Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: "fresh~horses" <fresh~horses@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 9 Oct 2005 20:22:14 -0700
Jim Chinnis wrote:
> "fresh~horses" <fresh~horses@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in part:
>
> >
> >Jim Chinnis wrote:
> >> Susan <nevermind@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in part:
> >>
> >> >x-no-archive: yes
> >> >
> >> >Jim Chinnis wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> It might be noted also that the plaintiff's physicians felt the statin was a
> >> >> good idea and prescribed it.
> >> >>
> >> >> But Pfizer has deep pockets and attorneys can smell the money.
> >> >> --
> >> >> Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
> >> >
> >> >I'm really disappointed in your sarcasm and dismissiveness, Jim.
> >> >
> >> >My mother was perfectly fit and healthy at age 75-80 when she was rx'ed
> >> >statins she didn't need (she had great ratios and TGLs) due to "hyping
> >> >to all comers." She suffered severe pain, exhaustion, muscle weakness
> >> >and destruction and endured a year on steroids as a result of it. She's
> >> >just the type of patient the suit is addressing.
> >> >
> >> >If they're going to get ignorant, lazy doctors to hand out rx's willy
> >> >nilly, they should pay for the damages.
> >>
> >> Nope. If malpractice was involved, it's the physician at fault, not the firm
> >> that makes the drug. I don't think we have a good fix on whether statins are
> >> appropriate for elderly women with high LDL and good ratios. I don't know if
> >> we ever will. Physicians have to make reasonable extrapolations from the
> >> available data and the evidence regarding mechanisms. Nothing there is in
> >> black and white, in my opinion.
> >>
> >> No sarcasm was intended, BTW. Just was making a point about subgroup
> >> analysis and diminishing sample size.
> >> --
> >> Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
> >
> >
> >We might also make a point about dosage comparisons in the Prove It
> >trial, for which Pfizer provided funding, and of which all physicians
> >received multiple copies as part of the hype and shill to which they
> >were subjected:
> >
> >Pravachol 40mg is NOT equivalent to 80 mg Atorvastatin.
> >
> >http://www.medicationsense.com/articles/may_aug_05/crestor_headlines_053005.html
> >
> >"Most people with elevated cholesterol require reductions in their LDL
> >levels of 25% to 30%. This can usually be accomplished quite nicely
> >with 20 or 40 mg of Mevacor (or its much less expensive generic,
> >lovastatin), or 40 mg of Lescol, or 20 or 40 mg of Pravachol.3,4 These
> >are the milder statins, and they are less likely to cause side effects.
> >With the strong statin Lipitor, you need only 2.5 or 5 mg, but you will
> >get 10 mg -- 100% to 400% excess medication -- because 10 mg is the
> >lowest dosage Pfizer makes. With strong Zocor, you need only 5 or 10
> >mg, but doctors routinely prescribe Merck's recommended initial dosage
> >of 20 or 40 mg -- again much more medication that actually needed.4
> >With super-strong Crestor, the proper dose for reducing LDL 25%-30% is
> >1 mg, yet the lowest doses available are 5 mg or 10 mg -- five to ten
> >times more medication than these people need.4-6 Such overmedication
> >causes more frequent and more serious side effects. This is why the
> >FDA is receiving more reports about Crestor than any other statin drug,
> >and why 62% of the reports about Crestor involved the 5 mg and 10 mg
> >dosages.1"
> >
> >~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >Here are the relevant paras from the Prove It trial, which proved
> >little more than the extent to which pharmaceutical companies will go
> >with spin:
> >
> >The fine print for Prove It:
> >"Support for distribution of this report was provided by Pfizer Canada
> >Inc...."
> >
> >"PROVE IT
> >The PROVE IT trial compared two statins, pravastatin and atorvastatin,
> >at the maximal doses used at the time of the study. The 4162 patients
> >randomized to either pravastatin 40mg daily or atorvastatin 80 mg daily
> >had been hospitalized in the preceding 10 days with an acute coronary
> >syndrome. The LDL-C aachieved during the 24-month treatment with
> >pravastatin was 2.46 mmol/L (interquartile range 2.04-2.92 mmol/L) and
> >with atorvastatin 1.60 mmol/L (interquartile range 1.29-2.04 mmol/L).
> >
> >Atorvastatin was shown to be superior to pravastatin with the primary
> >outcome (death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina,
> >revascularization and stroke) reduced 16% by atorvastatin compared to
> >pravastatin (Figure 2). Death and/or myocardial infarction was reduced
> >18%, the need for revascularisation 14%, and unstable angina requiring
> >hospitalization by 29% (Figure 3). The enhanced
> >benefit of atorvastatin compared to pravastatin was observed as early
> >as 30 days after initiating treatment. Atorvastatin at the 80mg daily
> >dose was well tolerated and the discontinuation rates of both
> >atorvastatin and pravastatin due to patient preference or adverse side
> >effects were similar."
>
> I don't see the relevance to the thread.
Between your short-sightedness here and on the legal aspects too...
> --
> Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
.
- References:
- Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: Susan
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: MEM, MD
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: Jim Chinnis
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: Susan
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: Jim Chinnis
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: fresh~horses
- Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- From: Jim Chinnis
- Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- Prev by Date: Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- Next by Date: Re: cholestoral lowering suppliment experience?
- Previous by thread: Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- Next by thread: Re: Lawsuit questions need for Lipitor
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
