Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mmm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mmm!mrgofor
From: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: Tylenol
Message-ID: <628@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 17:51:43 EST
Article-I.D.: mmm.628
Posted: Mon Mar 17 17:51:43 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Mar-86 06:37:26 EST
References: <190@drutx.UUCP> <1368@ihuxn.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Organization: none
Lines: 30

In article <1368@ihuxn.UUCP> gadfly@ihuxn.UUCP (Gadfly) writes:
>
>All the investigators, and J&J, seem to have ruled out (or are
>carefully not mentioning) the possibility of employee sabotage.
>The prevailing theory is that some person tampered with the
>tamper-proof packaging at or near the stores since the tainted
>bottles came from different lots.  As I understand it, though,
>they're *all* made at the same factory (in Puerto Rico) where
>it would be a lot easier for some paranoid malcontent to modify
>the contents before they're sealed.  Why couldn't this have
>happened?  The reported line is simply that it didn't, or it
>was ruled out.  Anyone know why?
>-- 
>ken perlow       *****   *****

	Because the capsules were *not* manufactured at the same place.
This is one of the most elementary things for investigators to look
at, and you can bet that the wouldn't overlook a situation where
all the tainted pills came from the same place. The distribution
channels for the pills apparantly were so different as to imply
that they were tampered with at the store level. Now, if we would
just move over-the-counter drug packages behind the counter so that
nobody could walk in and place a contaminated package back on the
shelf, perhaps the problem wouldn't be so bad.

-- 
					--MKR

The first half of a project takes 90% of the time. The other half takes
the other 90%.