adverse drug effects

[MarcusMaximus]

the number of adverse drug effects that kill the patient has now sky rocketed to 10 000 to 100 000 depending on who is doing the reporting. the deaths have been attributed to a number of things:
doctor incompetence. ( wrong drug prescribed)
lost in translation ( right drug prescribed - wrong drug given pharmacy)
doctor lack of knowledge of possible drug interactions.
doctor lack of knowledge of monograph listing of possible side effects.
Suppression of research that showed that the drug didn't work or that the drug was actually out and out dangerous.

it has been found that only 1/3 of research is actually being published. much more data is not being reported due to the fact that
1. the reseach is being funded by the drug manufacturers
2. the research showed that the drug in question didn't work or was clearly dangerous.

AS is often the case, the people first to stand up to tell the truth are the first to be shot & die or be ridiculed. Dr. oliviera in Canada, stood up to the financial backers of her reseach when she discovered that their drug appeared to be detrimental to her patients. her hospital backed the drug company...

REsearchers are not always wonderful do-gooders who want to solve world hunger and bring about world peace. There are not always independent scientists doing their work on their spare time paid for out of their own pocket. they are people just like you and I. Some are good and some are not so good. TO deny that money is involved or that money is a prime motivator is absurd.

The hospital is still the place to go but you have to ask questions of the women and men in white. Knowledge is still the key.

AAS- have killed how many people? directly attributable.

 

[Dale Mabry]

Not directly attributable.

I will agree that there is some corruption out there, but it is not nearly as bad as you lead to believe. First off, when a pharm company decides they want to put a drug out, they need to go to the FDA with a proposal for clinical trials. In this proposal, they need to lay out exactly how they intend to run the trials and the reasoning that led them to believe that this was the way to run them. In this document, there will be a list of the independent and dependent variables and these cannot change without authorization. Generally there are multiple phases to this research and many drugs do not make it to past phases 1 or 2. If a company fails to comply to the FDA's guidelies, they are done. These "audits" can occur at any time and without notice. Since I started at the University of Penn, we have been audited 3 times. To show you how serious they are about abiding by their guidelines, let me tell you a little something that does not even really pertain to the research method. If they come in, and you do not have all records locked up in files, or the room that the files are in is not locked, or there is one little mark on a form that is not dated and initialed, bam, your funding is gone and your drug WILL NOT be gven FDA approval. Also, if you do not report results, you do not get approval. Sure, the research is not given out to the general public, but neither is the drug so that is irrelevant.

This is just a general synopsis of what happens, believe me, it is a million times more involved and a huge pain in the ass.

As for the doctor you speak of, if she did not let the FDA of Canada know what was going on, she is the bad guy here. I gave up a job a few years ago because the dickhead I worked for wanted me to tamper with results and I wouldn't. I left and told him that if I ever saw those numbers changed in a journal I would report his ass.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Originally posted by Dale Mabry
Not directly attributable.

I will agree that there is some corruption out there, but it is not nearly as bad as you lead to believe.

i am not leading anyone to believe anything. it is written in medical journals, in black ink on white paper, in Science, TIBS, Nature, Discover.

There are millions of doctor-patient interactions and millions more prescriptions being written and filled.

so a couple 1000 or so people die; who cares....

and who really gives a rat's ass that some reports are not being accepted. it's just a few more million bucks. the low percentage of non reporting only results in a cupla deaths and a couple of thousand thalidomide babies. really affected no one.

everything is great, in this greatest of all possible worlds.

you have a great one.

i am not leading anything to anyone. these are just the facts ma'am as buddy used to say!

< look for the irony in there please.... >

 

[bandaidwoman]

All the above is true. That's why there is a huge amount of aftermarket analysis and reporting by all clinicians after a new drug comes out on the market. Ie: the heart valve damage by Fen-phen etc. But let's not forget that over the counter herbals are not subject to such strict research analysis,( as flawed as they may be depending on the researcher.) St. John's wort causes people with organ transplants to reject their organs if taken with many of the immunoregulators. People found out the hard way after waiting years for a kidney or liver etc. only to take St John's wort for their depression instead of a prescription antidepressant with no known interaction. Kava kava was ripped off the shelves in Germany after it was associated with increasing frequency of fulminant liver failure. (German commission E is the nation's FDA so to speak that monitors herbal therapy). The over the counter drugs do not subject their drugs to such careful aftermarket analysis. Any side-effects of their over the counter drugs will not be provided by the manufacturer, instead, it dependant on detective work by a clinician and the patient's willingness to divulge the information and reporting it to the appropriate authorities. This was the case with tylenol and asprin, since they were never prescription drugs to begin with. Who knew thay would be the biggest causes of liver damage and failure and bleeding ulcers, respectively. (I'm not defending drug companies, since as a whole, I hate them. )

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Originally posted by Dale Mabry
Not directly attributable.

As for the doctor you speak of, if she did not let the FDA of Canada know what was going on, she is the bad guy here. I gave up a job a few years ago because the dickhead I worked for wanted me to tamper with results and I wouldn't. I left and told him that if I ever saw those numbers changed in a journal I would report his ass.

hard to believe that you don't know about that particular case yet i then realized that you do UNIVERSITY researrch. not funded by any Pharm. This is the key difference. however, university research is being influenced by corporate sponsorship albeit to a much more limited degree.

Again, i do not lead people to any conclusions. People here are on the board have proven themselves time and time again to be more than capable of forming their own opinion given enough information from all sides of the argument.

MM

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Originally posted by bandaidwoman
St. John's wort causes people with organ transplants to reject their organs if taken with many of the immunoregulators. People found out the hard way after waiting years for a kidney or liver etc. only to take St John's wort for their depression instead of a prescription antidepressant with no known interaction. Kava kava was ripped off the shelves in Germany after it was associated with increasing frequency of fulminant liver failure. (German commission E is the nation's FDA so to speak that monitors herbal therapy). The over the counter drugs do not subject their drugs to such careful aftermarket analysis. Any side-effects of their over the counter drugs will not be provided by the manufacturer, instead, it dependant on detective work by a clinician and the patient's willingness to divulge the information and reporting it to the appropriate authorities. This was the case with tylenol and asprin, since they were never prescription drugs to begin with. Who knew thay would be the biggest causes of liver damage and failure and bleeding ulcers, respectively. (I'm not defending drug companies, since as a whole, I hate them. )

wholeheartedly agree. The natural herbal supplement industry shot itself in the foot. But ya know, it's funny; the same people who dislike the herbal side of the industry are sometimes the same people who believe in homeopathy. go figure.

Dr. O was drawn and quartered for her work. much like whistle blowers everywhere. Just the name given to people who tell the truth somehow conjurs up images of someone ratting someone out. This ain't so.

the CEO of a major multi national Pharm Giant publicly stated that 90% of the drugs only work in 30-40 % of the population given the drugs. nice odds there....give me some of that will ya!!
MM

 

[bandaidwoman]

I think,you stated marcus, there needs to be vigilance on all sides.
\
I have spent $150,000 dollars transforming all my medical records into electronic medical records that not only allow me to transcribe and pull up all the patient's medical records from other hospitals, docs, radiology readings downloaded from the hospital compute etc, but when i write a prescription it has a updated data base that not only tells me if the drug is n the patient's drug formulary ( saving call backs from pharmacies) but the potential interactions with everything else listed on their medicine list (It even has a Mosbey's herbal drug interaction data base in there.) My junior partners objected but I told them the money we save in potential lawsuits over one careless prescription after a sleepless night on call wll make up for the huge initial investment.

 

[Mudge]

Aspirin hits the liver too? Bummer

I have a PDR for home, which will list many interaction problems, there are online DBs some of which are free also. I'm aware of interactions sometimes being caught by pharmacists also.

 

[bandaidwoman]

Originally posted by Mudge
Aspirin hits the liver too? Bummer

I have a PDR for home, which will list many interaction problems, there are online DBs some of which are free also. I'm aware of interactions sometimes being caught by pharmacists also.

Any non-steroidal antiinflammatories can, but not to the extent tylenol does. It's main effect is on the kidneys (interstitial nephritis and overdoses can cause kidney failure) and bleeding complications. Occassional ones here and there or even a daily preventative isn't going to hurt most.

As for the PDR, they are useful tools but are already outdated when they are published. I remember when the PDR said it was safe to prescribe ciprofloxin antibiotic with coumadin but within two months of its publication, alot of us knew it caused toxicity
by word of mouth and checking with Adverse drug registries. In addition, they give generalized warnings when clinical trials show the drug may be safe or more toxic in a certain clinical scenario.
In fact, the PDR still gives warnings about giving the pneumonia vaccine in those with heart and lung problems, when these people have been shown time and time again by the CDC to benefit the most from it. That's why it's not admissable in court.

 

[Mudge]

I dont doubt it, just like an Encyclopedia. By the time something is broadly accepted enough to be entered, its already old news.

 

[Dale Mabry]

Originally posted by MarcusMaximus
hard to believe that you don't know about that particular case yet i then realized that you do UNIVERSITY researrch. not funded by any Pharm. This is the key difference. however, university research is being influenced by corporate sponsorship albeit to a much more limited degree.

MM

All of my research has been funded by NIH and thus has had no corporate sponsorship with the exception of one. I did one on the use of fluoride in pregnancy and a dentist sponsored it. He did not care which way it turned out, just wanted to know what the deal was in terms of pre-term labor and possible terminations.

Also, if you are going to state something as fact, references would be nice. I would like to see something that shows sane use of steroids can lead to death. Food and water can also be directly attributable to death, but it would be outside the realm of normal use that would cause this.

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Originally posted by Dale Mabry
All of my research has been funded by NIH and thus has had no corporate sponsorship with the exception of one. I did one on the use of fluoride in pregnancy and a dentist sponsored it. He did not care which way it turned out, just wanted to know what the deal was in terms of pre-term labor and possible terminations.

That's great.

Also, if you are going to state something as fact, references would be nice. I would like to see something that shows sane use of steroids can lead to death. Food and water can also be directly attributable to death, but it would be outside the realm of normal use that would cause this.

Dale, I believe that we are on the same side on this critical point. you must have missed it; I asked for any deaths directly attributable to steroid use. meaning that i'd be surprised if any turned up. not shocked as statistically there is always someone out there willing to do the craziest things. or is susceptible to some immuno response not normally associated with steroid use.

having said that, it should be pointed out to the newbies and the naive that the bodybuilding lifestyle may not be healthy when carried to the extreme that pro bodybuilding requires.

for which alleged non fact do you wish to be referenced?

 

[Dale Mabry]

My bad, I was reading 2 different posts at the same time and got your postings mixed up with someone else's. I guess I finally found that irony of which you speak.


Plus I got shitfaced and lost my ass in Atlantic City last night so my brain is in low performance mode right now.

 

[Just a guy]

FUCK ALL THIS SHIT... ROIDS ARE GOOD FOR U heh

 

[MarcusMaximus]

Originally posted by Dale Mabry
My bad, I was reading 2 different posts at the same time and got your postings mixed up with someone else's. I guess I finally found that irony of which you speak.


Plus I got shitfaced and lost my ass in Atlantic City last night so my brain is in low performance mode right now.

LOL. yeah, i kind of figured that you had my post mixed up with someone else' . I can't get that smiley dealy in here.. oh well...

irony was in reference to the comments about the deaths/birth defects being insignificant.

too bad about your gambling losses. i have heard this comment about gambling:

The bad thing about gambling is losing. the only thing worse than losing when you gamble is winning...

 

[MarcusMaximus]

well, there goes the neighbourhood

Originally posted by Just a guy
FUCK ALL THIS SHIT... ROIDS ARE GOOD FOR U heh

here's the statistical anomaly about which i spoke!

 

[Dale Mabry]

Originally posted by MarcusMaximus
LOL. yeah, i kind of figured that you had my post mixed up with someone else' . I can't get that smiley dealy in here.. oh well...

irony was in reference to the comments about the deaths/birth defects being insignificant.

too bad about your gambling losses. i have heard this comment about gambling:

The bad thing about gambling is losing. the only thing worse than losing when you gamble is winning...

I only lost like $100 so it was no big deal, I just hate losing at anything. I guess I can look at the positives, I watched one of my friends completely self-destruct last night. He got down $200 and we took a break. He said he was going to spend whatever he needed to get back up. He ended up $600 in the hole. I knew the night was bad because we played Let it ride poker and he said that I would be able to play for a while on $150. 15 minutes after I sat down I was down $100 and I said F this, I am going to get smashed.

 

[plouffe]

My buddy's mom made him taking a Gambling Addiction class and he's 15 yr. old.... haha.