In the Superior Court of Pennsylvania - How Appealing

specifically recall any conversation he had with Mrs. Hess at the time of her cancer
diagnosis. Yet, he continues: “Had she asked me in April of 2002 whether her
hormone therapy caused her cancer, I would have told her that I did not know.”
R.3645a.
Ms. Blaylock testified that “My doctor never told me that the HRT caused the
tumor in the first place. The first time I became aware that the HRT was an actual
cause of my breast cancer was after the Women’s Health Initiative report was
released in July of 2002.” R.2924a. Mrs. Medwid testified that she was not told at
the time of her diagnosis that her breast cancer was caused by hormone therapy
medications and that she did not learn that “Prempro could have been a cause of my
breast cancer” until after July 9, 2002. R.1337a–38a. The evidence concerning the
other plaintiffs shows the same.
In addition, the information defendants expressly designed to reach the
plaintiffs and their doctors — defendants’ packaging inserts and product labels —
told a far different story than the one defendants now attempt to embellish with
bits and pieces of publications over a five–year period. During that same five–year
period, defendants continued to tell plaintiffs, and the world, that:
• The majority of studies show no breast cancer risk from any use
of estrogen;
• The only studies showing a risk involved estrogen use at high
doses or for long duration (10 years or more);
• The effect of adding progestins to estrogen was unknown;
• Some studies suggest adding progestins has no effect on the risk
from estrogen, if any; and
– 31 –