According to an article in the August 20, 2005, edition of USA TODAY entitled "Vioxx verdict of $253M likely to prompt more suits":

"A Texas jury's $253 million verdict against drugmaker Merck had lawyers worldwide plotting strategy in a war over billions of dollars that will last years."

Between September 30, 2004, and January 28, 2005, Etopia Media Medical News Network published six in-depth articles dealing with multiple aspects of the fall-out from Merck's announcement, on September 30, 2004, that it was withdrawing VIOXX from the market.

You can still read those articles, by clicking on their titles below:

1-28-05: Researchers at the University of Chicago and Stanford University Medical Schools publish study showing that "increases in COX-2 inhibitor use among patients in whom NSAIDs could be used accounted for more than 63% of the growth in COX-2 inhibitor use during the period examined"

12-19-04: COX-2 inhibitor Celebrex® increases "cardiac event" risk just as COX-2 inhibitor VIOXX® does, but Pfizer, unlike Merck, chooses not to recall it

11-6-04: The Lancet confirms what Etopia Media Medical News Network reported a month ago, that Merck & Company should have known about the cardiac health risks of VIOXX® as early as 2000

10-4-04: The New York Times says that the "reason for the greater risk [of cardiac events in VIOXX® users] is not known; EMMNN offers a possible reason

10-3-04: VIOXX® risks have been known for years, other COX-2 inhibitors may be equally dangerous

9-30-04: Merck spokesperson discusses its recall of VIOXX®