experts for sale experts for sale,get them while they are hot

[cathal maguidhir]

the tentacles of big pharma are wrapped around the wallets ,of the entire medical profession its hard to resist 600 euro+an hour ,and all those adoring thankful people whose child you have just killed with a useless bronciodilator drug,keep taking the tablets ,they new on the market ,they help you to stop asking awkward questions ,a hundred and fifty years after Semmelweis Ignaz Semmelweis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia we are spending our money on radio ads to get us to tell them to wash their hands well d,uuh experts for sale ,experts for sale get them while they are hot
"Is Academic Medicine for Sale?" A reader wryly responded, "No. The current owner is very happy with it."
Rigged Drug Studies Favor|
The Manufacturer
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service
11-8-8


OMNS -- If you have often suspected that drug studies are rigged by the pharmaceutical manufacturer, you are right. "Drug studies skewed toward study sponsors," reported The Washington Post. (1) "Industry-funded research often favors patent-holders, study finds." Specifically, the American Journal of Psychiatry study authors said, "In 90% of the studies, the reported
overall outcome was in favor of the sponsor's drug. . . On the basis of these contrasting findings in head-to-head trials, it appears that whichever company sponsors the trial produces the better antipsychotic drug." experts for sale ,experts for sale
Politics? poly means many and ticks are blood sucking creatures that carry awful diseases

[cathal maguidhir]

follow the experts follow the experts,
Urine Drug Tests for Doctors?
After Decades of Unchanging Addiction Rates, Some Anesthesiology Departments Are Using Drug Testing


Certain occupations are so high-risk that the public feels compelled to subject people to drug testing: military pilots, train engineers, bus drivers ... but, anesthesiologists?

After years of failed policies to reduce the addiction rate among anesthesiologists, professors are at a loss for what to try next.

Two renowned hospitals -- Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and the Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Ohio -- seem to think the profession needs it and recently implemented random urine drug testing in their anesthesia residency teaching departments.

Given the history of addiction within the anesthesiology community, few anesthesiologists are surprised.

A 2005 survey by the Cleveland Clinic estimated that 80 percent of anesthesiology residency training programs reported problems with drug-impaired doctors, and an additional 19 percent reported a death from overdose.

"The problem is that we are exposed to, and we have the use of, very highly addictive and potent medications," said Dr. Michael G. Fitzsimons, administrator for the substance abuse program of the department of anesthesia and critical care at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

But testing doctors can be problematic.


Doctors familiar with the signs of addiction are sometimes able to mask their drug use from coworkers, making it difficult to detect when they are using and need help. And those determined to hide their habits have been known to find creative ways of beating drug tests -- even submitting fake urine samples.

Despite the difficulties, the administrators of the programs in Boston and Cleveland believe they have been successful, and now hope more comprehensive studies will be done to determine whether such programs help stave off drug use long-term.

A Tragic Shock

Dr. Raymond Roy of Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, N.C., is still moved by an experience he had 10 years ago with a promising doctor he recruited into his anesthesiology residence program.

"We thought this guy was wonderful, but one day he and his wife showed up in my office saying, 'I'm going to an addiction treatment program in Atlanta,'" said Roy, who asked to keep the doctor anonymous out of concern for his family.

After some further questioning, Roy discovered the doctor had had an addiction problem since high school, but was smart and savvy enough to make it through college, medical school and a previous specialty program.

"He would come to work early to require drugs to inject to keep him from going into withdrawal, not to get high, but enough to make it through the day where he could get drugs at home," said Roy. "We had no clue."

That same doctor died from an overdose in Roy's program, even after completing drug rehabilitation and returning to an area without access to drugs.



DOCTORS AND NURSES MOST LIKELY TO COMMIT SUICIDE
Nurses and doctors are more likely to take their own lives than anyone in Britain, show figures disclosed yesterday.

Nurses and doctors are more likely to take their own lives than anyone in Britain, show figures disclosed yesterday.

The Liberal Democrats, who obtained the figures, said doctors were almost twice as likely to take their own lives and nurses were at 50 per cent greater risk. But 90 per cent of nurses are female and when compared with the female population, their suicide rate was almost four times the average.Doctors and nurses 'most likely to commit suicide' - Health News, Health & Wellbeing - The Independent

[cathal maguidhir]

hello mrs x ,and this will be little johnny,i cant be sure but my instinct ,is that he is suffering from advanced bi-polar disorder ,its mysteriously increasing exponentially as a analogue of the pills invented to treat it ,i know a lifetime of powerful untested psychiatric drugs isn't what you hoped for for him ,so i will just double check my paypal account and carefully cross reference that with the Eli Lilly page of my mimms drug catalogue ,,yes the ummm green one try him on that for a month
A key source of information on children’s mental illness and treatment has been the
psychiatry department at Harvard University. Several physicians at the well-known and
respected school have been arguing that a form of bipolar disorder appears in children
and should be treated pharmacologically.
1
While their practice and theories have been far
from unquestioned, it was not until this summer that all eyes turned to the potential
financial motives behind their theories
Children's Mental Health For Sale

[cathal maguidhir]

"The defense remains the same because it is based on facts and facts don't change.And neither do dead people . "Do not allow Merck to conduct further business in this country
I believe that law enforcement authorities in America have both the right and the responsibility to arrest top Merck executives, seize Merck's inventory, and deny Merck the right to conduct any further business in this nation by cancelling its corporate charter. I believe Merck is engaged in serious crimes against the People and that its business practices are clearly being conducted in violation of federal law (not to mention in violation of basic business ethics and human compassion). If this was any other corporation we were talking about here -- and not Merck -- this company would be subjected to a massive campaign of media scrutiny and Congressional scrutiny. But not Merck. It's too powerful, too influential.

Merck should be renamed "The Teflon Company" because even though it's pushing dangerous chemicals, nothing seems to stick.

Let me break it down for you and tell you what's really happening here. It's the same old story, after all: Rich, powerful white-collar criminals get away with murder, while the poor, the disadvantaged and the sick get shafted"".,,couldnt agree more
Merck holds the line on Vioxx
CEO Clark says asthma drug Singulair is bright light for growing sales.
October 24, 2005: 12:21 PM EDT
By Aaron Smith, CNN/Money staff writer

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Merck maintains its defense for Vioxx, the beleaguered painkiller that was pulled off the market in 2004 and has been blamed for heart attacks in a growing tally of lawsuits, a top company lawyer said Monday.

"We will continue to defend these facts on the scientific basis of causation," said Kenneth Frazier, senior vice president and general counsel for Merck & Co. (up $0.24 to $26.42, Research), during a teleconference on the company's third quarter, in which it reported rising earnings but slumping sales. "The defense remains the same because it is based on facts and facts don't change.
Merck Caught in Massive Scientific Fraud as In-House Authors were Disguised as Independent Scientists Drug giant Merck has been caught red-handed in a scheme to deceive the FDA and the public over the integrity of its scientific studies, say top medical authorities. According to reports that were (amazingly!) published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and detailed in the Washington Post, Merck waged a "campaign of deception" to disguise its in-house study authors as independent scientists working for universities. This scheme made the studies appear independent and unbiased, allowing them to carry more apparent credibility to FDA officials, doctors and other scientists.

This fraud was conducted to boost the apparent scientific credibility of the studies backing Vioxx, a drug that has caused well over 100,000 heart attacks and likely killed well over 50,000 Americans, according to Senate testimony by the FDA's own senior drug safety researcher Dr. David Graham. Vioxx earned Merck $2.3 billion in 2003 alone, and was one of the most lucrative drugs ever sold by any company. But since 2004, when some of the real dangers of the drug became known, a tremendous amount of evidence leading to fraud has surfaced.

It now appears quite clear that Merck deliberately lied about the dangers of the drug, misrepresented the results of scientific studies, deceived the FDA to win drug approval, knowingly covered up evidence of the drug's dangers, and now it seems Merck even conducted a deliberate campaign of deceptive ghostwriting designed to attach independent-sounding names to in-house studies that were essentially pro-Vioxx promotional pieces disguised as scientific reports."Just one drug, Vioxx, reportedly killed well over 50000 Americans according to the FDA's own senior drug safety whistleblower,

[cathal maguidhir]

off course they will get away with it they allways do ,,,,Use of Antipsychotics in Children Is Criticized
But Risperdal is not approved for attention deficit problems, and its risks — which include substantial weight gain, metabolic disorders and muscular tics that can be permanent — are too profound to justify its use in treating such disorders, panel members said.


By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: November 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — Powerful antipsychotic medicines are being used far too cavalierly in children, and federal drug regulators must do more to warn doctors of their substantial risks, a panel of federal drug experts said Tuesday.

More than 389,000 children and teenagers were treated last year with Risperdal, one of five popular medicines known as atypical antipsychotics. Of those patients, 240,000 were 12 or younger, according to data presented to the committee. In many cases, the drug was prescribed to treat attention deficit disorders.

But Risperdal is not approved for attention deficit problems, and its risks — which include substantial weight gain, metabolic disorders and muscular tics that can be permanent — are too profound to justify its use in treating such disorders, panel members said.

“This committee is frustrated,” said Dr. Leon Dure, a pediatric neurologist from the University of Alabama School of Medicine who was on the panel. “And we need to find a way to accommodate this concern of ours.”

The meeting on Tuesday was scheduled to be a routine review of the pediatric safety of Risperdal and Zyprexa, popular antipsychotic medicines made, respectively, by Johnson & Johnson and Eli Lilly & Company. Food and Drug Administration officials proposed that the committee endorse the agency’s routine monitoring of the safety of the medicines in children and support its previous efforts to highlight the drugs’ risks.

But committee members unanimously rejected the agency’s proposals, saying that far more needed to be done to discourage the medicines’ growing use in children, particularly to treat conditions for which the medicines have not been approved.

“The data show there is a substantial amount of prescribing for attention deficit disorder, and I wonder if we have given enough weight to the adverse-event profile of the drug in light of this,” Dr. Daniel Notterman, a senior health policy analyst at Princeton University and a panel member, said when speaking about Risperdal.

Drug agency officials responded that they had already placed strongly worded warnings on the drugs’ labels.

“I’m a little puzzled about the statement that the label is inadequate,” said Dr. Thomas Laughren, director of the agency’s division of psychiatry products. “I’m anxious to hear what more we can do in the labeling.”

Kara Russell, a spokeswoman for Johnson & Johnson, said, “Adverse drug reactions associated with Risperdal use in approved indications are accurately reflected in the label.”

But panelists said the current warnings were not enough.

While panel members spoke at length about Risperdal, they said their concerns applied to the other medicines in its class, including Zyprexa, Seroquel, Abilify and Geodon.

The committee’s concerns are part of a growing chorus of complaints about the increasing use of antipsychotic medicines in children and teenagers. Prescription rates for the drugs have increased more than fivefold for children in the past decade and a half, and doctors now use the drugs to settle outbursts and aggression in children with a wide variety of diagnoses, even though children are especially susceptible to their side effects.

A consortium of state Medicaid directors is evaluating the use of the drugs in children on state Medicaid rolls to ensure that they are being properly prescribed.

The growing use of the medicines has been driven partly by the sudden popularity of the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder.

The leading advocate for the bipolar diagnosis is Dr. Joseph Biederman, a child psychiatrist at Harvard University whose work is under a cloud after a Congressional investigation revealed that he had failed to report to his university at least $1.4 million in outside income from the makers of antipsychotic medicines.

In the past year, Risperdal prescriptions to patients 17 and younger increased 10 percent, while prescriptions among adults declined 5 percent. Most of the pediatric prescriptions were written by psychiatrists.

From 1993 through the first three months of 2008, 1,207 children given Risperdal suffered serious problems, including 31 who died. Among the deaths was a 9-year-old with attention deficit problems who suffered a fatal stroke 12 days after starting therapy with Risperdal.

At least 11 of the deaths were children whose treatment with Risperdal was unapproved by the F.D.A. Once the agency approves a medicine for a particular condition, doctors are free to prescribe it for other problems.

Panel members said they had for years been concerned about the effects of Risperdal and similar medicines, but F.D.A. officials said no studies had been done to test the drugs’ long-term safety.

Dr. Dure said he was concerned that doctors often failed to recognize the movement disorders, including tardive dyskinesia and dystonia, that can result from using these medicines.

“I have a bias that extra-pyramidal side effects are being under-recognized with these agents,” Dr. Dure said.

Dr. Laughren of the F.D.A. said the agency could do little to fix the problem. Instead, he said, medical specialty societies must do a better job educating doctors about the drugs’ side effects.

[cathal maguidhir]

placebo the wonder drug

Prozac, used by 40m people, does not work say scientists
Analysis of unseen trials and other data concludes it is no better than placebo



Prozac, the bestselling antidepressant taken by 40 million people worldwide, does not work and nor do similar drugs in the same class, according to a major review released today.

The study examined all available data on the drugs, including results from clinical trials that the manufacturers chose not to publish at the time. The trials compared the effect on patients taking the drugs with those given a placebo or sugar pill.

When all the data was pulled together, it appeared that patients had improved - but those on placebo improved just as much as those on the drugs.

The only exception is in the most severely depressed patients, according to the authors - Prof Irving Kirsch from the department of psychology at Hull University and colleagues in the US and Canada. But that is probably because the placebo stopped working so well, they say, rather than the drugs having worked better.

"Given these results, there seems little reason to prescribe antidepressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients, unless alternative treatments have failed," says Kirsch. "This study raises serious issues that need to be addressed surrounding drug licensing and how drug trial data is reported."

The paper, published today in the journal PLoS (Public Library of Science) Medicine, is likely to have a significant impact on the prescribing of the drugs. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) already recommends that counselling should be tried before doctors prescribe antidepressants. Kirsch, who was one of the consultants for the guidelines, says the new analysis "would suggest that the prescription of antidepressant medications might be restricted even more".

The review breaks new ground because Kirsch and his colleagues have obtained for the first time what they believe is a full set of trial data for four antidepressants.

They requested the full data under freedom of information rules from the Food and Drug Administration, which licenses medicines in the US and requires all data when it makes a decision.

The pattern they saw from the trial results of fluoxetine (Prozac), paroxetine (Seroxat), venlafaxine (Effexor) and nefazodone (Serzone) was consistent. "Using complete data sets (including unpublished data) and a substantially larger data set of this type than has been previously reported, we find the overall effect of new-generation antidepressant medication is below recommended criteria for clinical significance," they write.

Two more frequently prescribed antidepressants were omitted from the study because scientists were unable to obtain all the data.

Concerns have been raised in recent years about the side-effects of this class of antidepressant. Evidence that they could prompt some young people to consider suicide led to a warning to doctors not to prescribe them for the under-18s - with the exception of Prozac, which was considered more effective than the rest.

In adults, however, the depression-beating benefits were thought to outweigh the risks. Since its launch in the US in 1988, some 40 million people have taken Prozac, earning tens of billions of dollars for the manufacturer, Eli Lilly. Although the patent lapsed in 2001, fluoxetine continues to make the company money - it is now the active ingredient in Sarafem, a pill sold by Lilly for premenstrual syndrome.

Eli Lilly was defiant last night. "Extensive scientific and medical experience has demonstrated that fluoxetine is an effective antidepressant," it said in a statement. "Since its discovery in 1972, fluoxetine has become one of the world's most-studied medicines. Lilly is proud of the difference fluoxetine has made to millions of people living with depression."

A spokesman for GlaxoSmithKline, which makes Seroxat, said the authors had failed to acknowledge the "very positive" benefits of the treatment and their conclusions were "at odds with what has been seen in actual clinical practice".

He added: "This analysis has only examined a small subset of the total data available while regulatory bodies around the world have conducted extensive reviews and evaluations of all the data available, and this one study should not be used to cause unnecessary alarm and concern for patients."

[cathal maguidhir]

"One death would be prevented for every 20 babies resuscitated with air rather than 100% oxygen. For term and near-term infants, we can reasonably conclude that air should be used initially, with oxygen as backup if initial resuscitation fails," Dr. Davis says in a news release. "The effect of intermediate concentrations of oxygen at resuscitation needs to be investigated. Future trials should include and stratify for premature infants."Because 100% oxygen is not more effective than room air and most likely harmful in newborn resuscitation (higher mortality in two meta-analyses, excessive oxidative stress in two prospective trials, prolongation of positive pressure ventilation and therefore barotrauma), there is no reason to use 100% oxygen as a first-line and initial gas in the delivery room," Dr. Hansmann writes. "On the other hand, we do not know whether ventilation with 30, 40, or 50% oxygen had prevented treatment failure in the moderately depressed newborns initially ventilated with air or had been accompanied by an increase in neonatal mortality, as seen in the pooled groups treated with 100% oxygen. On the basis of the existing data, air can be the initial gas to be used for the resuscitation of moderately depressed newborn infants at or near term. Adjustable oxygen supply (oxygen blenders) as back-up on treatment failure with air must be available at any time."

[adamirer]

are you ok???

[cathal maguidhir]

yes thanks for asking ,but here are 4000 people who are not ,anymore
n at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, Calif.

"We estimate that approximately 4,000 out of the 5,000 asthma deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are actually caused by these long-acting beta-agonists, and we urge that these agents be taken off the market," (dream on do you know how many billions this is making)she added.

Adding an anti-inflammatory drug to a long-acting beta-agonist adds little benefit, report the Salpeters. Advair, for example, (the fourth bestselling drug in the world with $5.6 billion in annual sales), combines salmeterol with an anti-inflammatory drug to provide some protection against bronchial inflammation associated with beta-agonists. But hospitalizations still doubled for patients inhaling a long-acting beta-agonist combined with an anti-inflammatory drug compared with asthma patients taking a placebo and an anti-inflammatory drug by itself.

Of the 19 studies surveyed in the meta-analysis, the largest -- the Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial with 26,000 participants -- reported a fourfold increased risk for asthma-related deaths and a twofold increase in life-threatening asthma events in patients using salmeterol. If older people who also suffered from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were removed from the analysis, the Salpeters report, salmeterol would be associated with a six times greater risk for asthma-related deaths.

The meta-analysis found that 53 of 3,083 patients inhaling beta-agonists were hospitalized for an asthma attack compared with 12 of 2,008 patients who received a placebo, meaning that there was one hospitalization for every 71 patients treated with a long-acting beta-agonist per year.

The Salpeters say that these two long-acting beta-agonists can result in death because tolerance to them develops over time.

"These agents can improve symptoms through bronchodilation at the same time as increasing underlying inflammation and bronchial hyper-responsiveness, thus worsening asthma control without any warning of inc
'"/>

[cathal maguidhir]

are you ok???

haven't heard from you in ages suppose you are off asking the families of the irish people killed by big pharma and their dealers the Ducktors,,and warning the others,dont worry about me i have got a civil service job ,,sweeping up the spilt gravy around dublin 4