By RAELYNN RICARTE
News staff writer
June 5, 2007

Patricia “Patty” Rowan, a retired English teacher at Hood River Valley High School, could soon regain the right to sue Merck & Co., Inc., for the death of her husband, Clyde, in 2002.

Rowan, now a local real estate agent, had an unexpected champion in the quest for justice this spring. Bob Williams, also a retired HRVHS teacher, took up her cause in Salem — and kept the issue before legislators.

“When she told me her story I just cried. And I thought something needed to be done so people could have their day in court,” he said.

Williams and Rowan gained the ear of Rep. Patti Smith, R-Corbett, who became the chief sponsor of a bill to restore legal rights for Vioxx victims and their families. House Bill 2448 has been approved unanimously by the House and the Senate is expected to follow suit next week.

“They (Merck) can’t fix this for me. The damage has been done and there is no way to bring my husband back,” said Rowan. “But they can be held accountable for his horrific death.”

If signed into law, the legislation would extend the time period for product liability cases arising from problems with drugs, such as Vioxx, known as Cox-2 inhibitors. Victims and their families are now prohibited by law from filing claims for injuries sustained before Jan. 1, 2004.

That deadline had already passed before Rowan began to suspect that her husband’s death was tied to Vioxx, an anti-inflammatory drug that he had been taking.

“I was sitting on the sofa in the fall of 2004 and reading the paper while I watched TV,” said Rowan. “It was then that I heard why Vioxx was being withdrawn. I suddenly knew what had happened; it just made sense.”

In 2001, Clyde Rowan, 70, began using Vioxx to treat nerve pain. Over the next year, he became debilitated by dozens of unexplained mini-strokes and a silent heart attack. When Rowan was diagnosed with cancer in 2002, he was too weak to fight the disease.

Merck pulled Vioxx, also known as Rofecoxib, off the market in September of 2004 — after 84 million prescriptions had already been written. The company had gained approval by the Federal Drug Administration to sell the medicine in 1999. Vioxx targeted Cox-2 enzymes that caused pain and swelling.

In the year before Vioxx was shelved, Merck generated $25 billion from sales of the drug. Health experts now claim that Vioxx caused more than 27,000 heart attacks — many fatal — and disabled thousands of people with strokes.

Documents leaked by Merck employees reveal that the company knew of the safety risks for several years before stopping production of Vioxx.

“I think what makes this so heinous is that they covered it up and they lied,” said Rowan. “I think pharmaceutical companies are as frightening as any power out there right now.”

She has no immediate plans to sue Merck — but is grateful for Smith’s efforts on her behalf. A previous attempt by state officials to get similar legislation through the 2005 session failed. Rowan credits the perseverance of both Smith and Williams for success in this go-round.

“What will make pharmaceutical companies stand up and take notice? It would seem to be the only thing they respect and that is money,” she said.

Rowan believes it is a “bad marriage” for corporations, university research and federal grants to be tied together. She said, in the case of Vioxx, profit appeared to be the primary motive for production and not consumer health.

“Merck is not the only pharmaceutical company driven by greed. Somebody needs to hold these corporations accountable because right now, they seem to be above the law,” she said.

With Rowan struggling to build a new life after 32 years of marriage, Williams stepped forward to lobby on her behalf. His father died of asbestosis after working for years in a shipyard — and his family was able to file a successful lawsuit.

“I was upset when I heard that the statue of limitations had run out with so many of these cases. We needed to restore justice,” Williams said.

“Fairness is the capstone of a moral society.”

He said Smith acted without hesitation to get HB 2448 written and on its way through the political process. She said the intent of the bill was not to take sides in the Vioxx battle, but to ensure that all Oregonians could take their case before a jury.