Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Arthritis / January 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

FDA  ignores warnings from own specialists

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Zee - 29 Jan 2005 21:55 GMT
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42607

Think about it. As drugs are switched from prescription to
over-the-counter products, insurance companies will find themselves
largely "off the hook" and drug companies are likely to experience the
benefits of increased sales. Such change is a literal windfall for both
industries. And if the driving force is money, the vehicle is a
fast-paced economy, convenience and time - not safety.

As for our watchdog agency and any hoped for stopgaps, it appears the
FDA sometimes ignores the danger signs and worse, stigmatizes its own
employees if they dare question the safety of certain drugs. This may
point to an even bigger problem.

Corroborating claims of drug-industry deception, a two-year Los Angeles
Times investigation published in December 2000 found that the seven
drugs approved since 1993 had been withdrawn after reports of deaths
and severe side effects. It also stated, "The FDA approved each of
those drugs while disregarding danger signs or blunt warnings from its
own specialists. Then, after receiving reports of significant harm to
patients, the agency was slow to seek withdrawals."

In response, public confidence is justifiably eroded in the FDA's
ability or apparent inclination to protect or even warn the public of
dangers to our health from the pharmaceutical industry. While this has
been a boon to the legal industry, it obviously increases the burdens
on the individual regarding drug use and safety. It further means the
pop-a-pill mindset so prevalent in America is growing akin to a game of
Russian roulette.

--------more---------
Mike-UK - 29 Jan 2005 23:14 GMT
> http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42607
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> industries. And if the driving force is money, the vehicle is a
> fast-paced economy, convenience and time - not safety.

De-regulated market forces at work...

> As for our watchdog agency and any hoped for stopgaps, it appears the
> FDA sometimes ignores the danger signs and worse, stigmatizes its own
> employees if they dare question the safety of certain drugs. This may
> point to an even bigger problem.

Do a search on the inspectors who are supposed to make sure
the meat from slaughterhouses is safe. 80

> Corroborating claims of drug-industry deception, a two-year Los Angeles
> Times investigation published in December 2000 found that the seven
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> own specialists. Then, after receiving reports of significant harm to
> patients, the agency was slow to seek withdrawals."

Do a search on how the Monsanto milk-yeald "enhancement" got
passed, the one that passes the tumours it causes in cattle
on to the consumer.

> In response, public confidence is justifiably eroded in the FDA's
> ability or apparent inclination to protect or even warn the public of
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> pop-a-pill mindset so prevalent in America is growing akin to a game of
> Russian roulette.

Advertising dollars paying back bigtime.

TV is no substitute for real information,
despite what it tells you it tells you.

Cynical? Moi? :\

Signature

---------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/4872c

Have a nice day, it really does do you good! :)

Nell - 30 Jan 2005 00:16 GMT
> http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42607
>
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> --------more---------

Not exactly reassuring. :-(

I forwarded the post to family and friends but edited your email address
to a bunch of x's. After I sent it, I realized I could have just ccp'd
the body of the post. Duh.

Nell
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.