Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gwen Shannon's avatar

It is like a bad medical TV drama. The patient is treated for something that doesn't need treating ,then needs treatment to counter the unwanted effects. The treatment required to remedy side effects causes more problems. Meanwhile those of us who refuse to participate keep getting messages to join in. This whole pantomime has made me question the validity of "Gold Standard" treatment for everyone, cardiology one of the worst offenders. It sounded good when first expounded by a GP I worked with but observing and reading wider no longer my view.

Expand full comment
The Wiltster's avatar

File this under the same heading as all those times when a pharma ad says, "do not stop taking [place other pharma drug here] when you start [our drug]" or words to that effect. The one thing pharma ads NEVER do is suggest that one pharma offering negates the need for another. It must be in the bylaws or something. Heaven forbids! Hell, I'm actually surprised it got cited 30 times. Willing to bet Pfizer has an entire department dedicated to making sure no paper suggests that their crap interacts badly with another pharma company's crap. Sales, dammit!

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts