Not just in Eugope

[hensylee]

Anybody want to check this out will find we don't get the full picture of some of our FDA approved pharmaceuticals.

Study faults drug approval system
One in five new drugs has serious side effects that do not show up until well after the medicine has received government approval, according to a study that exposes what one researcher calls an alarming game of medical Russian roulette.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/745698.asp

 

[ALCapshaw]

Hensylee,

I think that the important conclusion for us is to ALWAYS question the Doctor (and Pharmacist) about possible side effects and interactions with our present medications.

As noted, older drugs are safer because of their longer history. I remember when Lipitor first came out as the new miracle drug for cholesterol. I was put on Zocor by my bypass surgeon and my cardiologist told me he didn't see any compelling reason to change since my LDL was right where he wanted it. This article removes any desire to change.

I agree with the counter argument that if we wait for a guarantee that no problems will be encountered, no new drugs will ever get approved. Trials are a necessary part of the approval process. As a design engineer, I well appreciate that low level 'issues' may not appear until high volume production is begun. I've seen it countless times with electrical products where failures or other anomolies at the 10 parts per million level are not detected until well into production,
sometimes years after first production.

'AL'

 

[Zipper]

Thanks Ann & Al !!

Very good info and advice! The recent reactions to Vioxx and Celebrex show that we must be aware of the newer drugs creating unexpected side effects.

We are so lucky to have each other looking out for potential problems/dangers, and helping each other be informed.

Joan