would lead to a fatal reaction in 1% of those who took it, would you want it to be available to the public? Why or why not? A cure for the disease would be worth the risk? What is the highest rate acceptable? Arthritis can be a very painful and debilitating disease. If it would cure the most serious cases, and with complete information to the patient, I would say yes. But if the arthritis is debilitating and can be operated with only slight pain, I would say no. All drugs have side effects - death is of course what we want to avoid - in the end, I think it would be on the individual - but only to drop it on the public would not be ethical. I want it published, because it can contribute to 99% of patients, but I would be a "black box" warning should be defined, counted this risk. There are many drugs out there that is a known risk for serious side effects, including death. I would not be the first-line therapy, but I would use it as a last resort if the patient has other standard treatment regimen, the final decision in the hands of patients and their trained physicians. How old is the patient? How strong is it? What is the ultimate goal? It should have enough information about the warning signs of the fatal reactions (maybe we can stop the drug at the time, how fast is the answer?). I do not want to prescribe it until it was in the market for years and I had the chance to write data to it .
0 comments:
Post a Comment