1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP

FDA Bans another! This Time It's Anti-Nausea Drugs

  1. darkglobe
    This from New York Times:

    Okay, I know it's not particularly interesting or shocking, but it just goes to show how draconian the attitude of authority can be!


    I find this quite interesting, though.

    Oh how agency euphemisms (sp?) amuse me...

Comments

  1. stoneinfocus
    The should test inahlers with corticosteroids for effectiveness -these don´t do shit, actually, and cause more sides than a low dose systemic corticosterone-regime, which def. is useful, but those inhalers are such a good deal, for an outfashioned, not anymore patented-protected reliable medication. ;-) .

    I saw one study from a clinic, that did interstignly the follow up of sever asthmatic patients, on systemic steroids, firstly after the invetnion of the inhalers, who were to use inhalers now, .. the first follow up after 3(!) years!) was positive, but a few years later, they did another one, for whatever reason (observation/conscience?) concluding, that these inhalers don´t take care of the severity of asthma.

    My asthma exacerbated and with inhalers I always had a sore throat, so that I could hardly speak and a funny little white candida in my pharynx, although I always flushed my mouth and ate/drank something big time because of the sides, because it really bothered me, besides that it didn´t seem to help much, it was just the sympathomimetics doing their job, which are as a smart move to betray your patient, always in this therapy included.

    Then I saw a study comapring 100mg iv hydrocortisone compared with an 3000mcg of a high potent (30x hydrocort eq.) Corticosteroid, inhaled every hour, yielding a high systemic dose, just that htis time it was inhaled every hour, concluding that corticosteroids balbla , you get the picture.

    You fall for the assumed "good wil to helpl" and ignore, resp. misinterprete changes in your condition, wasting years over years of your precious lifetime, just to recognize, that it´s just worsening and you´re in a condition far worse than it ever was or would have gotten with the old systemic regime in a low-high dose pattern, that now had to be upgraded to monster doses with all the sides to get the condition into control again, destroying my adrenal axis completely, so I´m just a living dead with no eneergy until I get my cort-pill and this supression is going to last more than a year, so to say it´s lifetime. :/

    Just another example of the FDA and regulatory agencies how they just add to the imbalance of justice and equality and lack of the objective possibility of comparability for scheduling effects. -if it only did more good than bad, but with too many restrictions this is never going to happen.

    But, hey, I only wnat my corticosteroids systemic, because you learn at the medical university, that corticosteroids make high and are _therefore_ demanded by trhe patient and in high dose, why the morons thuink onyl because og that. Since I do sport I´m "just want to be stonger in my sports" and doping.

    Corticosteroids are def. no fun in the longer run (>6 weeks) if you don´t do anything to stop the sides (which docs won´t do, because they´re too lazy, or undereducated) and prevent receptor-downregulation, then you´re seriously in trouble and then find a doc, who will treat you accordingly, good luck! *lol*
  2. stoneinfocus
    So another new law that tends to worsen things for the liberty of choice,

    maybe it works for another indication, that it´s not permitted for (extreme anal joy while putting it/it being put up in your arse), so the old law was better and not too narrow for no obvious reason -one can use enough internet-resources nowadays to inform oneself and trust knowledge and have one´s choice.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!