| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Bubali" |
| Date: |
22 Dec 2005 07:04:05 PM |
| Object: |
got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
.
|
|
| User: "Bobby Kratchet" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
22 Dec 2005 08:29:30 PM |
|
|
"Bubali" <dertytr@dromednam.com> wrote in message
news:afOdnf5XlNCW0DbenZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
Tell that to Rumsfeld, supposedly he is or has placed millions of orders for
the military to take. By the way dosnt he also own stock in that company
that he is placing millions of orders for???
.
|
|
|
| User: "chess" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
23 Dec 2005 04:37:36 AM |
|
|
"Bobby Kratchet" <gizmo100@peeps.com> wrote in message
news:11qmo8dlk64pj1c@corp.supernews.com...
"Bubali" <dertytr@dromednam.com> wrote in message
news:afOdnf5XlNCW0DbenZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
Tell that to Rumsfeld, supposedly he is or has placed millions of orders
for
the military to take. By the way dosnt he also own stock in that company
that he is placing millions of orders for???
NEW YORK (Fortune) - The prospect of a bird flu outbreak may be panicking
people around the globe, but it's proving to be very good news for Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other politically connected investors in
Gilead Sciences, the California biotech company that owns the rights to
Tamiflu, the influenza remedy that's now the most-sought after drug in the
world.
Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)'s chairman from 1997 until he joined
the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at
between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial
disclosures filed by Rumsfeld.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "C. Pangus" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
22 Dec 2005 08:05:44 PM |
|
|
"Bubali" <dertytr@dromednam.com> wrote in message
news:afOdnf5XlNCW0DbenZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
to widespread use of tamiflu when not really needed will only reduce
effectiveness.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SJ Doc" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
22 Dec 2005 10:58:12 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:04:05 -0500, "Bubali" wrote:
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
So what's the failure (and morbidity) rate for 'flu vaccine?
Depending upon the age of the particular patient and the presence or
absence of comorbid disorders (chronic obstructive or restrictive lung
disease, cystic fibrosis, pharmacogenic immune suppression in patients
who have undergone transplant surgery, etc.), even the most
appropriate influenza vaccination - i.e., one which anticipates and
covers the strain of 'flu that is prevalent in the population that
year - will have varying degrees of efficacy, and patients who are
properly vaccinated *will* contract influenza, *will* suffer varying
degrees of debilitation, and *will* die as the result of respiratory
complications associated with the infection.
An antiviral medication like Tamiflu (oseltamivir, Roche) has proven
advantages in terms of efficacy if initiated shortly after a patient
begins to demonstrate symptoms typical of viral 'flu [which cannot be
said about the older medication - Symmetrel (amantadine, Endo) -
upon whose mechanism of action oseltamivir research was modeled,
and which appears to be somewhat less effective in chemoprophylaxis
as well as treatment than is oseltamivir]. Tamiflu is not, however,
expected to be completely efficacious in treating all patients, even
when used according to optimal treatment protocols.
There is nothing certain in the practice of medicine, just as there is
nothing certain in life. Unreasonable expectations of infallibility
and omnipotence should be reserved for religious beliefs, not the
management of infectious diseases.
Which you would, of course, understand if you weren't a complete
***** cement-head.
-----------------
Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will
come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship
to restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal
privileges to others. The Constitution of this Republic should make
a special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom.
-- Benjamin Rush, M.D.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bubali" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
23 Dec 2005 12:06:20 AM |
|
|
NOW THIS DOCTOR IS FUNNY ...hey, bro, this is not a New England Journal
conference ... until further evidence, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, 2 OUT OF 13
DIED. Do you have any other facts more recent than the ones presented
already?
If not, shut up and do something!
(:-)
"SJ Doc" <SJ_Doc@NOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:bavmq1tn31ibh5kks11r2pvld7i8qc3ht7@4ax.com...
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:04:05 -0500, "Bubali" wrote:
Avian flu claims 2 who took Tamiflu
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002698111_birdflu22.html
So what's the failure (and morbidity) rate for 'flu vaccine?
Depending upon the age of the particular patient and the presence or
absence of comorbid disorders (chronic obstructive or restrictive lung
disease, cystic fibrosis, pharmacogenic immune suppression in patients
who have undergone transplant surgery, etc.), even the most
appropriate influenza vaccination - i.e., one which anticipates and
covers the strain of 'flu that is prevalent in the population that
year - will have varying degrees of efficacy, and patients who are
properly vaccinated *will* contract influenza, *will* suffer varying
degrees of debilitation, and *will* die as the result of respiratory
complications associated with the infection.
An antiviral medication like Tamiflu (oseltamivir, Roche) has proven
advantages in terms of efficacy if initiated shortly after a patient
begins to demonstrate symptoms typical of viral 'flu [which cannot be
said about the older medication - Symmetrel (amantadine, Endo) -
upon whose mechanism of action oseltamivir research was modeled,
and which appears to be somewhat less effective in chemoprophylaxis
as well as treatment than is oseltamivir]. Tamiflu is not, however,
expected to be completely efficacious in treating all patients, even
when used according to optimal treatment protocols.
There is nothing certain in the practice of medicine, just as there is
nothing certain in life. Unreasonable expectations of infallibility
and omnipotence should be reserved for religious beliefs, not the
management of infectious diseases.
Which you would, of course, understand if you weren't a complete
***** cement-head.
-----------------
Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will
come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship
to restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal
privileges to others. The Constitution of this Republic should make
a special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom.
-- Benjamin Rush, M.D.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SJ Doc" |
|
| Title: Re: got Tamiflu? You'll die anyway! Others already did! |
23 Dec 2005 01:07:33 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 01:06:20 -0500, "Bubali" wrote:
NOW THIS DOCTOR IS FUNNY ...hey, bro, this is not a New England Journal
conference ... until further evidence, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, 2 OUT OF 13
DIED. Do you have any other facts more recent than the ones presented
already?
If not, shut up and do something!
(:-)
The summary of the report is available free from the NEJM at
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/353/25/2667. An extract
of the editorial "Perspective" comment upon the report is available at
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/353/25/2633. Unless you're
a subscriber to the publication (which you're almost certainly not),
that's about all you can access immediately online. Were you able to
read the full content of these publications, you would see that there
is a medication called zanamivir (Relenza, GSK; see the current PI at
http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_relenza.pdf) that does not have
the same potential (heretofore largely considered theoretical) to
select for H5N1 strains that might be resistant to a neuraminidase
inhibitor as does oseltamivir.
In any case where H5N1 influenza is suspected, failure of appropriate
clinical response to oseltamivir (including inability to secure a
satisfactory reduction in influenza A viral load) would give cause to
initiate therapy with zanamivir. None of the mutations associated
with oseltamivir resistance prevent the binding of zanamivir, but the
product (being effective only in a dry powder inhalation route of ad-
ministration) is both more costly and more difficult to utilize than
is oseltamivir. It's not the first-line choice of therapy in most
cases.
There is some considerable speculation in the clinical literature that
the dosing regimen approved for oseltamivir may be inadequate, with
the development of resistant strains largely the result of achieving
inadequate target tissue levels to gain proper "kill." This is a
problem with almost all antiviral medications, as it is with anti-
biotic and antifungal agents. The solution could be something as
simple as increasing Tamiflu dosing when H5N1 infection is suspected.
We don't know as yet whether or not the mutations associated with
oseltamivir resistance have any impact upon the transmissibility of
the strains so selected. It would not be unreasonable to suspect
this, as resistance mutations are almost invariably associated with a
thermodynamic "cost" in terms of viral fitness (i.e., the bug's
relative replication competence under the defined circumstances).
There's more for the virologists to dig up on this subject, but I
expect that's going to be something we'll see about at ICAAC in
2006 or 2007.
When next you read the writing of an ex-Journalism major working to
satisfy the "if it bleeds, it leads" demands of the Associated Press,
consider that such people are not clinically trained or experienced,
that they don't have more than a superficial understanding of either
pharmacology or the mechanisms of disease, and that they are edited
by other ex-Journalism majors, not competent peer-review officers.
Bear in mind that to an ex-Pre-Med major, the Journalism clowns are
remembered as having been in force among the drunken bodies sprawled
all over the dormitory floor, and over whom we used to step on our way
to the library each Sunday morning. It's hard to take these people
seriously when you encounter them in later years.
That being the case, you're still a cement-head to rely upon anything
with which the blithering idiots at AP chose to defile their fish
wrappers in order to grab eyeballs and sell department store ads.
----------
Hygiene is the corruption of medicine by morality. It is
impossible to find a hygienist who does not debase his
theory of the healthful with a theory of the virtuous.
The whole hygienic art, indeed, resolves itself into an
ethical exhortation. This brings it, at the end, into
diametrical conflict with medicine proper. The true aim
of medicine is not to make men virtuous; it is to safeguard
and rescue them from the consequences of their vices. The
physician does not preach repentance; he offers absolution.
-- H.L. Mencken, The Smart Set, May 1919
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
