If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WorldNetDaily)   The FDA is a useless killer; in our litigious environment it is certainly not in the best interest of any drug company to produce a bad drug. As a citation, the author lists vioxx and thalidomide   (wnd.com) divider line 137
    More: Ironic, FDA, killer, vioxx, drug companies, anti-inflammatory, Bayer, Competitive Enterprise Institute, flu pandemics  
•       •       •

1523 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Jan 2013 at 11:38 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-01 09:43:24 AM
Lots of people don't know, but thalidomide is still quite available.  I see a ton of the stuff, it's used to treat multiple myeloma.  And it costs $4000 a month if you pay in cash.  The paperwork is similar to buying a car.
 
2013-01-01 09:50:19 AM
And Vioxx can relieve the pain and stiffness of arthritis by killing you.
 
2013-01-01 09:55:41 AM
This is what free market people actually believe.
 
2013-01-01 10:08:51 AM
  Gentle submitter: The drug companies would never allow the FDA to be dismantled.  If it were, how could they rely on federal preemption to avoid civil liability for their "errors."  No, as long as the regulators are carefully compensated by big pharma, they love the FDA.
 
2013-01-01 11:10:46 AM
*twitch*

*twitch*
 
2013-01-01 11:37:21 AM
Now I am not the brightest bulb in the box, but when it comes to evaluating treatments, I will stack the cumulative experience, clinical skills and knowledge of a nation of physicians over a few government wonks any day.

This admitted "not the brightest bulb" has failed to do the basic research necessary to make any sort of evaluation of "government wonks".
From Wikipedia:

Fabricated efficacy studies
On March 11, 2009, Scott S. Reuben, former chief of acute pain at Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, Mass., revealed that data for 21 studies he had authored for the efficacy of the drug (along with others such as celecoxib) had been fabricated in order to augment the analgesic effects of the drugs. There is no evidence that Dr. Reuben colluded with Merck in falsifying his data. Dr. Reuben was also a former paid spokesperson for the drug company Pfizer (which owns the intellectual property rights for marketing celecoxib in the United States). The retracted studies were not submitted to either the FDA or the European Union's regulatory agencies prior to the drugs approval. Drug manufacturer Merck had no comment on the disclosure.
 
2013-01-01 11:40:33 AM
Vioxx was an awesome drug.

Only non-narcotic that helped my friend with her severe joint and muscle pain.

All the new ones are sulphonamides (I probably spelled that wrong) and she cant take sulpha based meds.. so she is screwed.
 
2013-01-01 11:43:35 AM
Satire?
 
2013-01-01 11:43:52 AM
She is past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

Past president? Did they throw her out for becoming sane?

*reads article*

Nope. Must have been something else.
 
2013-01-01 11:49:03 AM
Working for a firm that is currently under Consent Decree, holy crap do we need the FDA.  Producing safe drugs of consistent potency and quality is a fiddly deal, and needs tight regulation to make sure producers are 1) not cutting corners and 2) are staying up to date with current good practices.
 
2013-01-01 11:49:22 AM

Because People in power are Stupid: Now I am not the brightest bulb in the box, but when it comes to evaluating treatments, I will stack the cumulative experience, clinical skills and knowledge of a nation of physicians over a few government wonks any day.

This admitted "not the brightest bulb" has failed to do the basic research necessary to make any sort of evaluation of "government wonks".
From Wikipedia:

Fabricated efficacy studies
On March 11, 2009, Scott S. Reuben, former chief of acute pain at Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, Mass., revealed that data for 21 studies he had authored for the efficacy of the drug (along with others such as celecoxib) had been fabricated in order to augment the analgesic effects of the drugs. There is no evidence that Dr. Reuben colluded with Merck in falsifying his data. Dr. Reuben was also a former paid spokesperson for the drug company Pfizer (which owns the intellectual property rights for marketing celecoxib in the United States). The retracted studies were not submitted to either the FDA or the European Union's regulatory agencies prior to the drugs approval. Drug manufacturer Merck had no comment on the disclosure.


Not to mention it was the "cumulative experience, clinical skills and knowledge of a nation of physicians" that kept Vioxx on the market until the FDA pulled it. The FDA doesn't prescribe drugs. They don't buy drugs. It was doctors who kept it on the market.
 
2013-01-01 11:49:47 AM
Funny, as drug companies use that same "litigious environment" to try to bury their mistakes.

GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.


Faith-based economics.
 
2013-01-01 11:49:47 AM

Rent is too damn high: Satire?


Orthopedic surgeon talking about medication.

So, yeah, satire.
 
2013-01-01 11:50:32 AM

hillbillypharmacist: Lots of people don't know, but thalidomide is still quite available.  I see a ton of the stuff, it's used to treat multiple myeloma.  And it costs $4000 a month if you pay in cash.  The paperwork is similar to buying a car.


say no way. marijuana's a fast way to fall
 
2013-01-01 11:55:04 AM

GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.


Same people will also talk about the need for tort reform in the next breath.
 
2013-01-01 11:56:34 AM
As far as these people are concerned, all government is bad. Particularly federal government. Pick a program, any program, and they're agin' it.

They are all, to an extent,  echoing Goldwater: "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

They know that they are staking positions that are 'way out there', but they think that since they are fighting evil, it's OK.

I vote for continuing to ridicule them even though they don't really care. The ridicule might at least keep some people from joining them in their ridiculous crusade.
 
2013-01-01 11:56:58 AM

Shadow Blasko: Vioxx was an awesome drug.

Only non-narcotic that helped my friend with her severe joint and muscle pain.

All the new ones are sulphonamides (I probably spelled that wrong) and she cant take sulpha based meds.. so she is screwed.


I work at a university that rhymes with Schmarvard that is getting heavily into bioinformatics.

While looking at some anonymous research data from patients, researchers found a period of time where there was this huge spike in heart attacks in patients that otherwise didn't fit the risk profile for them. It was just this huge spike that then went away. After looking into the data more, they discovered that the spike started ~1 year after Vioxx was introduced, and went away ~1 year after it was pulled from the market.

It might have been a great drug, but the side effects were severe.

Over time, genetic testing and more information about how drugs actually interact with various proteins will allow doctors to figure out both the right dose for your condition and be able to tell if you're at risk for the various side effects. It's possible that Vioxx could come back for the segment of the population that doesn't have heart attacks as side effects. Doubtful though. Hope your friend is able to get something else soon.
 
2013-01-01 12:01:39 PM
The one thing the absolute free-market libertarians are never able to answer is that there is ALWAYS someone with capital power who is willing to trade your long-term well-being for his short-term profit. And chances are his short-term profit can be converted to long-term as well. If the "free market" removes one of these people, there are a thousand more to replace him or her.

At the end of the day, the losers are left to recover what they can of a polluted landscape, ruined health, broken economy, or whatever while the winners play with their cigarette boats in the Caymans.
 
2013-01-01 12:04:53 PM

theteacher: Rent is too damn high: Satire?

Orthopedic surgeon talking about medication.

So, yeah, satire.


I resent that! I am familiar with NSAIDS *and* cephalosporins!
 
2013-01-01 12:06:30 PM
Thereis no need to buy an alarm because people who rob houses go to jail.
 
2013-01-01 12:07:48 PM
It is not in the best interest of any drug company to fail to meet the expectations of their stockholders. If they can meet those quarterly earnings by pushing a poorly-tested or even dangerous drug out the door, they will do so.

When has trusting corporate enterprise to do the right thing for the long term incentive ever worked out? Is there a single example in all of human history?
 
2013-01-01 12:10:18 PM

theteacher: Rent is too damn high: Satire?

Orthopedic surgeon talking about medication.

So, yeah, satire.


What's the difference between an orthopedic surgeon and a carpenter?

A carpenter knows more antibiotics.
 
2013-01-01 12:19:19 PM
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons?

Seems legit.
 
2013-01-01 12:20:54 PM
i1.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-01-01 12:21:32 PM
Physicians are a bad choice to rely on for approving drugs. Doctors love to hand out drugs, if for no other reason than the amount of money they get paid for promoting some drug companies latest wonder pill.
 
2013-01-01 12:23:50 PM
Competitive Enterprise Institute

WTF is that?  and why should we listen to them? oh wait, to the googlemobile.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to advancing the principles of limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty.

well there is no doubt they are unbiased and have our best interests at heart. because if there is anything that limited government, free enterprise and individual liberty has taught us it's big pharma is our friend.
 
2013-01-01 12:25:00 PM

MorrisBird: Gentle submitter: The drug companies would never allow the FDA to be dismantled. If it were, how could they rely on federal preemption to avoid civil liability for their "errors." No, as long as the regulators are carefully compensated by big pharma, they love the FDA.


No, the solution is simple: keep pushing "torte reform" and once people can no longer sue drug companies for damages (and remember that it's not easy now), then you can get rid of the FDA and sell whatever you want for whatever you want.
 
2013-01-01 12:27:14 PM

MisterLoki: Association of American Physicians and Surgeons?

Seems legit.


FTL: The society's "journal" JPANDS has published an article on the supposed link between breast cancer and abortion.[33] It has been roundly debunked.[34][35][36] Near the end of the 2008 Presidential Election the "journal" published a claim that Barack Obama uses neuro-linguistic programming to exercise mind control over people at his rallies.[37]


Wow. Just...wow.
 
2013-01-01 12:28:17 PM

gameshowhost: Funny, as drug companies use that same "litigious environment" to try to bury their mistakes.

GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.

Faith-based economics.


I told a "freemarketer" that is retired from the airline industry that getting rid of the FDA makes as much sense as getting rid of the FAA, not to mention that it would kill my job because no one would buy our products without a guarentee of safety. He of course defended the existance of the FAA because its something he knows about. It easy to be a fundamentalist when you don't actually know anthing.
 
2013-01-01 12:31:14 PM
So the problem isn't a crooked drug market flooded with hastily prepared and dubiously cleared medicines that cause stomach bleeding, aural hallucinations, violent tendencies, sleeplessness, eyeball reversal, baldness, cramping, spontaneous flight in infants, skin loss, blindness, labial crystallization, gambling, and promiscuity as side effects to a treatment meant to make people stand in a meadow with an adorably harmless family dressed in art teacher blue.  No, the problem is that, because of the byzantine snakepit that is the FDA, these drugs aren't hitting shelves faster.  OK, then.
 
2013-01-01 12:33:41 PM
What the author doesn't know about the drug approval process could fill a warehouse. Yes, FDA is sort of evil and makes mistakes and approves drugs that should never be approved but dangerous drugs are sometimes approved (or approved for new uses) because of heavily massaged data provided by *drumroll, please* the pharmaceutical companies. I don't see this author blaming the pharma companies for killing people. I also don't see author of TFA complaining about the FDA holding back the over-the-counter morning-after pill for years and years (a drug which hasn't killed anyone) for purely political (not scientific) reasons.

Is author of TFA really a doctor? If so, are they handing out MDs to just anyone these days?
 
2013-01-01 12:34:19 PM
"In medicine, we speak of errors of "commission" - problems from administering a treatment, and errors of "omission" - errors that arise from failing to give treatment. The FDA supposedly prevents
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/how-many-have-died-because-of-the-fda/#b79q oIX4WDqrLGYD.99"

is this chick mormon?
 
2013-01-01 12:35:47 PM

hillbillypharmacist: The paperwork is similar to buying a car.


so you sign two forms wait 15 minutes then sign a third form?
 
2013-01-01 12:36:33 PM
J-s-s people, this isn't that hard - > permanently reduce FDA's funding 10% and give a 10% tax break to American pill makers that embrace ISO900X and ISO140XX manufacturing standards.
 
2013-01-01 12:37:00 PM

Curious: Competitive Enterprise Institute

WTF is that?


right wing wank-tank
 
2013-01-01 12:37:05 PM

Needlessly Complicated: What the author doesn't know about the drug approval process could fill a warehouse. Yes, FDA is sort of evil and makes mistakes and approves drugs that should never be approved but dangerous drugs are sometimes approved (or approved for new uses) because of heavily massaged data provided by *drumroll, please* the pharmaceutical companies. I don't see this author blaming the pharma companies for killing people. I also don't see author of TFA complaining about the FDA holding back the over-the-counter morning-after pill for years and years (a drug which hasn't killed anyone) for purely political (not scientific) reasons.

Is author of TFA really a doctor? If so, are they handing out MDs to just anyone these days?


Bill Frist and Ron Paul are both MDs.

Think about that for a while and then I think you can answer your own question.
 
2013-01-01 12:37:11 PM
I don't believe I would go to this doctor if she believes in unregulated drugs. I am frightened by what she might prescribe.

While the FDA has many flaws (especially financial incentives provided to decision makers by drug company lobbyists), it does far more good than harm in keeping "snake oil" off the market.

So how does she feel about the unregulated bonuses paid to doctors by drug companies to prescribe their particular drugs instead of the competitors? That's "free market", isn't it?
 
2013-01-01 12:38:47 PM

festus963: gameshowhost: Funny, as drug companies use that same "litigious environment" to try to bury their mistakes.

GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.

Faith-based economics.

I told a "freemarketer" that is retired from the airline industry that getting rid of the FDA makes as much sense as getting rid of the FAA, not to mention that it would kill my job because no one would buy our products without a guarentee of safety. He of course defended the existance of the FAA because its something he knows about. It easy to be a fundamentalist when you don't actually know anthing.


How very true. For correlation, see: patrons of the Creationist Museum.
 
2013-01-01 12:39:14 PM

utah dude: J-s-s people, this isn't that hard - > permanently reduce FDA's funding 10% and give a 10% tax break to American pill makers that embrace ISO900X and ISO140XX manufacturing standards.


also, don't try to free-market'ize genomics, since most people think that DNA is something limited to the O.J. Simpson trial.

/phd in genomics
//slashy
 
2013-01-01 12:40:06 PM
You really have to go out of your way to be that stupid.
 
2013-01-01 12:41:41 PM

ox45tallboy: I don't believe I would go to this doctor if she believes in unregulated drugs. I am frightened by what she might prescribe.


www.omtecexpo.com

"So what's the problem?"

www.scrubs123.com

"I got a fever."

whitemencantfunk.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-01 12:43:46 PM
My only issue with the FDA is that there are people who ARE going to die of their cancer and can't afford to go to some foreign country to try an experimental drug or get involved in a clinical trial. If it's a terminal illness, why now make it more available if it's a last hope? If it were me, and it was a last hope thing, I would take a chance. Some things do need to change for sure.
 
2013-01-01 12:44:45 PM

thamike: So the problem isn't a crooked drug market flooded with hastily prepared and dubiously cleared medicines that cause stomach bleeding, aural hallucinations, violent tendencies, sleeplessness, eyeball reversal, baldness, cramping, spontaneous flight in infants, skin loss, blindness, labial crystallization, gambling, and promiscuity as side effects to a treatment meant to make people stand in a meadow with an adorably harmless family dressed in art teacher blue. No, the problem is that, because of the byzantine snakepit that is the FDA, these drugs aren't hitting shelves faster. OK, then.


Don't forget the boner pills which give you the unusual and dubiously beneficial ability to convince an attractive, middle-aged woman to help drag a couple of ornate bathtubs out onto the veranda where the water will get cold rather quickly instead of getting naked with you in the jacuzzi like normal people.
 
2013-01-01 12:45:46 PM

Glicky: GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.

Same people will also talk about the need for tort reform in the next breath.


That's what makes regular folks crazy. Free market enthusiasts take the view that if you are buying a product, you are buying it at your own risk. The "job creators" shouldn't have to pay you if you took their medicine that they advertised for heart problems and ended up growing three nipples. It's your fault. Study it out!
 
2013-01-01 12:48:09 PM
As professional groups go, doctors are at the bottom of the IQ ladder, just above artists and actors. Ask any nurse. Prodigious memory? Sure. Nerves of steel? Absolutely. Utter lack of empathy and human kindness? Apparently so, given the necessity of inflicting a certain amount of pain as part of the process and the inevitability of death and similar unpleasant outcomes. If doctors truly cared about their patients they would be emotional wrecks.

I used to have the deepest respect for doctors, but frankly, it's long gone. Most doctors today are in it for the money, pure and simple. They are unimaginative and simple-minded, and the medical reimursement process encourages them to indulge in superfluous testing which is perfectly analogous to the practice of "churning" in the stock market. You do unnecessary stuff because you can charge the client for it handsomely. I keep my interactions with them to a minimum.
 
2013-01-01 12:48:17 PM

thenewmissus: ...and ended up growing three nipples.


Go on
 
2013-01-01 12:48:21 PM

thenewmissus: Glicky: GAT_00: This is what free market people actually believe.

Same people will also talk about the need for tort reform in the next breath.

That's what makes regular folks crazy. Free market enthusiasts take the view that if you are buying a product, you are buying it at your own risk. The "job creators" shouldn't have to pay you if you took their medicine that they advertised for heart problems and ended up growing three nipples. It's your fault. Study it out!


I would welcome a third nipple if it cured any heart problems I might have.  One can go far with a third nipple and a strong heart.  Just look at Kate Moss and Marky Mark.
 
2013-01-01 12:48:25 PM

Bigdogdaddy: My only issue with the FDA is that there are people who ARE going to die of their cancer and can't afford to go to some foreign country to try an experimental drug or get involved in a clinical trial. If it's a terminal illness, why now make it more available if it's a last hope? If it were me, and it was a last hope thing, I would take a chance. Some things do need to change for sure.


Unless the drug is designed to turn around otherwise terminal cases, I don't think loading your study up with soon-to-be-dead-no-matter-what people is going to get you anywhere. The test is for finding the statistical likelihood that salvageable cases can be more effectively salvaged, not for just firing a magic bullet at a bunch of cancers and hoping for the best.
 
2013-01-01 12:50:19 PM
I also have a hard time understanding any doctor that sees nothing wrong with directly marketing drugs to consumers. I don't want to "ask my doctor about" jack sh*t - he needs to know what drug will work best on me, or I need to find another doctor.

Does anyone think this woman prescribes whatever her patients ask her for? Because that's the true definition of "free market medicine", right?
 
2013-01-01 12:51:21 PM
images1.wikia.nocookie.net

Prescott Pharmaceuticals:
The tingling tells you it's working,
the class action lawsuit tells you it's Prescott.
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report