Vioxx etc
What happened to leaving it up to the consumer, i.e. the patient, to decide how much risk they are willing to accept? Where is the voice of the consumer in this latest scare which now encompasses Vioxx, Celebrex and the age-old OTC pain relief, naproxen (Aleve)? This is a classic example of the threesome of the paternalistic side of medine + the business side of the pharmaceutical industry + the litigious nature of American society...And left out in the cold is the patient suffering from arthritis who without the medications is facing a life of _known_ debilitating pain versus the risk of heart problems in the future. Maybe the consumer should have the choice...Caution is one thing - shutting people off from alreday established pain relief protocols, without much by way of alternatives...is quite another. What next - will we ban chemotherapy?
But then again - considering how November turned out - maybe Americans are more sado-masochistic than we give 'em credit for...and I'm not just talking about medical marijuana...
posted by ladymurasaki at 13:24
1 Comments:
Ahh, great minds blah blah... Listening to NPR on the way home this evening, similar thoughts ran through my head.
Of course, in the coverage of the Aleve situation, it seems to be lost in the panic that there is a difference between arthritis relief and headache relief i.e. the former = indefinite use, the later is once or twice. To NPR's credit, they pointed this out and went on further to point out that the drug was originally tested by the FDA in short-usage trials, as it wasn't originally meant to be used as an arthritis drug.
The whole situation isn't unlike HRT for post-menopasual women. Me mum had similar questions after that story got big a few years back -- i.e. the hot flashes suck, what are *my* chances of a heart attack, not the population's.
< sarcasam >
While our hearts bleed for the patients, though, let us not forget the drug companies. That's a hard-working bunch of corporations investing untold millions in new and better drugs to keep us healthier longer, and they struggle to recoup the R&D costs that go into those expensive meds.
If the patient is given the option to continue taking a med, it's only a matter of time 'til someone sues anyway (think cigarette companies) and those slim profit margins disappear in a puff of legal fees, out of court settlements, and spin control. And then there won't be newer, better drugs and we'll end up with socialized medicine or some other comprable horror.
< /sarcasam >
< holiday_cheer >
Post a Comment
<< Home