1-1banner
 
medpundit
 

 
Commentary on medical news by a practicing physician.
 

 
Google
  • Epocrates MedSearch Drug Lookup




  • MASTER BLOGS





    "When many cures are offered for a disease, it means the disease is not curable" -Anton Chekhov




    ''Once you tell people there's a cure for something, the more likely they are to pressure doctors to prescribe it.''
    -Robert Ehrlich, drug advertising executive.




    "Opinions are like sphincters, everyone has one." - Chris Rangel



    email: medpundit-at-ameritech.net

    or if that doesn't work try:

    medpundit-at-en.com



    Medpundit RSS


    Quirky Museums and Fun Stuff


    Who is medpundit?


    Tech Central Station Columns



    Book Reviews:
    Read the Review

    Read the Review

    Read the Review

    More Reviews

    Second Hand Book Reviews

    Review


    Medical Blogs

    rangelMD

    DB's Medical Rants

    Family Medicine Notes

    Grunt Doc

    richard[WINTERS]

    code:theWebSocket

    Psychscape

    Code Blog: Tales of a Nurse

    Feet First

    Tales of Hoffman

    The Eyes Have It

    medmusings

    SOAP Notes

    Obels

    Cut-to -Cure

    Black Triangle

    CodeBlueBlog

    Medlogs

    Kevin, M.D

    The Lingual Nerve

    Galen's Log

    EchoJournal

    Shrinkette

    Doctor Mental

    Blogborygmi

    JournalClub

    Finestkind Clinic and Fish Market

    The Examining Room of Dr. Charles

    Chronicles of a Medical Mad House

    .PARALLEL UNIVERSES.

    SoundPractice

    Medgadget
    Health Facts and Fears

    Health Policy Blogs

    The Health Care Blog

    HealthLawProf Blog

    Facts & Fears

    Personal Favorites

    The Glittering Eye

    Day by Day

    BioEdge

    The Business Word Inc.

    Point of Law

    In the Pipeline

    Cronaca

    Tim Blair

    Jane Galt

    The Truth Laid Bear

    Jim Miller

    No Watermelons Allowed

    Winds of Change

    Science Blog

    A Chequer-Board of Night and Days

    Arts & Letters Daily

    Tech Central Station

    Blogcritics

    Overlawyered.com

    Quackwatch

    Junkscience

    The Skeptic's Dictionary



    Recommended Reading

    The Doctor Stories by William Carlos Williams


    Pox Americana: The Great Smallpox Epidemic of 1775-82 by Elizabeth Fenn


    Intoxicated by My Illness by Anatole Broyard


    Raising the Dead by Richard Selzer


    Autobiography of a Face by Lucy Grealy


    The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks


    The Sea and Poison by Shusaku Endo


    A Midwife's Tale by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich




    MEDICAL LINKS

    familydoctor.org

    American Academy of Pediatrics

    General Health Info

    Travel Advice from the CDC

    NIH Medical Library Info

     



    button

    Sunday, January 22, 2006

    Labels: The FDA is changing the labels on drugs. Isn't the label the sticker that goes on the outside of the drug bottle? The one with the instructions and the quantity and the patient name and pharmacist name and doctor name? What they're really changing is the package insert, that tissue-paper thin, fine-printed monograph that describes the detailed pharmacology of the drug. The one that doctors used to look up in the Physician's Desk Reference when they were looking for side effects and dosage instructions, but which has been supplanted by data bases like Epocrates for many physicians - because the electronic databases on handhelds are quicker, cheaper, and easier to use.

    The printed inserts are chock full of information - from the effect of the drug on fetal rats to dose-response curves, lethal dosage, and in some cases, antidotes to overdose. It's a great source for physicians, but not necessarily one that's all that useful for the average patient. So what's all the fuss about?

    Trial lawyers reacted angrily to a preamble to the new rule stating that the rule pre-empts, or supersedes, state liability statutes.

    In the preamble, the agency listed six claims against drug makers that would be prohibited as a result of the rule, including claims that a drug maker should have put into a label's "highlights" section a risk warning included elsewhere in its label, or claims that a drug maker should have included a warning that the drug agency deemed unnecessary.


    In other words, if one person out of thousands says that taking a drug made their eyes cross, then the drug maker doesn't have to include crossed eyes in its list of side effects. And evidently, if it doesn't have to include it, they can't be sued. (Although that's very doubtful. Anyone can sue anyone over anything.) And truthfully, those lists of potential side effects have become ridiculously long as drug makers seek to cover themselves legally. And that, in itself can cause problems:

    "Overwarning, just like underwarning, can similarly have a negative effect on patient safety and public health," the preamble states.

    That is certainly true. Take a look at this list of side effects for a common blood pressure drug. According to the package insert it causes everything from death to cold and flu. Who in their right mind would take it? Who would prescribe it. Well, most of us do prescribe it, and many patients take it. We just no longer take those kinds of side effect warnings seriously because they include every single possibile or reported ill effect rather than probable ill effects.

    Everyone would be better served by having realistic side effect listings rather than hypotheticals.
     

    posted by Sydney on 1/22/2006 06:44:00 PM 0 comments

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    This page is powered by Blogger, the easy way to update your web site.

    Main Page

    Ads

    Home   |   Archives

    Copyright 2006