“Jensen said Sulindac has the highest reported incidents of SJS/TEN of any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug on the market in arguing the drug’s dangers outweighed any benefit it offered.”
This sentence has an error. It ought to read “incidence,” not “incidents.”
What a terrible defense argument >> “A reality in society, and in the medical society, is there are risks associated with drugs,” Thomas said, in his final argument. “There are a lot of drugs on the market, and a lot of drugs have side effects.”
I don’t recall hearing any side effects for current drugs on the market of “and the risk of being burned alive from the inside out”.
While I agree that “being burned alive from the inside out” is not an acceptable side effect, how many people actually know the side effcts of medications they are be taking? People have to take some responsibility for the substances they take into their bodies. What’s next… read all the side effects, sign the dotted line saying you read all the side effects and are still willing to take the medication…
Next time you’re at a book store, look up a Nursing Drug Handbook. Flip through the pages and look at some of the side effects listed.
Bit of an eye-opener… especially when some of them have “death” listed as a possible side effect. Admittedly those tend to be some of the more powerful/controlled medications.
“People have to take some responsibility for the substances they take into their bodies.”
To Hank: your comment would be valid in the case of some long-time smoker who decides to sue a tobacco company because they developed lung cancer; this unfortunate woman took a prescribed medication for an ailment that had nothing to do with her eyes or skin! There is a difference…
There’s something missing here.. did she take it continuously for two weeks and “suddenly” notice the side effect symptoms? Was it a one time usage? Usually after the first use, if there’s severe side effect there’s some warning isn’t there?
Caffiend I think the same thing. And what an eye opener these TV commercials for pills are!
The commercials these days all seem to show 5-10 seconds of happy scenes with a smiling patient, butterflies, holding hands in bathtubs, & what not, followed by 50-55 seconds of absolutely terrifying side effects.
“Thinking of trying Abilify?” Warnings include:
–increased incidence of stroke and other cerebrovascular adverse affects including death
–increased risk of suicide in children, adolescents and young adults
–neuroleptic malignant syndrome
–tardive dyskinesia
–hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus
–orthostatic hypotension
–leukopenia, neutropenia, and agranulocytosis
–seizures/convulsions
–cognitive and motor impairment
–suicide (they listed it twice so I did)
And in >=5% of cases (“commonly observed adverse reactions”): Akathisia, extrapyramidal disorder, somnolence, tremor, restlessness, sedation, insomnia, fatigue, nausea, blurred vision, salivary hypersecretion, dizziness, constipation, vomiting, pyrexia, drooling, increased appetite, and lethargy.
And those are the short lists… the abilify website has multiple paragraph sections for each of these side effects!
For example, take 5.4 TARDIVE DYSKINESIA, which reads: “5.4 Tardive Dyskinesia
A syndrome of potentially irreversible, involuntary, dyskinetic movements may develop in
patients treated with antipsychotic drugs. Although the prevalence of the syndrome appears to
be highest among the elderly, especially elderly women, it is impossible to rely upon prevalence
estimates to predict, at the inception of antipsychotic treatment, which patients are likely to
develop the syndrome. Whether antipsychotic drug products differ in their potential to cause
tardive dyskinesia is unknown.
The risk of developing tardive dyskinesia and the likelihood that it will become irreversible are
believed to increase as the duration of treatment and the total cumulative dose of antipsychotic
drugs administered to the patient increase. However, the syndrome can develop, although much
less commonly, after relatively brief treatment periods at low doses.
There is no known treatment for established cases of tardive dyskinesia, although the
syndrome may remit, partially or completely, if antipsychotic treatment is withdrawn.
Antipsychotic treatment, itself, however, may suppress (or partially suppress) the signs and
symptoms of the syndrome and, thereby, may possibly mask the underlying process. The effect
that symptomatic suppression has upon the long-term course of the syndrome is unknown.
Given these considerations, ABILIFY should be prescribed in a manner that is most likely to
minimize the occurrence of tardive dyskinesia. Chronic antipsychotic treatment should generally
be reserved for patients who suffer from a chronic illness that (1) is known to respond to
antipsychotic drugs and (2) for whom alternative, equally effective, but potentially less harmful
treatments are not available or appropriate. In patients who do require chronic treatment, the
smallest dose and the shortest duration of treatment producing a satisfactory clinical response
should be sought. The need for continued treatment should be reassessed periodically.
If signs and symptoms of tardive dyskinesia appear in a patient on ABILIFY, drug discontinuation
should be considered. However, some patients may require treatment with ABILIFY despite the
presence of the syndrome.”
It is worth noting that any injury/illness/death that occurs with a test subject group must be listed as a side effect. This applies whether there is a direct correlation to the drug or not.
Unless we start doing full testing on humans before it hits market, or prescribe drugs based on genetic markers, there will always be unknown and random side effects.
Since it was a “prescribed” drug would the doctor not have some responsibility in this? He/she should have discussed side effects with the patient and made sure she understood that if anything did show up that she stop taking it and return to the doctor….
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
“Jensen said Sulindac has the highest reported incidents of SJS/TEN of any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug on the market in arguing the drug’s dangers outweighed any benefit it offered.”
This sentence has an error. It ought to read “incidence,” not “incidents.”
What a terrible defense argument >> “A reality in society, and in the medical society, is there are risks associated with drugs,” Thomas said, in his final argument. “There are a lot of drugs on the market, and a lot of drugs have side effects.”
I don’t recall hearing any side effects for current drugs on the market of “and the risk of being burned alive from the inside out”.
Unreal.
While I agree that “being burned alive from the inside out” is not an acceptable side effect, how many people actually know the side effcts of medications they are be taking? People have to take some responsibility for the substances they take into their bodies. What’s next… read all the side effects, sign the dotted line saying you read all the side effects and are still willing to take the medication…
Next time you’re at a book store, look up a Nursing Drug Handbook. Flip through the pages and look at some of the side effects listed.
Bit of an eye-opener… especially when some of them have “death” listed as a possible side effect. Admittedly those tend to be some of the more powerful/controlled medications.
“People have to take some responsibility for the substances they take into their bodies.”
To Hank: your comment would be valid in the case of some long-time smoker who decides to sue a tobacco company because they developed lung cancer; this unfortunate woman took a prescribed medication for an ailment that had nothing to do with her eyes or skin! There is a difference…
There’s something missing here.. did she take it continuously for two weeks and “suddenly” notice the side effect symptoms? Was it a one time usage? Usually after the first use, if there’s severe side effect there’s some warning isn’t there?
Caffiend I think the same thing. And what an eye opener these TV commercials for pills are!
The commercials these days all seem to show 5-10 seconds of happy scenes with a smiling patient, butterflies, holding hands in bathtubs, & what not, followed by 50-55 seconds of absolutely terrifying side effects.
“Thinking of trying Abilify?” Warnings include:
–increased incidence of stroke and other cerebrovascular adverse affects including death
–increased risk of suicide in children, adolescents and young adults
–neuroleptic malignant syndrome
–tardive dyskinesia
–hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus
–orthostatic hypotension
–leukopenia, neutropenia, and agranulocytosis
–seizures/convulsions
–cognitive and motor impairment
–suicide (they listed it twice so I did)
And in >=5% of cases (“commonly observed adverse reactions”): Akathisia, extrapyramidal disorder, somnolence, tremor, restlessness, sedation, insomnia, fatigue, nausea, blurred vision, salivary hypersecretion, dizziness, constipation, vomiting, pyrexia, drooling, increased appetite, and lethargy.
And those are the short lists… the abilify website has multiple paragraph sections for each of these side effects!
For example, take 5.4 TARDIVE DYSKINESIA, which reads: “5.4 Tardive Dyskinesia
A syndrome of potentially irreversible, involuntary, dyskinetic movements may develop in
patients treated with antipsychotic drugs. Although the prevalence of the syndrome appears to
be highest among the elderly, especially elderly women, it is impossible to rely upon prevalence
estimates to predict, at the inception of antipsychotic treatment, which patients are likely to
develop the syndrome. Whether antipsychotic drug products differ in their potential to cause
tardive dyskinesia is unknown.
The risk of developing tardive dyskinesia and the likelihood that it will become irreversible are
believed to increase as the duration of treatment and the total cumulative dose of antipsychotic
drugs administered to the patient increase. However, the syndrome can develop, although much
less commonly, after relatively brief treatment periods at low doses.
There is no known treatment for established cases of tardive dyskinesia, although the
syndrome may remit, partially or completely, if antipsychotic treatment is withdrawn.
Antipsychotic treatment, itself, however, may suppress (or partially suppress) the signs and
symptoms of the syndrome and, thereby, may possibly mask the underlying process. The effect
that symptomatic suppression has upon the long-term course of the syndrome is unknown.
Given these considerations, ABILIFY should be prescribed in a manner that is most likely to
minimize the occurrence of tardive dyskinesia. Chronic antipsychotic treatment should generally
be reserved for patients who suffer from a chronic illness that (1) is known to respond to
antipsychotic drugs and (2) for whom alternative, equally effective, but potentially less harmful
treatments are not available or appropriate. In patients who do require chronic treatment, the
smallest dose and the shortest duration of treatment producing a satisfactory clinical response
should be sought. The need for continued treatment should be reassessed periodically.
If signs and symptoms of tardive dyskinesia appear in a patient on ABILIFY, drug discontinuation
should be considered. However, some patients may require treatment with ABILIFY despite the
presence of the syndrome.”
It is worth noting that any injury/illness/death that occurs with a test subject group must be listed as a side effect. This applies whether there is a direct correlation to the drug or not.
Unless we start doing full testing on humans before it hits market, or prescribe drugs based on genetic markers, there will always be unknown and random side effects.
Since it was a “prescribed” drug would the doctor not have some responsibility in this? He/she should have discussed side effects with the patient and made sure she understood that if anything did show up that she stop taking it and return to the doctor….