2008-03-10

FDA...

sometimes it just seems to me that the FDA is completely ridiculous - if they will approve a seasonal allergy medication that has the risk of causing glaucoma, cataracts and nasal sores, but they won't let you sell non-pasteurized milk. seems to me they are more interested in promoting sales and profits than actually caring about peoples' health. I guess this is America, right? That's what we're all about - sales and profits.

12 comments:

  1. Makes no sense to me... Then again... who are we to question government decisions right! Yah right!

    Stay cool! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Have you seen the commercial (the medication escapes me)- where one of the side-effects rambled off at the end is "gambling addiction" ---What? I almost want to take the pills for a few days just to see if I get an urge to gamble. Weird.

    The FDA has never made much sense to me. With all of the drugs they approve and recall left & right, I'm SURE they're waaaaayyyy more invested in the chemical companies' $$$ than our health. Waaaaaaaaayyyy more.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hah! I haven't seen that one! This world is really effed up. Heh.

    whee!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh yeah...gotta keep that economy up and going!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have to say, I much prefer the type of economy stimulus which results in the government sending us checks in the mail :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. wow- i think this sorta thing happen's every where- you write songs how cool is that-

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do indeed :) If you'd like to listen, you can click on the "Last.fm" link in the sidebar of my blog - and should you want to buy some of them, there are a few on iTunes (more to come fairly soon):)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dont you work for a hospital that is a magnet for drug reps? Look at how much free stuff and lunches they provide to get your employer to use these medicines. And you complain about seasonal allergy medicine? Try looking in your own "backyard" cause it will disgust you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oh, the allergy medicine was just an example that I had just seen on TV, and I totally agree that my own "backyard" so to speak is full of drug reps, etc (though I don't work at the hospital, specifically) and much worse things than seasonal allergy medications (though I did think it pretty ridiculous that something as mild as a seasonal allergy medication could cause cataracts and glaucoma). However, I'm not going to be able to stop the hospitals of the U.S. from using those medications, as much as I might desire it. The whole system is tied up in making money, and as long as they can do that, it will perpetuate.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pasteurized milk is a good thing for the general public. There are enough harmful microbes (speaking as an ex-microbiologist) that 1) the shelf-life of milk would otherwise be so short that most of the milk you bought in the store would be spoiled by the time it got to you, and 2) a lot more people and especially children would get sick from drinking those pathogens. Pasteurization does nothing more than heat the milk to 180 degrees F for a very short time, just enough to take out pathogens that could make you sick.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Actually, we bought unpasteurized milk, yogurt and other dairy products in Lithuania regularly, and though they do have a shorter shelf life (usually 3-4 days after we bought them), we never got sick from them, you just had to buy smaller amounts because they couldn't sit in your fridge for 2 weeks. However, that wasn't really the point of my blog - while pasteurization may make milk safer in a sense, I would hope you would agree that unpasteurized milk is significantly less of a health risk than a seasonal allergy medication that can cause cataracts and glaucoma (or a number of other medications they approve that have much worse potential side-effects). The point was just that they seem to have somewhat disparate interests in how they go about approving and rejecting certain things - and it has a tendency to follow the lines of boosting companies' revenues. So, I don't really want to argue about the benefits of pasteurization, the point was just that the FDA confuses me in what it decides to approve and reject.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dave,
    I agree with you on the position of the FDA on certain issues. Certainly we are much better off having pasteurized milk than not, but what else the FDA does in terms of approving or rejecting certain drugs is unknown. There are LOTS of interest groups and big business on both sides of every issue. So when the FDA rejects a certain drug they will get hammered from a large crowd; but they will also get it when they approve. They have standard rules that they use, which are what folks ought to argue. I'd encourage you to read the rules that are law and that the FDA must follow in order to approve or reject a drug. keep in mind Congress passes laws and FDA executes those laws. And BTW, the FDA doesn't make any money one way or another; they are a severely underfunded organization thats supposed to enforce the laws.
    Paj

    ReplyDelete