Comments on: heparin update http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/02/heparin-update/ China law blog covering Chinese law, business, and non-profits by Thomas Chow Wed, 24 Feb 2010 02:38:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: T Chow http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/02/heparin-update/comment-page-1/#comment-30 T Chow Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:27:42 +0000 http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/02/17/heparin-update/#comment-30 Yes, I am speaking out of hat. This is not entirely a law blog. I talk about law, but who wants to talk only about law? That's quite boring. And second, who says I can only opine about law? Do I need to be an "expert" in any field to opine? No. Perhaps in a court of law my testimony would be struck, but I don't believe there is a need to be an expert about everything I post. (Nor am I lawyer for Baxter or the FDA.) But to say a company should have been doing more due diligence, I don't believe that is libelous. I believe that is true. There is always something more a company could have done because hindsight is 20-20. But my point is that every company should ramp up its due diligence in light of a lot news stories. (like today, the whole standards for toys being ramped up) A bit unfair? Perhaps since we don't know all of the facts and many of them are still developing. That's given by the nature of the story. But I think you misread my article b/c I lay quite a bit of blame on the FDA. A lot actually. Second, this isn't Baxter's first problem in the last couple years as I recall. Third, I never blamed the China plant. I said IF it was the China plant. But my last 2 posts, I have never laid the blame on the China plant without evidence. I am not joining the China-phobia of many--that is not the point of this blog. Yes, I am speaking out of hat. This is not entirely a law blog. I talk about law, but who wants to talk only about law? That’s quite boring. And second, who says I can only opine about law? Do I need to be an “expert” in any field to opine? No. Perhaps in a court of law my testimony would be struck, but I don’t believe there is a need to be an expert about everything I post. (Nor am I lawyer for Baxter or the FDA.)

But to say a company should have been doing more due diligence, I don’t believe that is libelous. I believe that is true. There is always something more a company could have done because hindsight is 20-20. But my point is that every company should ramp up its due diligence in light of a lot news stories. (like today, the whole standards for toys being ramped up)

A bit unfair? Perhaps since we don’t know all of the facts and many of them are still developing. That’s given by the nature of the story. But I think you misread my article b/c I lay quite a bit of blame on the FDA. A lot actually. Second, this isn’t Baxter’s first problem in the last couple years as I recall. Third, I never blamed the China plant. I said IF it was the China plant. But my last 2 posts, I have never laid the blame on the China plant without evidence. I am not joining the China-phobia of many–that is not the point of this blog.

]]> By: OutOfHat http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/02/heparin-update/comment-page-1/#comment-29 OutOfHat Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:41:52 +0000 http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/02/17/heparin-update/#comment-29 You are speaking completely out of your hat and it is unfair, maybe even libelous. What do you really know about this case? Did it ever even occur to you that the plant in China is not required to be licensed to sell pharmaceuticals because it was not selling pharmaceuticals? It was selling an ingredient. Before last week, did you even think the FDA inspected all ingredient plants around the world? Of course not. You say Baxter should have done better due diligence, but do you have any idea what due diligence it did? There is also no evidence yet that the plant in China is the source of the problem. You are a lawyer, so act like one. You are speaking completely out of your hat and it is unfair, maybe even libelous. What do you really know about this case? Did it ever even occur to you that the plant in China is not required to be licensed to sell pharmaceuticals because it was not selling pharmaceuticals? It was selling an ingredient. Before last week, did you even think the FDA inspected all ingredient plants around the world? Of course not. You say Baxter should have done better due diligence, but do you have any idea what due diligence it did? There is also no evidence yet that the plant in China is the source of the problem. You are a lawyer, so act like one.

]]>