I agree Channlers the whole thing seemed to be trying to put the blame in the wrong place.
But I do have a feeling that this probably happened in the 90's and is coming up to bite Bayer now. not sure how they would link th two, but HIV can lie dormant for a while before it starts to how up on tests, usually at least 6 months or so after the drug was distributed before someone would test positive, and even longer for them to actually become ill from it which is when they would go to the hospital who would treat them for the illness they ar down with, and not really test for HIV, so it could easily be years before doctor's notice the patient chronic illness and test for HIV. This is me speculating though. So either documentation was found to show that the original medication was from bayer, or something.
as for FDA's in other countries. it depends but they have different regulations. There are drugs that are not approved in the states that are approved in England and europe and the like. but HIV would be pretty common testing, which once again makes me think that this happened prior to HIV testing blood related meds became a norm.
Typical for the media to overhype and excagerate a situation and make everyone panic.
EDIt: my e key doesn't work very well. so ya got to fill in some blanks
This post has been edited by Megil Tel-Zeke: May 31 2006, 04:10 AM
--------------------
"By keeping others at a distance you avoid a betrayal of your trust. But while you may not be hurt that way you musnt forget that you must endure the loneliness." Friendly Hostility Fanboi
|