The topic of problematic FDA approved drugs has been covered by Natural Health News for more than 20 years. It seems as if there is no stopping this train. Many articles can be found here, using "search".
Why Medication Can Be Dangerous to Your Health from Dr. Leo Galland
Did you know that the majority of FDA approved drugs have serious potential side effects that were not detected before marketing approval?
That about three quarters of a million people a year are rushed to emergency rooms in the U.S. because of adverse drug reactions, according to the CDC?
That the number of medication-related deaths in the U.S. is estimated at over 200,000 a year, making medications the third or fourth leading cause of death in this country?
That even common pain relievers called NSAIDs, examples of which include Advil, Motrin, Aleve and aspirin, account for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the U. S. every year?
And from MoJo we have some of the same sentiments -NEW YORK – Editors of a top medical journal call Meridia "another flawed diet pill" and question whether it should stay on the market as a study shows it raises the risk of heart attack and stroke in people with heart problems.
The strongly worded editorial comes two weeks before government advisers review the prescription drug, which has already been pulled in Europe. In January, U.S. drug regulators strengthened existing warnings that the appetite suppressant should not be used by those with a history of heart trouble.
In Thursday's issue, the editors of the New England Journal of Medicine noted that the latest study showed weight loss with Meridia was minimal, it didn't improve cardiovascular health, and those with heart disease fared worse.
"It is difficult to discern a credible rationale for keeping this medication on the market," they wrote.
The editorial — with a headline calling the drug "another flawed diet pill" — was published along with the findings of the study conducted in Europe, Latin America and Australia.
Cheap Drugs
| Fri Aug. 27, 2010 7:15 AM PDT
Aaron Carroll writes today that we're addicted to new drugs even though older drugs are often just as good or better than the new ones. The problem is that 
we don't usually know this for sure since comparative studies are rare. However, a few years ago one was done for blood pressure medications: [1]
The whole post is worth reading. Sometimes new drugs are great, but I'm willing to bet that we waste upwards of a quarter to a third of the money we spend on pharmaceuticals because both doctors and patients have been brainwashed to always want the latest and greatest. But me? I like drugs that have been really well studied and are known to have infrequent and well understood interaction effects. In fact, new drugs actually make me kind of nervous. I am an insurance company's dream patient.
we don't usually know this for sure since comparative studies are rare. However, a few years ago one was done for blood pressure medications: [1]There were so many drugs to choose from for this trial (at different costs) that the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) primarily organized and supported a randomized, controlled trial to examine which was best. This study was enormous; it took place in 623 centers in the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands between 1994 and 1998, and included over 33,000 participants. Patients received one of four drugs:I'm glad to hear it! My blood pressure has been slowly rising for the past few years, and last year my doctor decided I should start taking something for it. At first she recommended a beta blocker, but as we talked about it she said something that made me a little nervous (I don't remember quite what). "You know," I said, "I actually have a strong preference for the oldest, cheapest, best studied drugs around." She looked slightly surprised, but said that was perfectly reasonable and immediately prescribed a diuretic. I've been taking it ever since. (And, yes, I try to watch my sodium intake too.)The last of these, the diuretic, was the oldest of the drugs, and by far the cheapest. However, at the end of the study, the results were clear. This old, cheap diuretic was significantly better at preventing at least one of the major types of cardiovascular disease when compared to the other, newer drugs. Since the diuretic was also significantly less expensive, it should be the drug of choice in initial treatment of high blood pressure. However, it usually is not.
- Amlodipine, a calcium channel blocker
- Doxazosin, an alpha-adrenergic blocker
- Lisinopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor
- Chlorthalidone, a diuretic
The whole post is worth reading. Sometimes new drugs are great, but I'm willing to bet that we waste upwards of a quarter to a third of the money we spend on pharmaceuticals because both doctors and patients have been brainwashed to always want the latest and greatest. But me? I like drugs that have been really well studied and are known to have infrequent and well understood interaction effects. In fact, new drugs actually make me kind of nervous. I am an insurance company's dream patient.
Links:
[1] http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/newer-drugs-arent-always-better/
[1] http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/newer-drugs-arent-always-better/
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar