Latest Drugwonks' Blog
"Old Friends. Old Friends. Sat on a park bench like bookends ..."
You know the song. Now have a look at our latest podcast, "Saul & Freddy." They're two senior citizens (ages 86 and 90) who we interviewed about health care while they were enjoying a beautiful sunny day -- and each other's company -- in New York's Central Park.
Here's the link (look under the "Podcasts" section):
http://www.cmpi.org
They're older ... but wiser. And politicians and pundits would be wise to heed their words.
You know the song. Now have a look at our latest podcast, "Saul & Freddy." They're two senior citizens (ages 86 and 90) who we interviewed about health care while they were enjoying a beautiful sunny day -- and each other's company -- in New York's Central Park.
Here's the link (look under the "Podcasts" section):
http://www.cmpi.org
They're older ... but wiser. And politicians and pundits would be wise to heed their words.
The New York Post's Sue Edelman reports that the Ground Zero responders Michael Moore took to Cuba because they couldn't get health care in America -- didn't get much care in Cuba.
Read here
Now the, er, inconvenient truth -- they were actually eligible for free health care under not one -- but at least three programs operating today.
The WTC Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program is a consortium of providers, including: Bellevue Hospital, Mt. Sinai Medical Center, Nassau County University Medical Center, Queens College Ground Zero Health Watch, SUNY-Stony Brook, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, and other providers nationwide. Call (888) 702-0630 or (212) 241-1554, or visit www.wtcexams.org . Nearly 40 percent of the people being served by the program do NOT have health insurance and are receiving free care. Even if they worked for one day or a couple of hours at Ground Zero they are receiving care.
The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC) is a non-profit organization that provides occupational health referrals in your area. Contact AOEC at 1010 Vermont Ave., NW #513, Washington, DC 20005, call (888) 347-2632 or (202) 347-4976, or www.aoec.org. New York State Occupational Health Clinic Network. For more information, contact your local occupational health clinic or the New York State Department of Health at (800) 458-1158, x7900 or (518) 402-7900, or visit www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/environ/occupate.htm .
We provide these links in the hopes that those in need get the care they deserve instead of the misinformation that will be fed to them in Sicko. Moore's movie does a disservice to the compassion and hard work of the caring professionals who actually improve the lives of 9-11 workers instead of exploiting them.
Read here
Now the, er, inconvenient truth -- they were actually eligible for free health care under not one -- but at least three programs operating today.
The WTC Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program is a consortium of providers, including: Bellevue Hospital, Mt. Sinai Medical Center, Nassau County University Medical Center, Queens College Ground Zero Health Watch, SUNY-Stony Brook, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, and other providers nationwide. Call (888) 702-0630 or (212) 241-1554, or visit www.wtcexams.org . Nearly 40 percent of the people being served by the program do NOT have health insurance and are receiving free care. Even if they worked for one day or a couple of hours at Ground Zero they are receiving care.
The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC) is a non-profit organization that provides occupational health referrals in your area. Contact AOEC at 1010 Vermont Ave., NW #513, Washington, DC 20005, call (888) 347-2632 or (202) 347-4976, or www.aoec.org. New York State Occupational Health Clinic Network. For more information, contact your local occupational health clinic or the New York State Department of Health at (800) 458-1158, x7900 or (518) 402-7900, or visit www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/environ/occupate.htm .
We provide these links in the hopes that those in need get the care they deserve instead of the misinformation that will be fed to them in Sicko. Moore's movie does a disservice to the compassion and hard work of the caring professionals who actually improve the lives of 9-11 workers instead of exploiting them.
I just finished reading all of the testimony and MedPac's recommendations about a comparative effectiveness commission. By the time everything is set up and they appoint all the people to run the commission (no doubt the very people who recommended it's creation) personalized medicine will have become very, very real. Or more to the point, since personalized medicine means the right medicine for the right person at the right time, why aren't we investing and supporting that since that is where the science and our biological reality exists? See the following article from the NY Times on how personalized medicine will make comparative effectiveness useless. We need personalized evidence of personalized medicine:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/health/psychology/19beha.html?ei=5088&en=8af3ca746369c4db&ex=1339905600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1182453053-RSDs6n8k6574ORFf9+woIw
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/health/psychology/19beha.html?ei=5088&en=8af3ca746369c4db&ex=1339905600&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1182453053-RSDs6n8k6574ORFf9+woIw
EMMA. If you liked the Cliff's Notes, you'll love the medical device.
FDA Clears 'Computerized Medication Box' for U.S. Market
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has cleared for marketing the INRange Systems' Electronic Medication Management Assistant (EMMA), a programmable device that stores and dispenses prescription medication for patients' use in the home.
Essentially a computerized medication box, EMMA was designed to be used under the supervision of a licensed health care provider. EMMA can reduce drug identification and dosing errors, and allow health care professionals to monitor patient adherence to medication regimens in an outpatient setting. It may be especially useful for aging patients, as well as those with complex medication regimens such as patients with HIV.
"FDA's clearance of the INRange remote medication management system puts an important safety tool directly in the hands of patients and their health care providers," said Daniel Schultz, M.D., director of FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. "It will help take away some of the confusion patients can experience when taking prescription medications, and allow care providers to more closely monitor their patients' medications between office visits."
A 2006 Institute of Medicine report estimated that medication errors harm at least 1.5 million people in the United States annually.
EMMA consists of a medication delivery unit and two-way communication software that allows a health care professional to remotely manage prescriptions stored and released by the patient-operated delivery unit. The delivery unit is about the size of a bread box and plugs into a standard power outlet.
EMMA stores prescription medications, emits an audible alert to the patient when the prescribed medications are scheduled to be taken, and releases them onto a delivery tray when activated by the patient at the appropriate time. It uses a Web-based application for a health care professional, such as a doctor or pharmacist, to remotely schedule or adjust a patient's prescribed medications, and provides the health care professional with a history of each time patients access their medications.
FDA reviewed safety and effectiveness information for EMMA under the "de novo" classification process. The ability to petition for "de novo" initial classification was added under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 to establish an additional way for novel, but less risky, devices to get to market.
No surprises in every box.
FDA Clears 'Computerized Medication Box' for U.S. Market
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has cleared for marketing the INRange Systems' Electronic Medication Management Assistant (EMMA), a programmable device that stores and dispenses prescription medication for patients' use in the home.
Essentially a computerized medication box, EMMA was designed to be used under the supervision of a licensed health care provider. EMMA can reduce drug identification and dosing errors, and allow health care professionals to monitor patient adherence to medication regimens in an outpatient setting. It may be especially useful for aging patients, as well as those with complex medication regimens such as patients with HIV.
"FDA's clearance of the INRange remote medication management system puts an important safety tool directly in the hands of patients and their health care providers," said Daniel Schultz, M.D., director of FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. "It will help take away some of the confusion patients can experience when taking prescription medications, and allow care providers to more closely monitor their patients' medications between office visits."
A 2006 Institute of Medicine report estimated that medication errors harm at least 1.5 million people in the United States annually.
EMMA consists of a medication delivery unit and two-way communication software that allows a health care professional to remotely manage prescriptions stored and released by the patient-operated delivery unit. The delivery unit is about the size of a bread box and plugs into a standard power outlet.
EMMA stores prescription medications, emits an audible alert to the patient when the prescribed medications are scheduled to be taken, and releases them onto a delivery tray when activated by the patient at the appropriate time. It uses a Web-based application for a health care professional, such as a doctor or pharmacist, to remotely schedule or adjust a patient's prescribed medications, and provides the health care professional with a history of each time patients access their medications.
FDA reviewed safety and effectiveness information for EMMA under the "de novo" classification process. The ability to petition for "de novo" initial classification was added under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 to establish an additional way for novel, but less risky, devices to get to market.
No surprises in every box.
Nova Scotia became the first province Wednesday to unveil plans for a publicly funded vaccine to protect young girls from the human papilloma virus - the leading cause of cervical cancer.
The announcement came as obstetricians and gynecologists from across Canada warned that more young women will die from the disease unless other provinces and territories act quickly. The latest federal budget included $300 million for such programs, but Nova Scotia is the first province to introduce one.
"There was no reason for not moving ahead (with the program)," Dr. Robert Strang, the province's acting deputy chief medical officer, said Wednesday.
Here's the full story:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=589d7feb-aea4-4c97-866d-c4cec272a45d&k=65541
The announcement came as obstetricians and gynecologists from across Canada warned that more young women will die from the disease unless other provinces and territories act quickly. The latest federal budget included $300 million for such programs, but Nova Scotia is the first province to introduce one.
"There was no reason for not moving ahead (with the program)," Dr. Robert Strang, the province's acting deputy chief medical officer, said Wednesday.
Here's the full story:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=589d7feb-aea4-4c97-866d-c4cec272a45d&k=65541
Why in the world would the Boston Globe run an op-ed by Lawrence Diller, whose unscientific views on ADHD and bi-polar disorder have now crystallized into an attack on Mass General's Joseph Biederman who, along with a handful of others, was able to steer child psychiatrists and pediatricians into an awareness of childhood manic depression. The Globe editorial accuses Biederman of being " morally culpable in providing the "science" that allowed Rebecca to die." Why not toss in dozens of others including CMPI board member Fred Goodwin who wrote the book on the treatment of bi-polar disorder, Herb Meltzer and others? I hear the black helicopters hovering in the background.
The Rebecca in question was given a fatal dose of clonodine by her parents. But Diller thinks it is the Biederman's fault. Why? Because he (and others) developed the standards " which include diagnosing preschool children as young as 2 with bipolar disorder and treating them with multiple medications."
How and why the Globe ran this cruel attack is beyond me. Biederman is a scholar and a caring, compassionate doctor. As for Diller's claim that of a "purported" diagnosis of bi-polar disorder, is there someone on the Globe editorial staff that is a closet Scientologist? Early onset bi-polar disorder has been clinicially documented, diagnosed and treated.
As the parent of a child who responded to the regimens developed by Biederman and others I can attest to it.
The Globe should be ashamed of itself for allowing it's reputation to be tarnished in this manner. As for Diller, he is beneath contempt and not worthy of further mention.
The Rebecca in question was given a fatal dose of clonodine by her parents. But Diller thinks it is the Biederman's fault. Why? Because he (and others) developed the standards " which include diagnosing preschool children as young as 2 with bipolar disorder and treating them with multiple medications."
How and why the Globe ran this cruel attack is beyond me. Biederman is a scholar and a caring, compassionate doctor. As for Diller's claim that of a "purported" diagnosis of bi-polar disorder, is there someone on the Globe editorial staff that is a closet Scientologist? Early onset bi-polar disorder has been clinicially documented, diagnosed and treated.
As the parent of a child who responded to the regimens developed by Biederman and others I can attest to it.
The Globe should be ashamed of itself for allowing it's reputation to be tarnished in this manner. As for Diller, he is beneath contempt and not worthy of further mention.
Another example of how you get polls to say whatever you want based on how you phrase the question:
"Sixty-one percent of U.S. adults believe poorer countries should be allowed to break companies' patents on HIV/AIDS drugs if doing so would help them treat more of their population, according to a new poll.
When asked specifically about a recent move by Brazil to break the patent on an AIDS drug made by Merck & Co. and provide a generic version instead, 57% said they were in favor of the country's decision, while 20% said they were opposed, the Wall Street Journal Online/Harris Interactive health-care poll found."
Too bad people didn't know that Brazil spends more on their military than in on public health or more on their ag-bio programs than on their HIV programs.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118227672705940767-search.html?KEYWORDS=harris+interactive&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month
"Sixty-one percent of U.S. adults believe poorer countries should be allowed to break companies' patents on HIV/AIDS drugs if doing so would help them treat more of their population, according to a new poll.
When asked specifically about a recent move by Brazil to break the patent on an AIDS drug made by Merck & Co. and provide a generic version instead, 57% said they were in favor of the country's decision, while 20% said they were opposed, the Wall Street Journal Online/Harris Interactive health-care poll found."
Too bad people didn't know that Brazil spends more on their military than in on public health or more on their ag-bio programs than on their HIV programs.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118227672705940767-search.html?KEYWORDS=harris+interactive&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month
Sicko director Michael Moore (read that however you choose) spends a lot of his movie showing how well-heeled UK docs are and how the NHS actually gives people cash to take cab rides back from the hospital.
For mo(o)re examples of just how great health care in Britain can be ... if and when you can find it ... consider this article from the Times of London:
SECRET NHS PLAN TO RATION PATIENT CARE
Read more here
For mo(o)re examples of just how great health care in Britain can be ... if and when you can find it ... consider this article from the Times of London:
SECRET NHS PLAN TO RATION PATIENT CARE
Read more here
What do you call it when science makes a real medical breakthrough -- one that can save lives and money -- but insurance companies refuse to pay for it.
In this case, you can call it "Wednesday."
Here's the story as reported by the AP ...
A new study suggests thousands of young women with breast cancer — an estimated 8,000 a year in the United States — are not offered testing to identify faulty genes and clarify their medical decisions.
Guidelines used by insurance companies to decide coverage for genetic testing should change to reflect the findings, said an author of the study, Dr. Jeffrey N. Weitzel of City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, Calif. Testing can cost more than $3,000.
Here's the complete story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/20/health/20cancer.html?adxnnl=1&adnnlx=1182360649-+Sn64+pi/6oXjTGlb3il5g
And for those who are calling for "comparative effectiveness" or "evidence-based medicine," or healthcare technology assessment" consider this -- isn't a genetic test that gets the right treatment to the right patient as early as possible the best way to lower costs and improve outcomes?
But that would require long-term thinking.
Why isn't Mr. Waxman calling a hearing on this?
(Do more women have to die of breast cancer than died on 9-11 for him to be interested.)
In this case, you can call it "Wednesday."
Here's the story as reported by the AP ...
A new study suggests thousands of young women with breast cancer — an estimated 8,000 a year in the United States — are not offered testing to identify faulty genes and clarify their medical decisions.
Guidelines used by insurance companies to decide coverage for genetic testing should change to reflect the findings, said an author of the study, Dr. Jeffrey N. Weitzel of City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Duarte, Calif. Testing can cost more than $3,000.
Here's the complete story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/20/health/20cancer.html?adxnnl=1&adnnlx=1182360649-+Sn64+pi/6oXjTGlb3il5g
And for those who are calling for "comparative effectiveness" or "evidence-based medicine," or healthcare technology assessment" consider this -- isn't a genetic test that gets the right treatment to the right patient as early as possible the best way to lower costs and improve outcomes?
But that would require long-term thinking.
Why isn't Mr. Waxman calling a hearing on this?
(Do more women have to die of breast cancer than died on 9-11 for him to be interested.)
We've never understood the theory behind a time-specific ban on advertising for newly approved medicines -- because we've never understood how less information makes any medicine safer.
So we're glad that such clearly political moves were resoundingly defeated in yesterday's Energy and Commerce mark-up. Bad for partisan politicians. Good for the public health.
According to Reuters, "Legislation meant to improve the government's drug safety oversight cleared a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee on Tuesday without a controversial limit on television advertisements. Lawmakers removed language that would have allowed the health secretary to ban TV commercials for a new drug for up to three years if necessary to protect the public health.
Instead, members voted 23-9 to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration power to fine companies $250,000 for running a false or misleading advertisement aimed at consumers.
Backers of that approach, written by New York Democratic Rep. Edolphus Towns, said an advertising ban would have violated constitutional protections of free speech.
I don't like the drug ads on television late at night .... They bug me. But I also recognize that sometimes things that bug me are protected under the Constitution, said Rep. Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican"
Ah, sanity.
So we're glad that such clearly political moves were resoundingly defeated in yesterday's Energy and Commerce mark-up. Bad for partisan politicians. Good for the public health.
According to Reuters, "Legislation meant to improve the government's drug safety oversight cleared a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee on Tuesday without a controversial limit on television advertisements. Lawmakers removed language that would have allowed the health secretary to ban TV commercials for a new drug for up to three years if necessary to protect the public health.
Instead, members voted 23-9 to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration power to fine companies $250,000 for running a false or misleading advertisement aimed at consumers.
Backers of that approach, written by New York Democratic Rep. Edolphus Towns, said an advertising ban would have violated constitutional protections of free speech.
I don't like the drug ads on television late at night .... They bug me. But I also recognize that sometimes things that bug me are protected under the Constitution, said Rep. Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican"
Ah, sanity.
Center for Medicine in the Public Interest is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization promoting innovative solutions that advance medical progress, reduce health disparities, extend life and make health care more affordable, preventive and patient-centered. CMPI also provides the public, policymakers and the media a reliable source of independent scientific analysis on issues ranging from personalized medicine, food and drug safety, health care reform and comparative effectiveness.
