The case of an athlete's death at the University of Central Florida is slowly moving forward but with trial dates set.

Ereck Plancher, a member of the UCF football team, died March 18, 2008, following a practice drill. The practice included a strenuous series of sprinting exercises called “gassers,” which the plaintiffs in the suit argue contributed to his death. Plancher may have suffered from a condition known as sickle cell trait, which is a blood disorder that can lead to certain complications under high-stress conditions.

Plancher's parents argue that the school is liable for wrongful death because it did not tell them or their son that he had tested positive for the condition.  The Plancher family attorney has repeated stated in open court that UCF has no written records indicating Plancher was told he tested positive. UCF attorneys are arguing that Plancher knew, or should have known, he had the genetic trait.  Additionally, UCF officials contend that since Plancher signed a liability waiver, this fact is irrelevant anyway.

Further complications in the case have arisen regarding the depositions of those involved, particularly the deposition of the football team's head trainer, Mary Vander Heiden. Both the defense and the plaintiff have alleged improper behavior on the part of opposing counsel, causing the case to proceed slowly. One judge has already stepped down from overseeing the case, as well.

A current round of hearings are set to determine if a special master is required to oversee deposition protocols, a measure that the presiding judge agreed is necessary. The court also imposed time limitations on the depositions and denied the plaintiff's requests to have the team's Head Coach's deposition heard in open court.

The entire affair is another prime example of how long legal proceedings can drag on. It has been more than two years since Plancher died, and still no date is set for the trial nor did the court schedule any new depositions. Court and legal costs are bound to be piling up at this point, further adding to the bereaved parents' burdens and worries as they look for resolution to a heartbreaking and traumatic event.

Tasers are once again in the news due to the death of a San Jose man during a police arrest. Steve Salinas was tasered and suffered fatal heart failure when police attempted to apprehend him in his motel room. Salinas’ daughter has filed a $20 million lawsuit against the San Jose Police Department as well as the Taser manufacturer, Taser International, Inc.

The suit alleges that the officers used the weapons excessively and with callous disregard for the reality of the situation they were presented with. Salinas’ daughter says her father was naked and had not committed any crime when the police burst into his room and repeatedly tasered him until his heart gave out. Salinas’ is the fifth taser-related death since the San Jose police were issued the devices in 2004.

All San Jose officers now carry tasers while on patrol. Watchdog and civil rights groups insist the weapons are not as safe as police claim they are. Some advocacy groups argue that the taser’s portrayal as a nonlethal weapon gives police a false sense of confidence and a willingness to use them more frequently than they otherwise would a firearm.

The police, for their part, stand by the events and the official report. They argue that Salinas was acting disturbed and confrontational, and that the use of force was required to apprehend him. The department also stands by the use of tasers as an alternative to more aggressive tactics.

The particulars of the case are still being hashed out, and it is too early to make a clear judgment about whether police acted appropriately. However, it is good that the matter is continuing to receive public attention. Whenever the authority to impose force is granted to any group, there is the potential for abuse. To maintain the greatest possible degree of freedom, every use of force must be examined carefully and unflinchingly in order to prevent abuse from becoming the norm.

The FDA has recently issued its strongest possible warning about the popular blood-thinning drug Plavix. The FDA warning states that some patients are unable to metabolize the drug. In short, their bodies can’t use the drug or their systems just ignore it. This is the result of a genetic trait, and many people who are taking Plavix may not be receiving any benefit from it nor even be aware of that fact. This can leave them at greater risk for heart disease and blood clots. From now on, the Plavix packaging will contain black box warnings about this so patients can be made aware.

The scale of Plavix sales cannot be overstated. In 2008, only the cholesterol-reducing drug Lipitor sold better. Millions of people use Plavix, and now a significant percentage of them may have to find an alternative. This is not to say that Plavix itself is dangerous, but information is key in treating illness. If doctors and patients are not aware that a medication isn’t working, it can slow down a switch to an alternative treatment that might be more successful. Unfortunately, genetic testing is one of the only ways to check for the trait and can cost up to $500. Doctors have stated that widespread genetic testing for the trait at this time would probably be premature, as the drug does work in over 97 percent of cases. But for those patients who have just learned of the new concerns involving the drug, uncertainties remain.

This incident involving Plavix illustrates the intermediary relationship that consumer advocacy groups, who protect us against dangerous drugs, maintain between consumers and manufacturers. Rather than waiting for harm to be done and lawsuits to be filed, private and public watchdogs bring information to light so that corrections can be made with the least possible disruption to everyone’s lives. Plavix is an effective drug that does a great deal of good. If this warning had not been communicated as early as it was, Plavix might have been caught in a storm of controversy later, and its ability to save lives would be reduced amid the conflict. As ever, information is key to a healthy, functioning society.