Homeopathy

it was a poorly written post.

could do better.

Also this one anecdote - as support for the idea that we are being overmedicated - seems to suffer from a little confirmation bias.

The situation is that a doctor assesses a patient's drug regime and rather than keep it going as it is or encourage stronger drugs to be taken or even increase the type and amount of drugs - he reduces the amount - and by a quite impressive 75%.

And this is used as evidence (or at least an illustration) of how we are overmedicated.

Let's look at the opposite scenario.

The situation here is that a doctor assesses a patient's drug regime and rather than reducing the amount he either keeps it going as it is or encourages stronger drugs to be taken or even increases the type and amount of drugs to be used.

I suspect that this would also be seen as evidence for how we are overmedicated ?

What do you think?

I may even withdraw my comment on his overselectiveness... because as of right now I cannot back it up sufficiently for my own liking, and the searching for the article I remembered has led me into the dark world of the nutritionist fanboy.
christ.
shudders

don't fuck with my editorial powers again.

"If you can loosely define what you mean by 'overmedicated' in a meaningful way (rather than an rewording of the term 'overmedicated') - and can share with me what has led you to this idea, I will have a go at answering the question."

You did a pretty good job up there with my Ritalin example. Let's go with that.

Really, unless you tell me what you mean by 'overmedicated' I wouldn't know how to even start to attempt an answer ?

@ damo

flexes muscles
yeah. that's right. don't fuck with pedantry. it's what gets you all the fame.

You mean Nurofen?

Thanks for pointing out my Typo ... doesn't really invalidate my reasoning.

What do you think might be a good test for the hypothesis that we are overmedicated?

I expect the suspicion is that overmedication has detrimental effects - so you could look for those detrimental effects.

what if those detrimental affects were an effect of the comorbidities of age?

er. no.
the cost of neurofen is higher because people pay more for the packaging. they also assume it works better. and so it does.

BG taught me that.

Boots made Ibuprofen. They also make Neurofen I think.
It's different price point marketing.

or else why would anadin (made years ago, patent lapsed) be more expensive than own brand aspirin.

NEXT!

Really, unless you tell me what you mean by 'overmedicated' I wouldn't know how to even start to attempt an answer ?

Are you after a catch-all definition? Ok, I mean the prescription of drugs to patients unneccessarily or excessively. You've used the term repeatedly since i said it. Is my definition in line with yours?

An example of this could be Ritalin for the treatment of ADHD and similar disorders primarily in children being readily prescribed in the US, often unneccesarily.

I'd be interested in discussing why that might be the case.

What do you think?

I think your gran had her treatments cut by 75% as you say.

I don't know the Marketing Vs R&D cost ... I was just using them as an example and Damo has just proved my example to be complete bullshit.

But in the U.S a drug maker has to go through several sets of trials and they only have soo many years where the drug "is their's" i.e. nobody else can use the formula ... without get my dissertation out I can't tell you the steps that are taken before final approval .. and it has been a year since I wrote the app which worked out the Tanimoto Coefficient for a set of comparisons and longer since I wrote the introduction to the dissertation.

@Damo ... you are correct just looked it up. I was under the impression that Whoever owned Neurofen invented Ibuprofen, dunno where I got that impression then.

I think by 'overmedicated' people mean that drugs are being prescribed where previously, no drugs would be prescribed. Such as the treatment of ADHD (where previously i don't think drugs were ever prescribed).

I'd bet my balls doctors prescribe drugs which people don't need.

Don't need to stop them dying, or just to speed up recovery?
You don't need ibuprofen usually, it just makes you feel better i.e. it alleviates symptoms.
my doctor never gives me antibiotics because he reckons people have too many. I know people that keep stashes of them and take them whenever they feel a bit ill.

Fella across from me eats them like smarties.

Just going to see if the vending machine has smarties....

Ours has mini-hobnobs. Fucken ace.

Peanut m&ms it is. They'll do. I'm here till seven...

Balki, do you think there is a problem with the overdiagnosis of conditions as 'dieases' rather than just personality, i.e. ADHD? Or are you simply concerned with the use of Ritalin as a course of treatment?

shit the bed this thread is the gift that keeps on giving isn't it?

Reading Bad Science got me started on this sort of thing, also psychological irrationality and the inability of humans to deal with randomness properly, how shit financial advisers really are, fascinating stuff.

I thought of you lot last week when I went to the chemist in France. The homeopathic display was quite impressive.

Don't get me started, there are adverts on TV at the mo for car sickness pills (it's the summer hols and the motorways are filling up) with "no side effects, they won't make you drowsy"

they won't, because they are made of sugar, and NOTHING ELSE, despite what the manufacturer may attempt to allege.

BTW, am I the only one thinking that Epic Troll Is EPIC?

keep it up though Tynan and soperRiva ;)

But in the U.S a drug maker has to go through several sets of trials

not just the US.

everywhere has to do trials.

what you're describing is the patent process. whereby once a drug, or more specifically an active ingredient and its method of manufacture is described and patented, that method cannot then be used by other parties. this allows the inventor time to reap the benefits. however, getting from active ingredient to drug in human ~ 15ish years. giving the drug company ~10 to go from first stage clinical trial to final drug. but in reality that's only probably 5. which. is 5 years to reap back all their costs, and pay dividends to shareholders

It's the marketing that persuades people to spend more on one rather than the other.

good point. well made.