Medical Forum / General / Cardiology / June 2005
New "Double" Statin Drug
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Rita - 24 Jun 2005 20:08 GMT Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that one of them lowers cholesterol caused by diet and the other lowers cholesterol as a result of heredity. Thus a double whammy.
It irritated me so much to see statins advertised on television that I failed to get the name of the other drug.
I expect these ads will send many running to their doctors and asking for them. I've always thought advertising prescription drugs to the general public is very, very wrong.
William Wagner - 24 Jun 2005 20:22 GMT > Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > asking for them. I've always thought advertising prescription > drugs to the general public is very, very wrong. Me Too.
Along with Alcohol. Another drug.
Bill
 Signature Garden Shade Zone 5 in a Japanese Jungle manner. FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted ((C) ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.
listener - 24 Jun 2005 21:33 GMT Rita <nitany_98@yahoo.com> wrote in news:h5mob1tglq086ci33vuur4rv111oig0403 @4ax.com:
> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > asking for them. I've always thought advertising prescription > drugs to the general public is very, very wrong. Vytorin (Zocor+Zetia) debuted last summer.
Don't let yourself get too irritated - it's not good for your blood pressure.....!
L.
Robert - 24 Jun 2005 21:45 GMT > Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > asking for them. I've always thought advertising prescription > drugs to the general public is very, very wrong. I seriously doubt that people are running to their doctor for any statins. Most people really don't care about their cholesterol as much as doctors do. People in general are resistant to taking a daily medication with side effects and that goes for blood pressure and anything else. The ones that usually run to their doctor are the ones already taking a medicine and they hate it. They feel it stinks and maybe the newer one is better.
listener - 24 Jun 2005 22:15 GMT >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > already taking a medicine and they hate it. They feel it stinks and > maybe the newer one is better. Not only that, but it turns out a lot of people forget to take and/or discontinue altogether (for no particular reason) their meds without letting their dr. know, including statins.
L.
Jason - 25 Jun 2005 02:57 GMT > >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > L. L., Great point. On the back cover of Dr. Cohen's book about statins, it states: "...Yet, many patients get side effects and a whopping 60 to 70 percent eventually stop statin treatment." Jason
 Signature NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Rita - 24 Jun 2005 22:35 GMT >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >medicine and they hate it. They feel it stinks and maybe the newer one is >better. Then the drug companies are wasting their money on the TV ads? Somehow I doubt that. They are pretty canny in financial matters.
zee - 25 Jun 2005 11:09 GMT > >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Then the drug companies are wasting their money on the TV ads? > Somehow I doubt that. They are pretty canny in financial matters. Rita
I don't suppose any of the following information was included in the advertisement for VYTORIN...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Zee
Warning from Health Canada on Zetia (aka Ezetrol, Ezetimibe) which is one of the two drugs that make up VYTORIN. The other drug in VYTORIN is SIMVASTATIN.
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpfb-dgpsa/tpd-dpt/ezetrol_hpc_e.html
February 1, 2005 Subject: Association of Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) with myalgia, rhabdomyolysis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, and thrombocytopenia
Dear Health Care Professional,
Merck Frosst/Schering Pharmaceuticals, following discussions with Health Canada, would like to inform you of new safety data for Ezetrol® (ezetimibe), used alone or in combination with a statin. Ezetimibe is a cholesterol absorption inhibitor that is classified as a systemic drug, because of the enterohepatic recirculation of one of its metabolites1.
The Product Monograph for Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) has been updated to include information from international post-marketing reports of rare, and in some cases serious, adverse events. The Patient Information section is being updated to inform patients of the signs and symptoms of hepatic, muscle, and pancreatic adverse events, for which early consultation with a physician is recommended.
Additional reports of myalgia, many accompanied by elevated creatine phosphokinase (CK) values, have been reviewed by Health Canada.
The Warnings, Precautions, and Adverse Events sections are being updated to reflect the occurrence of the following adverse events in patients taking Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) alone or in combination with a statin:
* myalgia; * rhabdomyolysis; * hepatitis; * acute pancreatitis; * thrombocytopenia; and * suspected interaction between Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) and warfarin
While it is not possible to definitively establish a causal relationship between these adverse events and the use of Ezetrol® (ezetimibe), the Product Monograph changes and the following recommendations are based on the potentially serious nature of these events.
Adverse muscle events:
Myalgia
Myalgia has been reported in patients treated with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe).
Importantly, a number of patients treated with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) in whom myalgia occurred, had previously experienced myalgia (with or without elevated CK levels) with statin therapy. Patients with a history of statin intolerance (myalgia with or without elevated CK levels) should be closely monitored for adverse muscle events during treatment with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe).
Rhabdomyolysis
Patients treated with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe), who experience persistent muscle pain, should be instructed to contact their physicians for evaluation of the possibility of rhabdomyolysis. In most reported cases, rhabdomyolysis resolved when the drugs were discontinued.
Adverse hepatic events:
Elevations of liver transaminases and cases of hepatitis have been reported in patients treated with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe). Liver function monitoring is recommended when therapy with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) is initiated in patients treated or about to begin treatment with a statin.
Health care professionals should be aware that the use of Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) in combination with a statin is contraindicated in patients with active liver disease or unexplained persistent elevations of liver transaminases.
Care should be exercised in the use of Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) in patients with active liver disease or unexplained persistent elevations of liver transaminases.
Adverse pancreatic events:
Physicians should consider the diagnosis of pancreatitis in patients who develop sudden acute abdominal pain during therapy with Ezetrol® (ezetimibe).
Suspected interaction between Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) and warfarin:
Additional International Normalized Ratio (INR) measurements are recommended in patients treated with warfarin, and in whom Ezetrol® (ezetimibe) is initiated.
-------snip---------
Rita - 25 Jun 2005 14:31 GMT >> >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin >> >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >I don't suppose any of the following information was included in the >advertisement for VYTORIN... The ad I saw mentioned possible side effects of liver and muscle pain and weakness. The TV ads always do include a quickly read "disclaimer" of that limited nature. Meanwhile showing visual images of happy, healthy people who have benefited from the drug:) As they say, one image is worth a thousands words.
zee - 25 Jun 2005 16:12 GMT > >> >> Saw an ad on TV today for a new drug that contains simvastatin > >> >> as in Zocor and another statin as well. The pitch was that [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > people who have benefited from the drug:) As they say, > one image is worth a thousands words. Pharmaceutical companies used to employ people with English and Journalism degrees for their marketing departments. People who could write and communicate well. There are still *some* of those people, but the preference now is people who have worked in advertising and marketing with Big Oil, Big Tobacco, and people with psychology degrees.
The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do his/her best to stay healthy sees those ads and gets the message: the risks if any are rare. The beneifts; good health, glowing good looks, an enviable lifestyle, is the primary outcome.
Analysis here of the DTCA situation. Why they do it, what it costs us:
Dr. Peter Mansfield heads Healthy Skepticism, an adwatch non-profit OUt of Adelaide University in Australia. Healthy Skepticism website exposes adverisisng distortions throughout the industry. HS also archives North American information: http:www.healthyskepticism.org
Full BMJ articles on DTCA and responding letters:' http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7481/5
Articles separately: Direct to Consumer Advertising by Peter Mansfield: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7481/5?maxtoshow=&HITS&hits&RE SULTFORMAT=&author1=mintzes&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid19711118273_4331&sto red_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1
PRIMARY CARE: Barbara Mintzes, Morris L Barer, Richard L Kravitz, Arminée Kazanjian, Ken Bassett, Joel Lexchin, Robert G Evans, Richard Pan, and Stephen A Marion Influence of direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising and patients' requests on prescribing decisions: two site cross sectional survey http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7332/278?maxtoshow=&HITS&hits& RESULTFORMAT=&author1=mintzes&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid19711118273_4331&s tored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1
EDUCATION AND DEBATE: Barbara Mintzes For and against: Direct to consumer advertising is medicalising normal human experience: For BMJ, Apr 2002; 324: 908 - 909 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7342/908?maxtoshow=&HITS&hits& RESULTFORMAT=&author1=mintzes&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid19711118273_4331&s tored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=1
Two copyright free posters about DTCA from the Canadian Women's Health Network: http://www.whp-apsf.ca/pdf/whpDTCA2_ad.pdf http://www.whp-apsf.ca/pdf/whpDTCA_ad.pdf
Zee
Rita - 25 Jun 2005 16:25 GMT >Pharmaceutical companies used to employ people with English and >Journalism degrees for their marketing departments. People who could [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >any are rare. The beneifts; good health, glowing good looks, an >enviable lifestyle, is the primary outcome. I believe ads for prescription drugs should be banned in the general media.
There is simply no way for the public to evaluate such drugs. Even reading the disclaimers on the packaging does not tell you the relative risk.
But the drug companies are a powerful lobby and got the law changed to allow this advertising.
And the ads work. People will buy a far more widely advertised allergy drug than the cheap and just as effective generic.
While not everyone is concerned about cholesterol, I think sufficient numbers will ask their doctor about these drugs to make the expensive TV ads worthwhile. And the more a drug is touted, the less resistance doctors show to going along with popular demand.
tonywesley@gmail.com - 25 Jun 2005 16:53 GMT [snip]
> And the ads work. People will buy a far more widely > advertised allergy drug than the cheap and just as effective > generic. I want Progenitorivox!
To see the "ad", go to prescriptionforchange.org Or http://humor.about.com/od/animatedwebtoons/v/ds031005.htm
"Side effects include constipation, male lactation, and rust-colored urination."
"If death occurs, discontinue use of Progenitorivox immediately. If symptoms persist, consult your physician."
zee - 25 Jun 2005 18:43 GMT Apologies; the poster links don't seem to work. I'll get it sorted. Presently DTCA is illegal in Canada. Pharma finds looholes, and there is a lot of "leak" across the border as we get US magazines, newspapers, and television. (We know a lot about you...!)
The home link on this site will take you to many DTCA rticles, and many articles on women's health issues. Most are academic, some popular press. http://www.whp-apsf.ca/en/documents/doc_index.html
And a sister site, where you will find more women's health articles, including on osteoporosis: http://www.cwhn.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Zee
> >Pharmaceutical companies used to employ people with English and > >Journalism degrees for their marketing departments. People who could [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > is touted, the less resistance doctors show to going along with > popular demand. Robert - 25 Jun 2005 21:20 GMT > Apologies; the poster links don't seem to work. I'll get it sorted. > Presently DTCA is illegal in Canada. Pharma finds looholes, and there > is a lot of "leak" across the border as we get US magazines, > newspapers, and television. (We know a lot about you...!) That brings up a good point about what Canada does. I find it interesting that Canada does not allow ads but the drug use consumption is equal to or greater than in the US. If you take Vioxx, the Canadian and US consumption was pretty similar. Canada has price controls on drugs and buys many drugs on bulk with price reductions and saving which are very cost saving. Vioxx WAS 50-70% cheaper in Canada. New drugs fill a void which is what drives it's sells. Americans can see it advertised on American TV and then buy cheaply from Canada and Canadians themselves can buy cheaply. The Canadian government and government officials are complicit on providing dangerous drugs without a long safety record. I also wonder why Zee never mentions that. The Marist take over of health care with the banning of private medicine has make things worse. It has made death acceptable when waiting in line by Marist apologist in that country. The Canadian Supreme Court has stated as much. Like any Marist system the target of corruption becomes the government officials and I guess the drug manufacturers only have to deal with government officials in Canada and not the people so they don't need ads in Canada.
William Wagner - 25 Jun 2005 21:47 GMT > > Apologies; the poster links don't seem to work. I'll get it sorted. > > Presently DTCA is illegal in Canada. Pharma finds looholes, and there [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > government officials in Canada and not the people so they don't need ads in > Canada. Hey Robert aren't you the guy that complains about spelling? Marist may be Marxist you know like in Groucho.
Bill
 Signature Garden Shade Zone 5 in a Japanese Jungle manner. FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.
Robert - 25 Jun 2005 21:54 GMT "William Wagner" <b2wagner@snip.net> wrote in message > Hey Robert aren't you the guy that complains about spelling? Marist may
> be Marxist you know like in Groucho. > > Bill <lol> I put it through the check spell and just hit change all without really looking.
Correct spelling only applies to people who want to scare the sh.t out of people by naming deadly diseases like rhabdomyolysis. People who can't spell are not as threatening as journalist who can be deadly.
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 27 Jun 2005 03:57 GMT > "William Wagner" <b2wagner@snip.net> wrote in message > Hey Robert aren't > you the guy that complains about spelling? Marist may [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > People who can't spell are not as threatening as journalist who can be > deadly. I had to wonder about the Marist thing..!!!
I agree with your last sentence Robert....
also that was an excellent explanation about Canada's healthcare system and all its flaws...
Robert - 27 Jun 2005 08:42 GMT > > "William Wagner" <b2wagner@snip.net> wrote in message > Hey Robert aren't > > you the guy that complains about spelling? Marist may [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I had to wonder about the Marist thing..!!! LOL. Funny thing is I work for a catholic hospital so they would be proud of me for that reference.
Rita - 25 Jun 2005 22:17 GMT >> > Apologies; the poster links don't seem to work. I'll get it sorted. >> > Presently DTCA is illegal in Canada. Pharma finds looholes, and there [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > >Bill I thought perhaps he was referring to Quebec Catholics as the culprits:)
Robert - 25 Jun 2005 20:55 GMT "zee" <outrider@despammed.com> wrote in message people, The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do his/her best to stay healthy sees those ads and gets the message: the risks if any are rare. The beneifts; good health, glowing good looks, an enviable lifestyle, is the primary outcome.
And you are here to frighten everyone into not taking the drug by implying that everyone gets AE and mentioning all the deadly consequences as though they are everyday.
You have an English background? Oh, that's right you are a journalist.
listener - 25 Jun 2005 21:17 GMT > "zee" <outrider@despammed.com> wrote in message people, > The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do his/her [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > You have an English background? Oh, that's right you are a journalist. Isn't it obvious to you that, as far as zee is concerned, any little ache or pain or memory slip is statin-related? And you can forget about testing. Most of the time tests will not show statin-relained AE, as far as she is concerned. Doctors don't care, hospitals don't care, pharma doesn't care. It's an extremely bleak, cynical world that she inhabits. She just wants to help people.
L.
Robert - 25 Jun 2005 21:48 GMT > > "zee" <outrider@despammed.com> wrote in message people, > > The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do his/her [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > L. She has learned her trade very well. She takes advantage of every opening she sees. Unfortunately you really have to see all her posts to see what she is doing. Her single reply to a lone poster makes sense at first blush. Somebody might have concerns about one drug or AE and they might think that it is only that one drug she has concerns with. I remember the question Jason had about alternatives to statins if they are so bad and she did not mention one single alternative. She wants to prevent people from taking medications and does not want to accept the complications if they don't. She is helping people die of natural causes. Her response to Steve about HRT and osteoporosis is classic. She says that osteoporosis is a natural progression and normal. Steve and I stated that is a disease where people get fractures at a slight touch and it should be prevented through interventions. If she were a doctor, she and the patient would stare at each other for the entire office visit. She does not believe in medications period. I think everybody out there should be aware of that especially new posters.
Sharon Hope - 26 Jun 2005 18:30 GMT So, in your world, everyone on the planet should adopt every new "wellness" drug available, simply because it is advertized on TV, but not one of them should take vitamins or other OTC supplements.
And, anyone who points out that the human race has survived to date without taking any of these new "essential" drugs daily forever, is a scaremonger?
And further, anyone who dares to reveal that they, themselves, have suffered adverse effects from these wellness drugs is a danger to be ostrasized, because others might be dissuaded from adopting a regimen of said drug for the rest of their entire lives.
And we are expected to believe you do not work for Pfizer, Merck, AZ, or any other pharmaceutical company, nor any of their hired representatives?
LOL
> "zee" <outrider@despammed.com> wrote in message people, > The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do his/her [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > You have an English background? Oh, that's right you are a journalist. listener - 26 Jun 2005 19:24 GMT > So, in your world, everyone on the planet should adopt every new > "wellness" drug available, simply because it is advertized on TV, but > not one of them should take vitamins or other OTC supplements Traditional medicine, alternative medicine, vitamins, supplements - all have their positive aspects and negative aspects.
> And, anyone who points out that the human race has survived to date > without taking any of these new "essential" drugs daily forever, is a > scaremonger? That's one of the silliest statements you've ever made.
> And further, anyone who dares to reveal that they, themselves, have > suffered adverse effects from these wellness drugs is a danger to be > ostrasized, because others might be dissuaded from adopting a regimen > of said drug for the rest of their entire lives. I think it's safe to say that you and zee have gone way beyond simple self-revelation and have become very strong advocates against the use of statins to the point of distorting studies to support your views and overreaching in many of your conclusions. In that regard, Robert's charge is chillingly correct.
> And we are expected to believe you do not work for Pfizer, Merck, AZ, > or any other pharmaceutical company, nor any of their hired > representatives? > > LOL I wouldn't even begin to try and understand your expectations. But if Andrew Chung is sure my real name is "Frank I suppose you can believe that *I* am somehow involved in pharmaceuticals! But I swear, on a stack of medical inserts, that I am not.
L.
>> "zee" <outrider@despammed.com> wrote in message people, >> The consumer who is frightened and who wants, after all, to do [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> You have an English background? Oh, that's right you are a >> journalist. zee - 26 Jun 2005 19:32 GMT I dunno. Curt has his opinion...
Zee
Robert - 26 Jun 2005 19:59 GMT > So, in your world, everyone on the planet should adopt every new "wellness" > drug available, simply because it is advertized on TV, but not one of them > should take vitamins or other OTC supplements. To the contrary. Everyone should try and avoid any new drug. The new drug is the last choice one should make. The next best choice is an old drug and the best choice of all is exercise, diet, vitamins and anything else they can take in order to avoid any drugs. Vitamins and OTC are drugs. Once a person takes drugs then it is the person who determines which drug is best for that individual and no ad can eliminate side effects that need not be toxic. An ad can get a person to try the drug but it does not determine that person staying on it if they don't like it.
> And, anyone who points out that the human race has survived to date without > taking any of these new "essential" drugs daily forever, is a scaremonger? Yes they are. It is a competing contest on who can scare the person the most. The doctor can do it by telling the person if he doesn't take meds then bad things can happen and then there's you who can scare people into not taking them by overexaggerating the incidence of life threatening reactions.
> And further, anyone who dares to reveal that they, themselves, have suffered > adverse effects from these wellness drugs is a danger to be ostrasized, > because others might be dissuaded from adopting a regimen of said drug for > the rest of their entire lives. So what you are saying is that you want to tell others not to take the drugs because very bad things can happen to them and end up with brain damage like yourself. If someone tells you not to drive your car because you can get into an accident will they be ostrasized? Those are assumed risks and taking new drugs you assume the risk.
> And we are expected to believe you do not work for Pfizer, Merck, AZ, or any > other pharmaceutical company, nor any of their hired representatives? > > LOL Statin induced paranoia? Nurses dispense drugs in hospitals every single day. You would not be able to give one single drug to any patient because of your mental state. Every drug out there is potentially lethal. Your perspective is so unbelievable and unrealistic that it really kills your arguements. There are valid concerns about statins and AE but you, the mesenger is damaged. We take care of the sick caused by the lack of drugs or interventions and those with drugs or inverventions. I find it interesting that there are so many open heart surgeries that may not be needed. It is a profit, many making business. The department head of cardiology was replaced years ago because he did not believe in expanding open heart surgeries like hysterectomies were expanded. He believed in medical medicinal drug interventions in avoiding surgery.
|
|
|