AIG executive handed 4-year sentence
Jan. 28, 2009
UPI.com
HARTFORD, Conn.
A federal court in Hartford, Conn., handed a former American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AFF) executive a four-year sentence for his role in a $500 million fraud scheme.
Judge Christopher Droney ignored sentencing guidelines that could have given former vice president of reinsurance Christopher Milton a life sentence, Business Insurance reported Wednesday.
Droney said Milton's actions were deliberate. "He knew this was not a bona fide transaction, but rather one designed to cook the books of AIG," Droney said.
Milton was convicted along with former General Re executives Christopher Garand, Robert Graham and Elizabeth Monrad, and former General Re Chief Executive Officer Ronald Ferguson. Prosecutors said the executives created General Re Corp. for the purpose of making AIG appear wealthier than it was.
The federal government last fall stepped in to rescue AIG, the nation's largest insurance company, with a $150 billion rescue package.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Victory bittersweet for drug liability case victim
By JOHN CURRAN
March 5, 2009
MARSHFIELD, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont musician who lost her arm after a botched drug injection says the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold a $6.7 million verdict against the pharmaceutical company that made the drug is a victory for consumers.
"I just feel really good for what this means for the whole country," said Diana Levine, 63. "The money, to me, means the company was held accountable for something that didn't need to happen, number one.
"So hopefully, they'll learn their lesson from it and change the label so this doesn't happen to any more people," she said.
Rejecting calls for limits on lawsuits against drug companies, the high court on Wednesday upheld the award against Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, the maker of anti-nausea drug Phenergan. In a 6-3 ruling, the court turned away Wyeth's claim that U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of the drug and its warning label should have shielded the company from Levine's suit.
Levine's nightmare began in 2000.
Suffering from a migraine headache, she went to a local clinic and was given painkillers and received an intramuscular injection of Phenergan. When she still felt nauseated, she was given an "IV-push" of the drug, with the second injection accidentally puncturing an artery. Gangrene set in. Several weeks later, her right arm was amputated.
"It basically took away my whole musical identity. I'd been playing music for 30 years, working with kids, writing songs. I played guitar, piano, bass in a rock band. I couldn't do any of those things anymore," she said.
She lost more than her music and her livelihood.
Suddenly, what was routine became a challenge. The drawers in her 150-year-old farmhouse needed two hands to be opened. A left-hander, she still had one hand to use, but she relied on it to compensate so much that she injured it with overuse.
She couldn't shovel or scrape ice off the windshield of her car, a real hardship in rural Vermont. In summer, she can't open a window without help.
"Nobody, nobody understands what it's like to just operate with one hand. Everything you do requires two hands, even when you think you only need one," she said.
For years, Levine wondered whether Wyeth would ever be held accountable.
On Wednesday, it was.
In the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said Wyeth could "unilaterally strengthen its warning," especially after it learned of at least 20 cases before Levine's injury in which an injection led to gangrene and amputation.
By JOHN CURRAN
March 5, 2009
MARSHFIELD, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont musician who lost her arm after a botched drug injection says the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold a $6.7 million verdict against the pharmaceutical company that made the drug is a victory for consumers.
"I just feel really good for what this means for the whole country," said Diana Levine, 63. "The money, to me, means the company was held accountable for something that didn't need to happen, number one.
"So hopefully, they'll learn their lesson from it and change the label so this doesn't happen to any more people," she said.
Rejecting calls for limits on lawsuits against drug companies, the high court on Wednesday upheld the award against Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, the maker of anti-nausea drug Phenergan. In a 6-3 ruling, the court turned away Wyeth's claim that U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of the drug and its warning label should have shielded the company from Levine's suit.
Levine's nightmare began in 2000.
Suffering from a migraine headache, she went to a local clinic and was given painkillers and received an intramuscular injection of Phenergan. When she still felt nauseated, she was given an "IV-push" of the drug, with the second injection accidentally puncturing an artery. Gangrene set in. Several weeks later, her right arm was amputated.
"It basically took away my whole musical identity. I'd been playing music for 30 years, working with kids, writing songs. I played guitar, piano, bass in a rock band. I couldn't do any of those things anymore," she said.
She lost more than her music and her livelihood.
Suddenly, what was routine became a challenge. The drawers in her 150-year-old farmhouse needed two hands to be opened. A left-hander, she still had one hand to use, but she relied on it to compensate so much that she injured it with overuse.
She couldn't shovel or scrape ice off the windshield of her car, a real hardship in rural Vermont. In summer, she can't open a window without help.
"Nobody, nobody understands what it's like to just operate with one hand. Everything you do requires two hands, even when you think you only need one," she said.
For years, Levine wondered whether Wyeth would ever be held accountable.
On Wednesday, it was.
In the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said Wyeth could "unilaterally strengthen its warning," especially after it learned of at least 20 cases before Levine's injury in which an injection led to gangrene and amputation.
Monday, March 2, 2009
AIG Price Tag: $1,400 per Taxpayer Family
AIG Price Tag: $1,400 per Taxpayer Family
By ALICE GOMSTYN
ABC NEWS Business Unit
March 2, 2009
How much will each American family pay, on average, to bail out beleaguered insurance giant American International Group? Try more than $1,400.
The government's bailout of AIG now tops $160 billion. That and other government bailout spending could result in higher taxes down the road, experts say.
(ABC News/Getty)
The government's newly overhauled rescue package for AIG is $162.5 billion, according to government officials. Divide that by 111,609,629 -- the total number of U.S. households, according to the U.S. Census' 2005-2007 American Community Survey -- and the result is $1,455.97. That's nearly double the maximum tax benefit U.S. couples will receive under the federal stimulus package approved last month...
By ALICE GOMSTYN
ABC NEWS Business Unit
March 2, 2009
How much will each American family pay, on average, to bail out beleaguered insurance giant American International Group? Try more than $1,400.
The government's bailout of AIG now tops $160 billion. That and other government bailout spending could result in higher taxes down the road, experts say.
(ABC News/Getty)
The government's newly overhauled rescue package for AIG is $162.5 billion, according to government officials. Divide that by 111,609,629 -- the total number of U.S. households, according to the U.S. Census' 2005-2007 American Community Survey -- and the result is $1,455.97. That's nearly double the maximum tax benefit U.S. couples will receive under the federal stimulus package approved last month...
Friday, December 12, 2008
Kaiser Permanente to pay $11.4 million total for retaliating against doctor who complained about patient care
I have been shocked at the unwillingness of Kaiser Permanente to make any effort to remediate problems that are brought to its attention. The people I have complained to have immediately thrown up a stone wall. Will this verdict cause Kaiser to respond differently to complaints? Will the persons responsible be fired? I doubt it.
Jury awards $7.5M more to former Kaiser doctor
Mercury News
The Associated Press
12/11/2008
A Los Angeles jury has ordered Kaiser Permanante to pay $7.5 million in punitive damages to a radiologist who was forced to resign from one the company's hospitals in 2006 after complaining about patient care.
The jury's decision on Thursday means Kaiser owes Dr. Michael Martinucci a combined $11.4 million. The same panel on Monday awarded the doctor $3.9 million in compensatory damages.
Kaiser says it will appeal Thursday's decision, saying it was "shocked and disappointed by the verdict."
Martinucci sued Kaiser after leaving the company, claiming he was forced to quit because he complained about work standards at the Hollywood hospital.
Martinucci was hired at Kaiser in 2003 and resigned three years later after his supervisor and a human resources staffer accused him of being racist and making sexual advances toward a male technologist.
Jury awards $7.5M more to former Kaiser doctor
Mercury News
The Associated Press
12/11/2008
A Los Angeles jury has ordered Kaiser Permanante to pay $7.5 million in punitive damages to a radiologist who was forced to resign from one the company's hospitals in 2006 after complaining about patient care.
The jury's decision on Thursday means Kaiser owes Dr. Michael Martinucci a combined $11.4 million. The same panel on Monday awarded the doctor $3.9 million in compensatory damages.
Kaiser says it will appeal Thursday's decision, saying it was "shocked and disappointed by the verdict."
Martinucci sued Kaiser after leaving the company, claiming he was forced to quit because he complained about work standards at the Hollywood hospital.
Martinucci was hired at Kaiser in 2003 and resigned three years later after his supervisor and a human resources staffer accused him of being racist and making sexual advances toward a male technologist.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Food consumer.org
Exercise cuts cancer risk – new study
By Sue Mueller
Nov 23, 2008
Physical inactivity or lack of exercise may dramatically increase risk of breast cancer, according to a new report published in the Dec 2008 issue of Cancer Causes and Control.
The report by Coyle Y.M at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, TX says exercise lowers estrogen levels that if high would cause a higher risk of breast cancer.
Coyle suggests that estrogen induces breast cancer by increasing breast epithelial cell proliferation, the metabolism of estrogen to genotoxic metabolites and the silencing of tumor suppressor genes (TSGS) that have been implicated in breast carcinogenesis.
According to the author, animal studies suggest that exercise slows breast tumor growth by promoting changes in cellular proliferation and apoptosis.
Human studies albeit limited also suggest that exercise produces favorable changes in estrogen metabolism which in turn reduces the risk of breast epithelial cell proliferation.
Coyle says that exercise reduces promoter hypermethylation of TSGS in breast carcinogenesis by lowering estrogen levels.
Further research is needed to clarify the mechanisms that relate to exercise as a negative modulator of breast cancer risk, the author concludes.
Many studies have suggested that regular physical activity or exercise reduces risk of cancer.
One recent study involving 5,968 women led James McClain of the National Cancer Institute and colleagues confirmed previous studies that have shown people who did physical exercise regularly were at lower risk of developing cancer.
The study reported at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research also found among women who were in the upper half with regard to the amount of physical activity each week, those who slept less than seven hours per night were 47 percent more likely to develop cancer than those who slept longer.
One study led by Michael F Leitzmann and colleagues at the National Cancer Institute and published in the Oct. 2008 issue of Breast Cancer Research found that postmenopausal women with body mass index lower than 25 kg/m2 who engaged in vigorous exercise were 23 percent less likely to develop breast cancer. But no such association was found in overweight and obese women.
The researchers followed up 32,000 women who enrolled in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project Follow-up Study to examine if there was an association between risk of breast cancer and physical exercise.
Another study led by Freedman DM and colleagues from National Cancer Institute and published in Oct 21, 2008 issue of Cancer Causes and Control found exercise such as walking and hiking for 10 or more hours per week rendered the greatest protection against breast cancer in women, a 43 percent reduction in the risk.
Exercise cuts cancer risk – new study
By Sue Mueller
Nov 23, 2008
Physical inactivity or lack of exercise may dramatically increase risk of breast cancer, according to a new report published in the Dec 2008 issue of Cancer Causes and Control.
The report by Coyle Y.M at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, TX says exercise lowers estrogen levels that if high would cause a higher risk of breast cancer.
Coyle suggests that estrogen induces breast cancer by increasing breast epithelial cell proliferation, the metabolism of estrogen to genotoxic metabolites and the silencing of tumor suppressor genes (TSGS) that have been implicated in breast carcinogenesis.
According to the author, animal studies suggest that exercise slows breast tumor growth by promoting changes in cellular proliferation and apoptosis.
Human studies albeit limited also suggest that exercise produces favorable changes in estrogen metabolism which in turn reduces the risk of breast epithelial cell proliferation.
Coyle says that exercise reduces promoter hypermethylation of TSGS in breast carcinogenesis by lowering estrogen levels.
Further research is needed to clarify the mechanisms that relate to exercise as a negative modulator of breast cancer risk, the author concludes.
Many studies have suggested that regular physical activity or exercise reduces risk of cancer.
One recent study involving 5,968 women led James McClain of the National Cancer Institute and colleagues confirmed previous studies that have shown people who did physical exercise regularly were at lower risk of developing cancer.
The study reported at a meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research also found among women who were in the upper half with regard to the amount of physical activity each week, those who slept less than seven hours per night were 47 percent more likely to develop cancer than those who slept longer.
One study led by Michael F Leitzmann and colleagues at the National Cancer Institute and published in the Oct. 2008 issue of Breast Cancer Research found that postmenopausal women with body mass index lower than 25 kg/m2 who engaged in vigorous exercise were 23 percent less likely to develop breast cancer. But no such association was found in overweight and obese women.
The researchers followed up 32,000 women who enrolled in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project Follow-up Study to examine if there was an association between risk of breast cancer and physical exercise.
Another study led by Freedman DM and colleagues from National Cancer Institute and published in Oct 21, 2008 issue of Cancer Causes and Control found exercise such as walking and hiking for 10 or more hours per week rendered the greatest protection against breast cancer in women, a 43 percent reduction in the risk.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
FDA ignores science regarding BPA
Do incidents like this mean you can't trust anything the FDA says?
Experts: FDA ignored evidence when calling BPA safe
Oct. 29, 2008
By Liz Szabo
USA TODAY
The Food and Drug Administration ignored evidence when concluding that a chemical in plastic baby bottles is safe, according an expert panel asked to review the agency's handling of the controversial substance.
The Food and Drug Administration ignored evidence about the danger posed by a chemical in plastic baby bottles, according a report released Wednesday.
The excluded studies suggest bisphenol A, or BPA, could pose harm to children at levels at least 10 times lower than the amount the agency says is safe, according to the report written by outside scientists asked to review the agency's handling of the controversial substance.
Excluding evidence of harm "creates a false sense of security" about BPA, the panel's report says.
The scientists took the FDA to task for basing its safety decision in August on three industry-funded studies. Another government agency, the National Toxicology Program, decided many other independent studies deserved consideration. The toxicology program concluded last month there is "some concern" that BPA alters development of the brain, prostate and behavior in children and fetuses.
The expert panel also found the FDA underestimated how much BPA babies ingest on several counts. For one, the agency failed to consider the cumulative effect of being exposed to BPA from dozens of products, a fundamental error that "severely limits the usefulness" of the FDA's safety estimate.
An advocacy group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, believes BPA is too toxic to use in baby products at all. The group formally has asked the FDA to remove BPA from food and beverage containers.
The new report was written by a subcommittee of the FDA's outside science board, experts who advise the FDA on complex issues. The full science board, scheduled to meet Friday, can endorse the subcommittee's report or write its own..
Experts: FDA ignored evidence when calling BPA safe
Oct. 29, 2008
By Liz Szabo
USA TODAY
The Food and Drug Administration ignored evidence when concluding that a chemical in plastic baby bottles is safe, according an expert panel asked to review the agency's handling of the controversial substance.
The Food and Drug Administration ignored evidence about the danger posed by a chemical in plastic baby bottles, according a report released Wednesday.
The excluded studies suggest bisphenol A, or BPA, could pose harm to children at levels at least 10 times lower than the amount the agency says is safe, according to the report written by outside scientists asked to review the agency's handling of the controversial substance.
Excluding evidence of harm "creates a false sense of security" about BPA, the panel's report says.
The scientists took the FDA to task for basing its safety decision in August on three industry-funded studies. Another government agency, the National Toxicology Program, decided many other independent studies deserved consideration. The toxicology program concluded last month there is "some concern" that BPA alters development of the brain, prostate and behavior in children and fetuses.
The expert panel also found the FDA underestimated how much BPA babies ingest on several counts. For one, the agency failed to consider the cumulative effect of being exposed to BPA from dozens of products, a fundamental error that "severely limits the usefulness" of the FDA's safety estimate.
An advocacy group, the Natural Resources Defense Council, believes BPA is too toxic to use in baby products at all. The group formally has asked the FDA to remove BPA from food and beverage containers.
The new report was written by a subcommittee of the FDA's outside science board, experts who advise the FDA on complex issues. The full science board, scheduled to meet Friday, can endorse the subcommittee's report or write its own..
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
AIG insurance executives start spending $85 billion bailout--at a luxury resort
Insurance company executives know we love them, and that we wouldn't want them to tighten their belts now that they're on the dole. After all, if we'd wanted them to suffer, we wouldn't have given them $85 billion dollars, right?
The Washington Times
AIG execs hold $440K post-bailout retreat
Sean Lengell
October 7, 2008
Top executives at the failed insurance giant AIG spent more than $440,000 at a company retreat days after the federal government bailed out the company with $85 billion in taxpayer funds.
American International Group (AIG) paid the exclusive St. Regis resort in Monarch Beach, Calif., more than $200,000 for rooms — some costing as much at $1,000 a night — as well as more than $150,000 in meals, according to released documents an testimony during a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Tuesday on Capitol Hill.
"Less than one week after taxpayers rescued AIG, company executives could be found wining and dining at one of the most exclusive resorts in the nation," said committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman, California Democrat.
The invoice also included almost $25,000 in spa and salon charges for pedicures, manicures, facials, massages and other services...
The Washington Times
AIG execs hold $440K post-bailout retreat
Sean Lengell
October 7, 2008
Top executives at the failed insurance giant AIG spent more than $440,000 at a company retreat days after the federal government bailed out the company with $85 billion in taxpayer funds.
American International Group (AIG) paid the exclusive St. Regis resort in Monarch Beach, Calif., more than $200,000 for rooms — some costing as much at $1,000 a night — as well as more than $150,000 in meals, according to released documents an testimony during a hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Tuesday on Capitol Hill.
"Less than one week after taxpayers rescued AIG, company executives could be found wining and dining at one of the most exclusive resorts in the nation," said committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman, California Democrat.
The invoice also included almost $25,000 in spa and salon charges for pedicures, manicures, facials, massages and other services...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)