 |  |
 |  |  | |||||||
|
--- VIOXX CASE MAY HELP ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE
usenet@mantra.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote in message news: > Vioxx case may help alternative medicine > > By Jim Warren > Herald-Leader Staff Writer > The Lexington Herald-Leader > Tuesday, October 12, 2004 > > The recent, unexpected demise of the popular anti- > inflammatory drug Vioxx -- and subsequent concerns that > were raised about similar drugs last week -- could boost > the already growing nationwide interest in complementary > and alternative medicines, two area physicians say. > > "I think that, hopefully, this will be a wake-up call for > the general public," said Dr. James Roach of Midway. "I > don't think the public fully recognizes how dangerous > some of these drugs can be." > > Dr. Edwards Smith, president of the Maharishi College of > Vedic Medicine in Lexington, agrees. > > "When you ask patients out there, they've sort of had it > up to here with harmful drug side effects," Smith said. > "The appeal of natural medicines is that they don't have > the harmful side effects, and in many cases they may be > just as effective as prescription drugs." COMMENT: We're led to the interesting question of how the *&^% Dr. Smith would know whether or not any "natural medicines" were more safe or less safe than Vioxx? Or how the @*^% Dr. Roach proposes to "fully appreciate" how dangerous some of these "drugs can be" but has knowledge that the alternatives are not? 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). What we'd like is for Drs Roach or Smith to tell us of ANY tests of ANY "natural remedies" which have been tested in double blind placebo controlled tests using more than 1300 people for more than 18 months, with a sensitivity which would have detected 5 extra heart attacks, had their been any. Please tell me of any Ayurvedic herb which has been that carefully tested for safety. Please cite references. And please, don't bother to tell me that these things have been given to millions of people for many years with nobody noticing any problems. So was Vioxx. These problems don't show up out of the noise unless you're doing a double blind controlled study with very careful monitoring. Practitioners treating patients would miss such slight deviations every time. SBH
In article <79cf0a8.0410131727.2fc43a45@posting.google.com>, sbharris@ix.netcom.com (Steve Harris sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com) wrote: > We're led to the interesting question of how the *&^% Dr. Smith would > know whether or not any "natural medicines" were more safe or less > safe than Vioxx? Or how the @*^% Dr. Roach proposes to "fully > appreciate" how dangerous some of these "drugs can be" but has > knowledge that the alternatives are not? > > 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). > > What we'd like is for Drs Roach or Smith to tell us of ANY tests of > ANY "natural remedies" which have been tested in double blind placebo > controlled tests using more than 1300 people for more than 18 months, > with a sensitivity which would have detected 5 extra heart attacks, > had their been any. Please tell me of any Ayurvedic herb which has > been that carefully tested for safety. Please cite references. > > And please, don't bother to tell me that these things have been given > to millions of people for many years with nobody noticing any > problems. So was Vioxx. These problems don't show up out of the noise > unless you're doing a double blind controlled study with very careful > monitoring. Practitioners treating patients would miss such slight > deviations every time. Well said! -- Orac |"I am not interested in trying to compensate | for your amazing lack of observation." | | Orac
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.
"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.
"Mark Probert" wrote in message news:98Sbd.12336$Fe6.5271238@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net... > 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. Vioxx worked fabulously for me. I had some wierd side effects from it, and had to switch, but I can definitely see how someone might get better relief from that than from another AI. Too bad this lady has to go the rounds of recently released medications *again* to see if she can find something that will work for her. Katherine 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
|
| ||||||||
 |  |
