BHR, FDA, Food & Drug Administration, McMinn, Medical device, Nephew, NephewSmith, Smith & Nephew, UNited States
Smith & Nephew BHR – How can a device manufacturer be denied by the FDA on a 3/2 vote in 2004 and then in 2006 be approved by a 3/2 vote using the same data ?
Smith & Nephew were denied approval of their BHR system by the FDA because their application relied on a single patient group of 2,385 controlled by the partial inventor of the BHR, who worked for the company and financial interest that exceeded the $25,000 limit for an employee to receive as a bonus for his partial invention (the package he received was a reported to be $191 million dollar value).
The concern expressed by the FDA in 2004 revolved around the lack of data concerning metal particles entering the human body and the adversities that could take place.
Then 2 years later Smith & Nephew applied to the FDA using the same information, BUT if the information I have is correct, McMinn was this time “an advisor and not an employee”. It appears this was sufficient to distance him from the company and satisfy the FDA’s requirements?
The BHR information provided still came from one test group. McMinn responded that 140 surgeons in 23 countries were using the bHR, none in the USA. It seems that this information was never checked (who will ever know), and that the FDA excepted the word of one person, and that person is reported to have had financial benefits to the tune of $191 million. Perhaps he should pay for our suffering from his earnings?
Something smells. Now there are 1000’s of innocent people suffering all around the world because of this BHR device and in the USA the manufacturer gets to hide behind the PMA law.
This same company (Smith & Nephew) continues to have brushes with the law and seems to be establishing repeat offender status: part of the group of medical device manufacturers who settled multimillions for paying surgeons kick backs and now they are being sued in a USA whistleblower case, involving fraudulent billing.
We need to get on this as much as possible and as quick as possible before they pass the health reform bill. I fear your country and others will follow suit of the USA and Smith & Nephew will never be called to account financially.
- Another S&N Victim spat out by the lawyers… Lives ruined and S&N gets off free…. (earlsview.com)
- Howard’s Lament – Lawyers dodge the tough jobs! (earlsview.com)
- Comment Example: Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee (earlsview.com)
- S&N tries to fade out of Metal on Metal QUIETLY… Smith & Nephew Voluntarily Withdraws Hip Component (earlsview.com)
- Smith & Nephew pulls metal-on-metal hip component – Reuters (drugstoresource.wordpress.com)
- 40′s Woman Ruined by Smith & Nephew Hip Implant (earlsview.com)
- Kathryn’s Story – More Smith & Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Misery… (earlsview.com)
- Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports On Smith & Nephew Hip Recall (prweb.com)
- Smith and Nephew payments to 236 Sugeons & Institutions in the USA (earlsview.com)
- Toni’s story of pain and depression – Smith & Nephew Birmingham hip … same old story again… (earlsview.com)
- Jack’s call for help – Legal help sought – Cormet Hip -Isn’t there some way to get beyond PMA preemptive device approval? (earlsview.com)
- J&J’s Decides to Voluntarily Recall Transvaginal Mesh Products; Brings Victims One Step Closer to Justice (prweb.com)
- Pluromed Files PMA for FDA Approval of LeGoo Internal Vessel Occluder (prweb.com)
- FDA: ‘Streamlined’ Reporting Process re: Ortho/Rehab/Device Committee Meeting (earlsview.com)
- Live Blog: FDA Advisory Panel For Edwards Sapien Transcatheter Heart Valve (forbes.com)
- PMA Process Taking Longer and Longer (egmnblog.wordpress.com)
- FDA approves infant combo vaccine for meningitis (tginnovations.wordpress.com)
Barbara Ford said:
Great timing Earl. I’m just completing my paperwork to send to a lawyer in New York!!!
hbs924Howard Sadwin said:
Barbara, contact me re: attorney, it is important.
Do not give up because of the preemption laws, if an applicant used false information,
in their pma application and were approved, how will the courts deal with this is the
question. I was hurt, the quality of my life has been taken away never to be the same
the manufacturer who did this to me and many other folks has to be held
Don’t give in or up, remember this is an obstacle, and deal with it, do not take no
and do not give in.
Pingback: New FDA guidance on considerations used in device approval « Earl's View
Pingback: All the Reasons WHY Smith & Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Should NOT have gotten PMA from the FDA « Earl's View
Pingback: Despite the Reasons AGAINST – FDA Advisory Panel Recommends Conditional Approval of Smith & Nephew’s BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing Technology « Earl's View
Pingback: Smith & Nephew – BHR PMA – FIRST OF A KIND PMA – WHO PULLED WHAT STRINGS???? « Earl's View
Pingback: Post-Approval Studies for Smith & Nephew BHR – NOT USEFUL « Earl's View
Pingback: P040033: BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR) SYSTEM by SMITH&NEPHEW ORTHOPAEDICS – FDAzilla Devices « Earl's View
Pingback: Premarket Approval (PMA) Database – BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR) SYSTEM « Earl's View
Pingback: Wright Medical’s Response to Smith & Nephew’s Response to WMT request to Deny BHR PMA « Earl's View
Pingback: FDA Defense of its Decision to Grant PMA to Smith & Nephew’s BHR… « Earl's View
Pingback: Attachments to Wright Medical’s request to Deny PMA to Smith & Nephew BHR « Earl's View
Pingback: FDA, Summary Minutes, Meeting of the Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Advisory Panel, Open Session, Hilton Washington D.C. North, Gaithersburg, MD, at 12 (Sept. 8, 2005) « Earl's View
Pingback: Smith & Nephew BHR – Food and Drug Administration, HHS « Earl's View
Pingback: SMITH & NEPHEW BHR – FDA Papers – Appendix G: Summary of MoM Hip Resurfacing Post-Approval Studies « Earl's View
Pingback: Smith & Nephew – Class 2 Recall R3 Constrained Acetabular Liner « Earl's View
Pingback: Smith & Nephew’s BHR PMA approval by the FDA despite lack of scientifically valid trials and BHR Conflict of Interest « Earl's View
Pingback: Smith & Nephew BHR FDA-required Post-Approval Studies « Earl's View
Pingback: Pre Market Approval – Why does the Law shelter Smith & Nephew & others like them? « Earl's View
Pingback: Cry from the Heart – Where is Mr Smith & his Nephew? « Earl's View
I have not been able to find and attorney willing to take my case against Smith and Nephew because of the PMA for the Birmingham Metal on Metal. My statute will expire soon. I guess I am one of many.