Ketoacidosis Lawsuit

In case you didn’t know, a ketoacidosis lawsuit is exactly what it sounds like: a lawsuit filed by someone who was hurt because they happened to be diabetic. Diabetic ketoacidosis, also known as ketoacidosis diabeticorum, is a condition where the body produces excessive ketones for some unknown reason. It’s a dangerous and sometimes fatal condition that can lead to brain damage and even death if not treated quickly enough. The best way to avoid such dangers is to prevent ketoacidosis from happening in the first place. So how can you do that?

Ketoacidosis Lawsuit

The best way to prevent this potentially life-threatening condition is to have good glycemic control medication. The two medications, Rifaximin (TM) and Ventophage (Vagistatin) are the top medications used to treat ketoacidosis. They work by slowing down how much sugar is produced by the liver, which keeps the blood sugar level stable.

However, both of these medications require a prescription. This means that anyone with type-2 diabetes can potentially be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. The reason that both of these medications are so effective is because they are also used to treat high blood pressure, cystic fibrosis, and epilepsy.

A ketoacidosis lawsuit against Mycelex and other companies involved in producing and distributing the aforementioned drugs were brought by a diabetic patient, Sheryl A. Scahill.

Sheryl had been taking mycelex for several years, and on top of the drug’s good Glycemic Control, she also has chronic kidney disease, kidney stones, and acute kidney injury. On top of that, Sheryl was regularly congested, had kidney stone symptoms, and suffered acute pain every time she urinated. The medical treatment she was receiving did not alleviate her suffering.

Her case was ultimately dismissed by the court, but her attorneys pursued her case anyway, claiming that Mycelex was responsible for chronic pain and suffering, as well as other complications.

After the dismissal, her attorney, Anthony M. Simeon, filed a confidential case evaluation on behalf of Sheryl A. Although Simeon repeatedly stated that there was no evidence linking Mycelex to any pain or suffering whatsoever, his claims were rejected by the court. Ultimately, however, the court granted the class action suit against Mycelex and other generic and brand name diuretics, granting class members similar rights to those who would receive medical treatment through commercial health insurance carriers, such as Medicare and Medicaid.

Sheryl A. ‘s lawsuit, her second, against Mycelex and other generic diuretics was eventually pushed to the U.S. federal court.

Her attorney, Anthony Simeon, filed a motion to dismiss stating that the complaint properly named Mycelex as a generic term. The court allowed the lawsuit to proceed, however, the plaintiff’s attorneys were not informed that the complaint had been transferred to the federal court, and that they only found out about the suit through the media.

As a result of this new development, all plaintiffs in Sheryl A. ‘s case were notified that their lawsuit could cause significant damages, unless they agreed to accept significantly less compensation than their claims could potentially deserve. Plaintiffs are also warned that if they cannot afford to pursue their case, that they could face the same fate as their friend, Sheryl A., who has now been forced into a life-long regimen of dialysis and medical care.

In its defense against Sheryl A. ‘s kidney failure, Mycelex relied heavily on confidential and proprietary information that was only disclosed after the lawsuit was filed.

Because of this, it is highly unlikely that Mycelex caused her kidney failure, as the FDA and other consumers may have believed. This lack of evidence directly contradicts the language contained within Mycelex’s labeling, which advised that the supplement was “designed” to counteract certain types of diseases (e.g., renal failure, chronic fatigue syndrome, diabetes) that typically strikes middle-aged or older adults.

This revelation was, in fact, one of the main reasons that Sheryl A. ‘s lawsuit was able to move forward in the first place: despite the fact that the product’s manufacturer knew that Sheryl A. ‘s kidney failure was brought on by her inability to drink the recommended amount of water each day, the company did not take any measures to ensure that her water intake was adequate.

Despite the fact that the FDA acknowledged that there was no proof that Mycelex caused Sheryl A. to become seriously ill or that her symptoms were related to her kidneys, Mycelex was able to use this undisclosed information as a basis for pursuing a case against her, even going so far as to subject her to mandatory mediation in an effort to force her to settle for far below the potential monetary damages that she could seek.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.