Wayne Stollings wrote:
Why would a company want to place a product on the market they believe may result in not only no return on the investment, but also added legal liabilities for damages?
The company will have a return on the investment anyway.
No, it will not once the claims are paid.
It's very difficult for the consumers to prove that the product on the market caused them terrible damages.
So those references to drugs with problems were unproven? It makes no sense to argue points that contradict each other as it makes both seem untrue.
The general doctors, the first aid and all the health system will protect the drug created by their friends, the researchers, and sold by their friends, the drugs companies.
That is hard to do when there are fatalities, which is what a toxic substance genearlly causes. You might want to read the thread a little better so as to not miss such important aspects.
It's sad to say but there is a mutual favouritism, a kind of symbiosis.
Not really, but if you want to claim it you should provide evidence to support that claim.
And it's very difficult for the consumer to do a legal action against a drug company. It's one against the system.
That is why agencies such as the FDA track complaints in the US. Maybe your government should take some lessons if that is not the case in your country.