 |  |
 |  |  | |||||||
|
--- VIOXX CASE MAY HELP ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE
"Harvey R. Stone" news:t6Ubd.5266$Lk3.755@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > > "Mark Probert" wrote in message > news:98Sbd.12336$Fe6.5271238@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net... > > > > "Goody-Two-Shoes" > > news:21num09gctsjotglpogqtamjbnsk1rljqj@4ax.com... > >> sbharris@ix.netcom.com (Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com) > >> wrote: > >> > >> >Vioxx was pulled from the market after a study of longer than 1.5 > >> >years with more than 1300 people enrolled in tests of the drug vs. > >> >placebo. No difference in stroke or heart attack risk was noted at > >> >1.5 years of use, but only after that did the excess risk become > >> >apparent. The trial was halted when the Vioxx group finally had a > >> >total of 10 strokes or heart attacks vs. 5 for placebo (statistically > >> >likely less than 3% of the time). > >> > >> Clearly there must be some sort of co-factor for those unlucky > >> additional five. Is there any effort made to find out what it is? Do > >> we understand the mechanism of action of this particular drug in > >> causing the extra strokes or heart attacks or do we simply rely on the > >> statistics and that's that? > >> > >> It seems to me that this blanket withdrawal type of solution > >> --something similar happened with fen-fen (however it's spelled) and > >> with HRT--denies us a drug that may be perfectly safe for 97% of the > >> population if we can only identify what the co-factor is. Or if we're > >> willing to take the risk. > > > > I was in the pharmacy a few days after it was pulled. This elderly woman, > > leaning on her quad cane, was pleading with the pharmacist to renew her > > Vioxx prescription. She said she would rather risk a heart attack than be > > in > > the pain she had been in before she started on Vioxx. Nothing else worked > > as > > well. > > > > Those creeps who are deriving a perverse glee from this incident should > > experience her pain for a few days. > > > > Ooooh, you make a very good point. It is a point that includes the choice > people make when they take a DMARD...... The choice of Vioxx as a NSAID > has been taken away for good reasons and it is about Tomorrow not > about today's pain. Its about tomorrows death. We have people who are > not in pain making choices for the people who are...... I am sorry to say > that I am not smart enough to give an answer to that. Nor am I. The pharmacist was very kind to her and gave her a list of possible substitues which he told her that she should bring to her doctor. Severe constant pain is a nightmare for people. I have two close friends who are in constant pain. One suffers from Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy and his pain has only been relieved by methadone. His wife left him. The other one had a garage door with a newly installed opener fall onto her neck and she wound up have three neck surgeries, the last one being a failed fusion. She netted over $1.5M from Sears, and would gladly give the money back for a day without pain. She is on morhpine and baely functions. Fortunately, her husband is a great guy and is totally supportive of her aft 15 years.
"Harvey R. Stone" > Ooooh, you make a very good point. It is a point that includes the choice > people make when they take a DMARD...... The choice of Vioxx as a NSAID > has been taken away for good reasons and it is about Tomorrow not > about today's pain. Its about tomorrows death. We have people who are > not in pain making choices for the people who are...... I am sorry to say > that I am not smart enough to give an answer to that. > > Harv COMMENT: Your government thinks it is. Though to be fair, Vioxx was pulled off the market by the maker, not the FDA. Those who claim some kind of deception by the maker should keep this in mind. Indeed, Vioxx increases the risk for heart attack and stroke by about 50%. You can do that easily by smoking a couple of cigarettes a day, or by gaining 30 lbs. Or by being a couch potato. The question of how much pain relief is worth a very small chance on your life, is a good one. People risk their lives to have plastic surgery to correct the size of their noses or whatever. People risk their lives to fly to Paris for vacation, or drive on the freeway to grandma's for Thanksgiving dinner. Why shouldn't they be allowed to take a risk to relieve constant pain? The answer of course is: no particular reason. The Vioxx risk is just something that hadn't been noted before. If it had, it's possible the drug would have been approved anyway. After we get used to it, perhaps it will be on the market again. Anybody seen the recent TV ads for Enbrel? You risk death from infection, maybe an increased risk of developing lymphoma, and god knows what else, all just to fix the heartbreak of psoriasis. Go figure. SBH
In article <79cf0a8.0410151445.37321314@posting.google.com>, Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com >"Harvey R. Stone" >news: > >> Ooooh, you make a very good point. It is a point that includes the choice >> people make when they take a DMARD...... The choice of Vioxx as a NSAID >> has been taken away for good reasons and it is about Tomorrow not >> about today's pain. Its about tomorrows death. We have people who are >> not in pain making choices for the people who are...... I am sorry to say >> that I am not smart enough to give an answer to that. >> >> Harv > > >COMMENT: > >Your government thinks it is. Though to be fair, Vioxx was pulled off >the market by the maker, not the FDA. Those who claim some kind of >deception by the maker should keep this in mind. > >Indeed, Vioxx increases the risk for heart attack and stroke by about >50%. You can do that easily by smoking a couple of cigarettes a day, >or by gaining 30 lbs. Or by being a couch potato. > >The question of how much pain relief is worth a very small chance on >your life, is a good one. People risk their lives to have plastic >surgery to correct the size of their noses or whatever. People risk >their lives to fly to Paris for vacation, or drive on the freeway to >grandma's for Thanksgiving dinner. Why shouldn't they be allowed to >take a risk to relieve constant pain? > >The answer of course is: no particular reason. The Vioxx risk is just >something that hadn't been noted before. If it had, it's possible the >drug would have been approved anyway. After we get used to it, perhaps >it will be on the market again. I'd bet against that. Merck will have its hands full defending lawsuits by zillions of people who once stood next to someone who was taking Vioxx. I believe Merck has a second generation COX-2 inhibitor in the pipeline (I think I recall reading it was already available in Europe). So that'll probably be the next product, though I'm sure now we'll need another 1.5-year study to see if it causes cardiovascular problems, or maybe the heartbreak of psoriasis. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
wright@clam.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote: >In article <79cf0a8.0410151445.37321314@posting.google.com>, >Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com >>"Harvey R. Stone" >>news: >>The question of how much pain relief is worth a very small chance on >>your life, is a good one. People risk their lives to have plastic >>surgery to correct the size of their noses or whatever. People risk >>their lives to fly to Paris for vacation, or drive on the freeway to >>grandma's for Thanksgiving dinner. Why shouldn't they be allowed to >>take a risk to relieve constant pain? >>The answer of course is: no particular reason. The Vioxx risk is just >>something that hadn't been noted before. If it had, it's possible the >>drug would have been approved anyway. After we get used to it, perhaps >>it will be on the market again. >I'd bet against that. Merck will have its hands full defending >lawsuits by zillions of people who once stood next to someone who was >taking Vioxx. Hmmm, you can still obtain Fen-Fen (or is it Phen-Phen?) from Mexico so maybe a non-US supplier will be happy to jump in an fill the gap for Vioxx. Maybe even a non-US manufacturer. Both via that no-prescription-needed cheap pharmacy, the internet. But no one answered my question: Is there a follow-up going on in the medical research world or maybe Merck to find the co-factor and how exactly Vioxx causes these excess deaths? The objective is to be able to identify in advance persons who because of the co-factor would have certain heart attack or stroke. Those people obviously shouldn't take the drug: the rest of us can eat it like candy. BTW, I'm also not entirely convinced of the validity of this study despite the press falling over themselves to accept anything that's based on "statistics" -- you know about damn lies... I suppose. Like the used car salesman there's an aura of "Just trust us." On the face of it it's almost impossible to randomize a trial of this nature: you don't know the entire population and you can't compel any randomized subject to participate.
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 02:12:49 GMT, wright@clam.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote: >Merck will have its hands full defending >lawsuits by zillions of people who once stood next to someone who was >taking Vioxx. Perhaps you mean the thousands of widows, widowers and orphans of their customers who died because they kept their product on the market to make billions ... and "forgot" to warn them of the heart attack risks. Start « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next » Related Discussion: Max 3 years to $3M :: No Joke! (1 posts) Reports: Other Drugs May Raise Heart Risks (1 posts) Food (1 posts) Positive thinking a pain reliever (1 posts) Top Discussions From Our Archives Relations Among Heart Disease, Diabetes and Dementia Investigated Red, Processed Meats Up Diabetes Risk Energy. Resilience. Vitality. Want some? Re: New to Diabetes--please help Other Discussion Categories Diabetes Symptoms Health Care Policy
|
| ||||||||
 |  |
