Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 9:43:08 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 0:22:41 GMT
linkI understand there is an opioid crisis and a chunk of that involves prescription drugs which means the only legal way to obtain them through a doctor. That being the case why is all this the manufacturer’s fault? Attached is the article about the J&J judgement. From the article “The defendants caused an opioid crisis that is evidenced by increased rates of addiction, overdose deaths and neonatal abstinence syndrome in Oklahoma," Judge Balkman said in a statement.” “Balkman's ruling affirmed the key legal argument of the state's case, that the drugmaker had created a "public nuisance." “The state met its burden," Balkman said in his comments, proving the company acted improperly with its "misleading marketing and promotion of opioids."“As NPR reported in July, during the trial the state's expert witness, Dr. Andrew Kolodny, testified that Johnson & Johnson also profited by manufacturing raw ingredients for opioids and then selling them to other companies, including Purdue, which makes Oxycontin.” So what?
This is what I don’t get. “Misleading marketing” to who? The doctors who prescribe the drugs? Part of the job description of doctors is to prescribe drugs. As part of their due diligence is to understand what these drugs will or won’t do along with the side effects. So misleading marketing means what exactly? With holding potential side effects? I would think if a drug company did that they would be in a lot more trouble than being sued as a public nuisance. There are a lot of drug advertising on TV, so is J&J doing misleading marketing to the public? So what? Even if someone watches or reads an ad and races off to their doctor and say “I want to try this”, it falls to the doctor to do his due diligence before prescribing the drug. It’s also fair to say the vast majority or all pain pills can be addictive. This is when the doctor who prescribed the pain medication becomes the gate keeper. When my mom was still alive she had really painful arthritis and was under doctors care for the pain. And they did limit how many pain pills she was allowed to have every month. Drug companies are in the business of developing and making drugs. Of course they are going to market them because they, in most cases, aren’t the only game in town. Their main marketing targets are the doctors and if it’s found they deliberately withhold side effects they would be in a lot of trouble. The drug companies are not standing on street corners handing out free samples to folks. There is a breakdown someplace that allows folks access to prescription pain pills. But is it the manufacturer’s fault? If so how? Is Bernie Sanders right? “This fine is a step in the right direction. But I want to see the corporate executives at Johnson & Johnson, Purdue, and other companies held criminally liable for their actions.” “Under my legislation, the Opioid Crisis Accountability Act, Johnson & Johnson would be fined $7.8 billion—13 times as much as this penalty, about half of the company's profits, and 10 percent of the total annual cost of the terrible opioid crisis afflicting our country.” “Under the so-called "War on Drugs," men on street corners dealing pot were thrown in jail . I want to see a war on the corporate greed that is killing Americans. I want to see top executives held personally liable for actions that led to the deaths of more than 42,000 people.”
What I’m seeing is this is nothing but finding someone to pay and it doesn’t matter if their target is responsible or not because someone always has to pay. So what what am I not seeing?
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 28, 2019 0:34:42 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly.
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Aug 28, 2019 0:35:42 GMT
The theory that multiple states have sued under is that the manufacturers intentionally misled doctors and patients as to the addictive nature of opioids and pushed out enormous amounts of opioids knowing that the amount of opioids they were selling in a given area vastly outweighed the population of the area. The opioids are labeled as required by the FDA with a wading they are addictive, but drug manufacturers would employ both sales people and outside marketing firms that would then push the narrative that the opioids aren’t “that” addictive. There are actually emails among top executives at many of the companies talking about how they can continue to increase their market areas knowing that those areas were already over saturated based on population size and how they could mislead doctors and patients to continue increasing those market shares. NPR has done several good programs on the issue if your interested in more information
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Aug 28, 2019 0:36:00 GMT
They claim that the sales reps pushed the opiods and said that they were not addictive and would not cause harm.
I heard one commentator say that J&J was happy in that the $$$ was much lower then they thought it could have been. They were concerned that it could be BILLIONS.
On a personal note: I carried a CDL for 50 years and knew that pain pills of any kind were a no no... I knew they could be addictive.. I do not understand how others did not know. Most definitely in the last 20-30 30-40 years for sure, It was no secret!
|
|
PrettyInPeank
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,691
Jun 25, 2014 21:31:58 GMT
|
Post by PrettyInPeank on Aug 28, 2019 0:48:55 GMT
I don't know what documentary or docuseries I watched, but I watched something a year or two ago that interviewed doctors and patients, and highlighted the lies the pharmaceutical companies told them to keep them hooked. I'll keep trying to remember what it was called. Edit: I think it was called Heroin(e) www.netflix.com/title/80192445?preventIntent=true
|
|
|
Post by hmp on Aug 28, 2019 0:48:59 GMT
I worked in primary care when these drugs first came out. The drug company reps & the literature they left for us went on & on about how these drugs were effective at treating pain but would not result in easy patient addiction to the pain meds. We were all so thrilled to finally have something to offer our chronic pain patients that was effective at treating their pain, but wouldn’t be as addictive as what we previously had. This happened at a time when pharmaceutical companies could still “reward” their prescribers. The more you prescribed, the bigger the incentive. All expense paid trips (including family members), nice dinners at the best rated & most expensive restaurants, hard to get tickets to sporting & cultural events... You name it, it was offered. Many of the reforms that prevent these practices that we have in place now came into being as a result of the marketing practices used for these drugs. Of course they weren’t the only meds marketed this way. It’s just that the misleading & untruthful info created a social catastrophe that they they will forever be paired together.
|
|
anaterra
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,062
Location: Texas
Jun 29, 2014 3:04:02 GMT
|
Post by anaterra on Aug 28, 2019 0:49:40 GMT
I agree with the op... i dont understand how the manufacturer is at fault...
Sorta seems like blaming McDonald's for the obesity in America... but even worse because these were prescribed BY A DOCTOR to a patient...
All drugs have side effects.. isnt the dr supposed to know them... and how they interact with each other when a person takes multiple pills...
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on Aug 28, 2019 0:52:44 GMT
I agree with the op... i dont understand how the manufacturer is at fault... Sorta seems like blaming McDonald's for the obesity in America... but even worse because these were prescribed BY A DOCTOR to a patient... All drugs have side effects.. isnt the dr supposed to know them... and how they interact with each other when a person takes multiple pills... The difference is McDs wasn’t bribing doctors to prescribe Big Macs. How would a dr know the side effects if a manufacturer hides the results of clinical trials and studies and doesn’t disclose the side effects?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 9:43:08 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 0:53:26 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly. If any drug company was deliberately withholding just how addictive the drugs are or down play any side effects for any drug, they would not be sued for being a public nuisance, the Feds would go after their licensees as well as bring criminal charges against the company. Especially if deaths were involved. Why do you think when you see one of those annoying drug ads on tv and at the end of how wonderful the drug is they tell about how many things could go wrong including death. If they want to stay in business, the drug companies are up front about potential side effects.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 28, 2019 0:55:23 GMT
I agree with the op... i dont understand how the manufacturer is at fault... Sorta seems like blaming McDonald's for the obesity in America... but even worse because these were prescribed BY A DOCTOR to a patient... All drugs have side effects.. isnt the dr supposed to know them... and how they interact with each other when a person takes multiple pills... Have you read any of the above posts? The big pharmaceutical companies LIED to doctors and patients about how addictive these drugs actually were. That is why they’re being held responsible.
|
|
PrettyInPeank
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,691
Jun 25, 2014 21:31:58 GMT
|
Post by PrettyInPeank on Aug 28, 2019 0:57:31 GMT
I agree with the op... i dont understand how the manufacturer is at fault... Sorta seems like blaming McDonald's for the obesity in America... but even worse because these were prescribed BY A DOCTOR to a patient... All drugs have side effects.. isnt the dr supposed to know them... and how they interact with each other when a person takes multiple pills... Would you feel differently if they said a Big Mac was special and only 75 calories instead of 563?
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Aug 28, 2019 0:58:41 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly. If any drug company was deliberately withholding just how addictive the drugs are or down play any side effects for any drug, they would not be sued for being a public nuisance, the Feds would go after their licensees as well as bring criminal charges against the company. Especially if deaths were involved. Why do you think when you see one of those annoying drug ads on tv and at the end of how wonderful the drug is they tell about how many things could go wrong including death. If they want to stay in business, the drug companies are up front about potential side effects. Do you really believe the companies can’t stay within FDA required warnings but still mislead doctors and patients about the addictive nature of these drugs? There are emails among the executives of thes companies where they are strategizing how to do so.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 28, 2019 0:58:45 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly. If any drug company was deliberately withholding just how addictive the drugs are or down play any side effects for any drug, they would not be sued for being a public nuisance, the Feds would go after their licensees as well as bring criminal charges against the company. Especially if deaths were involved. Why do you think when you see one of those annoying drug ads on tv and at the end of how wonderful the drug is they tell about how many things could go wrong including death. If they want to stay in business, the drug companies are up front about potential side effects. There are two lawyers and a health-care worker already posting on this thread, explaining what the pharmaceutical companies did wrong. A judge agreed. So do I.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 9:43:08 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 1:46:20 GMT
The emails caught my attention so I asked my friend google about the emails and it brought up this story from The Washington Post.
From the article...
“Hammer on the abusers’: Mass. attorney general alleges Purdue Pharma tried to shift blame for opioid addiction”
”Healey squarely blames the Sackler family for prioritizing profits over safety and responsibility, even as evidence mounted that OxyContin was fueling the opioid crisis.
“By their misconduct, the Sacklers have hammered Massachusetts families in every way possible. And the stigma they used as a weapon made the crisis worse,” Healey’s office wrote in a 312-page memo filed ahead of a Jan. 25 hearing, noting that the company has sold more than 70 million doses of opioids in Massachusetts since 2007, netting more than $500 million in revenue.
Opioids are now more likely to kill people than car crashes, according to the nonprofit National Safety Council. The epidemic started in the late 1990s when people became addicted to prescription painkillers such as OxyContin; after a crackdown on prescribing made the pills harder to obtain, users shifted to heroin and fentanyl, a synthetic opioid now driving overdose deaths.
Massachusetts and hundreds of other government entities are suing opioid manufacturers, including Purdue, as well as companies that distributed the drugs, claiming that they should pay for the damage the pills wrought.
The litigation is consolidated in a Cleveland courtroom, with all documents relating to the case under seal. But Purdue and Healey’s office reached a deal that included the release of the documents, the first time the public has been able to see internal emails and other records related to how Purdue marketed OxyContin and dealt with the growing problem of addiction and overdose death.”
”In 2007, Purdue paid $600 million in fines and its executives pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges for claiming the product was less addictive than other painkillers.”
So my new question. If drug companies like this one are deliberately doing what is being said and they have the proof of it. Then why are they still in business? Seriously. Why are they still in business? Who knows how honest they are being about other drugs.
See ask the question and you find out what you are missing.
|
|
|
Post by hmp on Aug 28, 2019 1:47:24 GMT
They lied about data and withheld data. Medicine is nothing if not data driven. You get a list of possible side effects. We get that list plus the stats on how many patients experienced them, and the statistical significance of those side effects. Sometimes that data is broken down further into age, gender, race, medical comorbidities (other medical diagnoses), again with all the statistics. We read journal articles to keep up with what’s new. We attend lectures and conferences to keep current. When companies lie about their data, those lies get further disseminated in review articles & continuing education lectures thereby cementing the believability of those “alternative facts”. If you want to get a tiny dose of what we go through, just read one of those package inserts that comes with your prescription med. The thick one with the teeny, tiny, print. That’s the amount of data we try to absorb, process, & memorize for each med we prescribe.
None of us believe what the drug reps say. We know they are paid to push their company’s drug. We know their bonuses are determined by how many prescriptions we write for their company’s drug. And yes, they also have access to that data They get reports by prescriber name of how many times you’ve written a prescription for their company’s drug. But we do believe the data that the reps show us that is then used to substantiate those marketing claims. The drug reps are one of the few ways to actually get to see that data.
I see this issue from both sides, as a provider and a patient with multiple serious medical diagnoses. If you think pharmaceutical companies and hospitals/healthcare consortiums value your health and well-being above the almighty dollar you are wrong. Most healthcare providers, aides, techs, pharmacists... truly want to help make you better. But most of the people we work for are not clinicians and don’t really care about you. Our healthcare system is broken and won’t be fixed until the majority of our population decides to understand the complexity of the issues and fix it. It won’t be easy. & it won’t be cheap. And something like this opioid crisis is just the tip of the iceberg. Just wait until you see what’s hiding under the water!
|
|
|
Post by jamieson on Aug 28, 2019 2:07:16 GMT
I agree with the op... i dont understand how the manufacturer is at fault... Sorta seems like blaming McDonald's for the obesity in America... but even worse because these were prescribed BY A DOCTOR to a patient... All drugs have side effects.. isnt the dr supposed to know them... and how they interact with each other when a person takes multiple pills... Pharmaceutical companies like Johnson & Johnson don't just manufacture drugs, they market them. Heavily. And their marketing costs have multiple tax loopholes for them. I hesitate to add that you almost have to be on the clinical side of this to get it, but I don't want to be condescending. I agree with all of what "HMP" has posted, and having also worked in primary care, you see everything from the legitimate need for painkillers, to their demand from the resulting addicts. Sad, and created to make money.
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on Aug 28, 2019 2:10:12 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly. If any drug company was deliberately withholding just how addictive the drugs are or down play any side effects for any drug, they would not be sued for being a public nuisance, the Feds would go after their licensees as well as bring criminal charges against the company. Especially if deaths were involved. Why do you think when you see one of those annoying drug ads on tv and at the end of how wonderful the drug is they tell about how many things could go wrong including death. If they want to stay in business, the drug companies are up front about potential side effects. Why do you think this? Johnson and Johnson was recently found to be *knowingly* selling powder that they *knew* contained asbestos and they *knew* caused cancer. What did the federal government do? Nothing. Why do you have so much trust that the federal government would control and contain a company that donates millions of dollars to the politicians who oversee that very same federal government?
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,648
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Aug 28, 2019 2:13:24 GMT
I am on my phone so don't want to type out a long response, but I agree with the above posters how the manufacturers were deliberate in their pushing these drugs while withholding information about how addictive they were.
I highly recommend the book Dreamland - does a great job explaining the opiate crisis (both prescribed and black tar heroin). A lot of parties are too blame.
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,648
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Aug 28, 2019 2:17:16 GMT
Also, I just listened to a disturbing interview with an author of a new book detailing the problems with the generic drugs manufactured in India. The FDA greatly failed in their mission (along with a lot of other problems).
There is a reason big pharma is one of the biggest lobbies.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Aug 28, 2019 2:17:31 GMT
I guess that we should absolve Big Tobacco of all wrongs and give back all the fines and legal judgments they have had to pay?
There is little/no difference between Johnson & Johnson and Phillip Morris in my mind, except that opioids kill more quickly than cigarettes.
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on Aug 28, 2019 2:17:35 GMT
These drug companies went out of their way to push more and more usage of these drugs (aimed at doctors and patients, and yes, they lied to everyone), and to hide just how addictive they were. They have made billions off of it. I have no problem with them paying some of that money back into the communities that have suffered so greatly. If any drug company was deliberately withholding just how addictive the drugs are or down play any side effects for any drug, they would not be sued for being a public nuisance, the Feds would go after their licensees as well as bring criminal charges against the company. Especially if deaths were involved. Why do you think when you see one of those annoying drug ads on tv and at the end of how wonderful the drug is they tell about how many things could go wrong including death. If they want to stay in business, the drug companies are up front about potential side effects. You are sharing a lot of wrong information in this thread. There is no such thing as bringing “criminal charges against the company.”
|
|
|
Post by pjaye on Aug 28, 2019 2:28:32 GMT
No matter what any drug company says, I can't believe that any doctor would believe that any painkiller could possibly not be addictive. I've been a nurse since the 1980s when these narcotic pain pills were not around, people still got addicted to injectable narcotics, people also got addicted to codeine tablets, benzodiazepines, sleeping tablets, etc etc. Addiction is not a new thing, but having those drugs in tablet form just makes it easier.
I don't believe for a second that any legitimate doctor would not know that any of these narcotic pills could lead to addiction issues...even if 100 articles said otherwise.
It's a (sad) fact of life that some people will become addicted to pretty much anything they can get their hands on and will consume medications in massive quantities in order to try to get high. We used to have a sleeping tablet that was a liquid in a gel capsule...until people started injecting that liquid. I'm kind of tired of people fucking up their own lives and trying to blame everyone else. No-one comes to your house and forces you to take narcotic tablets multiple times a day (or inject sleeping tablet liquid, or take 50 Benadryl or Lomotil at one time). People do this to themselves. Don't want to get addicted to narcotic tablets? Then don't take them longer or in bigger quantities than you are supposed to.
I think the 'talc' issue is totally different, unlike narcotics, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that talcum powder is safe to use. Once the company started seeing evidence that it wasn't...it should have immediately pulled that product and warned people to stop using it. That's a cover up. But pretty much everyone already knew that any pain medication would have the potential for addiction and doctors who overprescribed it and patients who took it for longer and in bigger doses can't really claim otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by nurseypants on Aug 28, 2019 2:31:38 GMT
Oy vey. Why even bother giving facts when people know their own damn feelings and biases trump those facts!!
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Aug 28, 2019 2:46:19 GMT
on't want to get addicted to narcotic tablets? Then don't take them longer or in bigger quantities than you are supposed to. and what if your doctor prescribes them in a quantity / time span that IS addictive? "Here; take this 3x/day for your knee pain, for 3 weeks. I'll give you 2 refills, in case you need them." (and this information is coming from the doctor, a person who supposedly has your best interest at heart.) If the doctor is pushing particular drugs because of marketing incentives from the Pharma companies, don't you think the doctors could possibly be culpable to a degree? And if the doctor gives you a refill, and you think your pain isn't going away (because you got addicted to them in that time span), how is that POSSIBLY the fault of the PATIENT?!?
|
|
|
Post by boys5times on Aug 28, 2019 2:47:29 GMT
I think its on the doctors. Reputable doctors don't prescribe enough to allow abuse. I had MAJOR back surgery and am fused from bra strap line to tailbone, skipping 1 vertebrae and then the next 2 fused as well. I was taking painkillers and even though it was only about one a day (after the initial fusion and once I was off the pic line that I had for 3 months) I signed a contract and submitted to random drug testing. My Dr. was responsible to make sure I was not abusing them. This decision makes me angry AND sad for those people that truly need painkillers to live a semi-normal life. I don't need them anymore but what about those that are truly in pain?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 9:43:08 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 2:56:09 GMT
I was a bit naive here.
Part of my job when I work is to place insurance for clinical trials for drugs and medical devices. Because of that I have access to the protocols and patient informed consent form for the drugs and medical instruments. In these documents are the lists of what side effects could occur.
There is usually more than one phase of a trail and after each phase the protocols/ICF are amended to reflect was determined from the previous trial. A big part of that are the side effects.
Its this data from the trials that is submitted to the FDA to gain approval for the drug or medical instrument up for approval.
So unless the ease of addiction of the drug was found after they received approval for the drug, and that happens, then the information is on file with the FDA.
So if any company is deliberately misrepresenting the information they provided the FDA to the doctors/public then its a bit more serious than a bunch of individual states suing these companies and declaring them a public nuisance. The FDA needs to step in and take the drug off the market and do an audit of all their drugs and how they are presenting the side effects to the doctors and if it matches the data gathered by the clinical trials and presented to the FDA for approval. Or put them out of business.
When a doctor decides what drug to prescribe they need accurate information to make the choice. That is why this is bit more serious then suing the company for being a public nuisance.
I was naive in that I didn’t think any drug company would be that stupid. But why wouldn’t they try it because it’s clear the FDA is sitting on the sidelines on this and leaving this up to the individual states.
|
|
|
Post by myshelly on Aug 28, 2019 3:15:49 GMT
I was a bit naive here. Part of my job when I work is to place insurance for clinical trials for drugs and medical devices. Because of that I have access to the protocols and patient informed consent form for the drugs and medical instruments. In these documents are the lists of what side effects could occur. There is usually more than one phase of a trail and after each phase the protocols/ICF are amended to reflect was determined from the previous trial. A big part of that are the side effects. Its this data from the trials that is submitted to the FDA to gain approval for the drug or medical instrument up for approval. So unless the ease of addiction of the drug was found after they received approval for the drug, and that happens, then the information is on file with the FDA. So if any company is deliberately misrepresenting the information they provided the FDA to the doctors/public then its a bit more serious than a bunch of individual states suing these companies and declaring them a public nuisance. The FDA needs to step in and take the drug off the market and do an audit of all their drugs and how they are presenting the side effects to the doctors and if it matches the data gathered by the clinical trials and presented to the FDA for approval. Or put them out of business. When a doctor decides what drug to prescribe they need accurate information to make the choice. That is why this is bit more serious then suing the company for being a public nuisance. I was naive in that I didn’t think any drug company would be that stupid. But why wouldn’t they try it because it’s clear the FDA is sitting on the sidelines on this and leaving this up to the individual states. You are still showing your naivety. You (and most Americans) are vastly overestimating the power of the FDA. The FDA actually doesn’t have the power to force a company to recall a drug. Recalls are voluntary. The FDA couldn’t put J&J out of business if they tried (but why would they even try). www.drugwatch.com/fda/recalls/
|
|
|
Post by pjaye on Aug 28, 2019 3:21:22 GMT
Here; take this 3x/day for your knee pain, for 3 weeks. I'll give you 2 refills, in case you need them." (and this information is coming from the doctor, a person who supposedly has your best interest at heart.) You don't take them if you don't need them...there is no compulsion to take every tablet in the box or to fill every prescription. I had back surgery last year. I went home with 28 slow release (SR) narcotic tablets and 20 immediate release (IR) narcotic tablets. I took the SR tablet every 12 hours for two weeks and I felt I still needed them when I saw the surgeon at 2 weeks post op, he wrote another prescription for a month. In total I took 5 of the 20 IR tablets I had. After another week on the SR I reduced it to only taking one in the morning I stopped them a week later switching to only paracetamol (Tylenol) and ibuprofen. The pain wasn't that bad anymore so I stopped taking them. I still have 15 IR and 8 SR tablets in my cupboard...and haven't thought about them for 12 months. That's what people are supposed to do. You take strong pain pills if you have SEVERE pain...you don't take them because there's still pills left in the box. Once you don't have severe pain, then you switch to OTC pain pills and then you stop taking those as well. And you also can't expect to be 100% pain free after surgery, there is still a level of pain that is reasonable to put up with. The doctors order is "IF you need them for severe pain" not "take them 3 x day until they are all gone" that only applies to antibiotics. That can't be news to anyone...surely?
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Aug 28, 2019 3:32:34 GMT
the FDA doesn't even have the people they need to do the in-person oversight they have to do now! Or people enough to review the paperwork required for a new drug approval. And they're approving drugs on a fast-track basis-- IF the company pays them enough $$ to make it worth their while (at least they used to do this, I think)... I worked for a Rx company in the late-90s - early-2000s; the management of our division (diagostics) thought some of the regulations just didn't apply to us, basically. And that our district's FDA office inspectors 'had it in' for us. So they didn't comply with very BASIC documentation regulations and fixes that had been requested REPEATEDLY. We were under a consent decree for YEARS, due to our own arrogance. But the FDA couldn't shut the entire company down-- or even our entire division-- because of that! The most they could do was make us pull some tests off the market till we fixed the documentation issues, but there were others that HAD to stay on the market. When I left the company, they were STILL under that consent decree-- and they must have still been making money, even with the products off the market (and we had to pay them a % of the gross sales for the tests still on the market, too.) Pharmaceutical companies are marginally interested in people's health, but only from the standpoint of how much $$ they can make from it. Otherwise they'd develop drugs to treat / cure all those orphan diseases, along with the big moneymakers. (And personally, I hate that they can market direct to consumers the way that they do, now.) You don't take them if you don't need them...there is no compulsion to take every tablet in the box or to fill every prescription. If you've gotten ADDICTED to them in that timeframe, then you DO think you NEED them. THAT'S the problem. And because most people aren't medically savvy like people in the medical industry are- then you TRUST your doctor that they know what they're doing when they prescribe you something.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Aug 28, 2019 3:37:04 GMT
It's cool how medical professionals will complain if patients do second guess their instructions and also if they don't.
|
|