Zantac Makers Ignored Warnings Of Cancer Risk For 40 Years

Zantac Makers Ignored Warnings Of Cancer Risk For 40 Years

Introduction

GSK, which is facing tens of thousands of lawsuits over cancer risks associated with the popular heartburn treatment Zantac, has stated that there is no consistent or credible evidence that the medicine causes cancer, but a new analysis from GSK's own experts says otherwise.

According to the article, GSK was informed by its own experts and independent researchers about potential cancer-causing contaminants in the medicine for decades. The FDA examined the hazards when reviewing the medicine, yet Zantac, or ranitidine, was authorized in 1983.

According to the study, GSK backed erroneous studies aimed at downplaying dangers throughout the years, and it chose not to make any modifications to its supply chain or storage methods that may have minimized the problem. The study is hundreds of pages long and contains judicial files and analyses.

A GSK spokesman stated that after three years of thorough research, there is no consistent or trustworthy evidence that Zantac (ranitidine) raises the risk of any kind of cancer.

Zantac came under intense public criticism in 2019 after an online pharmacy discovered excessive quantities of a possible carcinogen in the medicine and its generics. Following recalls, the FDA removed the medication from the market in 2020.

In doing so, the FDA stated that the level of the potential carcinogen, N-Nitrosodimethylamine, in the medicine grows even under normal storage circumstances. According to the FDA, greater temperatures worsen the problem. As per reports, GSK's leadership was alerted of the storage issue multiple times, but it chose not to adjust its existing arrangements.

GSK and other drugmakers are currently facing tens of thousands of lawsuits related to the medicine. The corporations have said that the research does not support the plaintiffs' claims.

Late this year, a judge in Florida threw out a huge number of federal court proceedings filed against the corporations. The judge determined that the plaintiff's experts relied on untrustworthy methodology to achieve their results. GSK stated at the time that it was relieved that litigation-driven research did not enter the federal courts.