Anderson told the good people at CBS Market Watch said he based his conclusion on how the case would turn out on several factors.
The first factor, said Anderson, is that Texas has a reputation for being a "plaintiff-friendly state."
A second factor is a change in the coroner's testimony during the course of the case. Anderson, who is also a physician, noted that there was a "physiologic link" between arrhythmia and blood clots, which he said "is what Vioxx predisposes to."
"The more likely root cause of cardiac death in someone with underlying diffuse coronary artery disease is a thrombus [blood clot], which could have led to an arrhythmia (or not) which may have been caused by Vioxx (or not)."
He also said a general "ill will" toward the pharmaceutical industry is another factor working against Merck in the case.
My comment: I'm not buying into the first factor. I'm also not buying this genral "ill will" comment. The problem with predictions like this is that if he is correct in that Merck loses, you will probably never know all the reasons for the verdict in favor of the Plaintiff.
In my view, the key parts of the trial will be the coroner's testimony and the clinical trial director testimony.
