribune that the procedure had no risks, which we determined to be false.

Dr. George  Q. Daley of the Children’s Hospital Boston and the Harvard Stem Cell Institute says Perry exercised “poor judgement” in under going this treatment.  ”As a highly influential person of power, Perry’s actions have the unfortunate potential to push desperate patients into the clinics of quacks,” who are selling unproven treatments “for everything from Alzheimer’s to autism,” said Daley.

The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) stated that over 1.8 million people in the UK are exposed to asbestos annually, and that one person dies from mesothelioma every 4 hours.

HSE predicts that approximately 5,000 people will doe from mesothelioma by 2015 due to current trends. If that statement is accurate, that means that mesothelioma deaths in the UK will be double that of their USA counterparts. This is based of the statistic  from the National Cancer Institute which has estimated that approximately 2,500 people die from mesothelioma each year.

Mesothelioma quickly covers the membraneous tissue which covers the lungs and abdominal organs due to exposure from asbestos fibers. After looking over the British government statistics which state that quite a few homes and businesses contained asbestos, it’s quite clear why the UK has much higher death rates.

Earlier in 2011 the UK’s Health and Safety Executive came under fire due to it ending the “Hidden Killer” advertising campaign which helped increase asbestos awareness within the construction and tradesman groups. The program was shutdown approximately 2 years after it’s debut due to HSE losing 35 percent of its funding. The UK’s largest construction union has reported that on average 8 joiners, 6 electricians, and 4 plumbers die from mesothelioma or other related asbestos diseases every week.