A group of consumers have recently filed a Zostavax lawsuit alleging shingles vaccine injury resulting in the development of a persistent strain of shingles.

Ten consumers have joined together to file a shingles vaccine injury lawsuit against Merck & Co Inc., Merck Shop & Dohme Corp., and McKesson Corp., alleging that Zostavax can cause the development of shingles due to a live strain of the virus contained in the inoculation.

All of the plaintiffs in the case say they were administered the Zostavax vaccine under the impression that the vaccine effectively prevents shingles.

However, after receiving the inoculation, all ten consumers allegedly developed a persistent strain of shingles. Their shingles vaccine injury began as a rash which was diagnosed as shingles and required extensive medical treatment, the plaintiffs say.

Shingles is a painful condition associated with a persistent rash, blisters, and itching. Other shingles symptoms include fever, headache, light sensitivity, and fatigue.

The condition can usually be treated with antiviral drugs to speed healing, but sometimes complications can occur. Complications associated with the shingles virus include postherpetic neuralgia (continued pain signals after healing), vision loss, neurological problems, and skin infections.

Zostavax is an inoculation intended to prevent the development on shingles, which is though to be caused by a reactivation of the varicella zoster virus associated with chickenpox. After an individual contracts chickenpox, the varicella zoster virus reportedly remains dormant in the central nervous systems for years after the original illness. The virus can be reactivated by a variety of factors including disease, stress, aging, and immune modulation.

The Zostavax vaccine was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2006 for “the prevention of herpes zoster (shingles) in individuals 60 years of age and older when administered as a single-dose.” The inoculation allegedly contains a live varicella zoster virus which is attenuated, a process which weakens the virus but still allows it to activate the immune system. The live attenuated version of varicella zoster virus should activate the immune system and assist the body in developing immunity against shingles.

Despite the increased effectiveness of inoculation when using a live virus, there is a risk associated with the process should the virus not be sufficiently weakened. The plaintiffs argue that this is the case with the Zostavax vaccine. In their shingles vaccine injury lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim that the live varicella zoster virus is under-attenuated, which creates an increased risk of causing shingles.

According to the Zostavax lawsuit, Merck did not warn patients and physicians of the possibility of shingles vaccine injury including viral infection. The plaintiffs also claim that Merck did not tell consumers that the vaccine does not remain effective after five years. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) allegedly reported that the vaccine wanes in efficiency after five years. Despite many consumers risking shingles vaccine injury for long term shingles prevention, the vaccine does not even achieve its primary goal of permeant shingles prevention, the plaintiffs argue.

Each plaintiff seeks a minimum of $25,000 in damages to compensate for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages related to their shingles vaccine injury.

The Zostavax Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-02969-SJF-AKT in the Supreme Court of the State of New York.