>>Been doing a little more digging. It looks like all drugs classified as "bisphosphonate" can cause the side effects. It's not just Fosamax.
>>
>>So, it looks like we have a choice of getting Osteoporosis or possibly get osteonecrosis.
>>
>>One source I found (http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/prostate.pdf) says osteonecrosis can be a side effect if you have a dental disease.
>>
>>Considering the alternative, if my BMD (Bone Mineral Density) declines into the range of osteoporosis, I will be restarting a bisphosphonate.
>>
>>I take back what I previously said (below). Millions are dependent upon bisphosphonates for their survival. It would be wrong to take this drug away from them, you, or I when and if it's needed.
>
>Then I don't understand - what's the class action about? Some lawyers trying to buy their next Porsche off Merck, or was Merck not stating the counterindications clearly enough, or were they just pushing Fosamax to anyone who'd pay, regardless of being in the group which would get side effects or not? IOW, what's the scoop?

I believe Merck and the other manufacturers of bisphosphonates did not provide a strong enough warning to Doctors that prescribe these drugs (they can also cause Renal failure).

I, also believe the lawyers do not care about the millions of people being helped by this medication. All they really care about is their 33 percent of the future settlement.

If I, the patient, know about possible side effects, I and my doctor can watch for them. I know that most, if not all, medications have known side effects. My primary treatment for Prostate Cancer has side effects that I'm well aware of because they are with me every day. But, what are the alternatives?.....a slow painful death.....No thanks.

I suffer and accept the side effects to stay alive. This has worked for me for 13 years.

I do believe people and their doctors should be informed, so, if nothing else Merck and the others should be forced to emphasize these side effects.