Quote:
Originally Posted by BBS1951
http://www.slate.com/id/2150354
This link does an excellent job of pointing out the pitfalls of evaluating the benefit of a drug.
So, if a drug company, (lets take Biogen as an example), says that there are 47% less attacks on Tysabri, this article points out how that tells you very little about the benefit of Tysabri. It can mask the real data which might show that it is far less effective than that.
I hope you find the article as good as did I. I had known this before, but these folks put it in terms that are easy for non-statistics folks to comprehend.
|
This article is probably the most enlightening article, that I have ever read. What little respect I had for big Pharma, just dropped another several points.
Not to mention, our Docs, who are freely prescribing these drugs to us, without advising us of the
real benefits versus risks.
Shame on them all.
From now on, before I take a Med, I will personally find out what the Real v Relative benefits and risks are, before I take it.
For instance, I am on Paxil, touted to be an SSRI without addictive components, however, after I am on it, I find out that you just can't stop taking it. You have to wean yourself off and even then, you are subject to residual withdrawal SX.
FDA made them put a black box warning on Paxil in 2002, but too late for many, who had horrific withdrawal symptoms, while weaning off of the drug.
What ticks me off is that the mfgs of Paxil, knew this long before they were forced to put the black box on the package. They were touting it as nonaddictive, right upm to the time the FDA came down on them.
Thank you so much for posting this BBS, and I am very interested to hear Mark/ox's thought on this. I do respect his opinion.
