Archive for May, 2009
SlendeSlim Review: Do 8 Patented Ingredients Make SlendeSlim A Winner?
Phosphacore Fat Burner Review: Is It Really #1 For Weight Loss?
Orwellâs adverse drug reaction
The Guardian has an interesting piece on Orwell and the writing of 1984. The information about the treatment of Orwell’s tuberculosis (TB) seems to indicate that he suffered a fairly severe skin hypersensivity reaction to streptomycin.
“In 1947 there was no cure for TB - doctors prescribed fresh air and a regular diet - but there was a new, experimental drug on the market, streptomycin. Astor arranged for a shipment to Hairmyres from the US.
Richard Blair believes that his father was given excessive doses of the new wonder drug. The side effects were horrific (throat ulcers, blisters in the mouth, hair loss, peeling skin and the disintegration of toe and fingernails) but in March 1948, after a three-month course, the TB symptoms had disappeared. “It’s all over now, and evidently the drug has done its stuff,” Orwell told his publisher. “It’s rather like sinking the ship to get rid of the rats, but worth it if it works.”
Streptomycin was the first aminoglycoside antibiotic developed, in the early 1940s, and was used first line in the treatment of tuberculosis. Martindale tells us that:
Hypersensitivity skin reactions are reported in about 5% of patients, and eosinophilia may occur. There have been reports of Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, severe exfoliative dermatitis, and anaphylaxis.
Skin reactions are not uncommon. Orwell’s seem relatively severe, if not life-threatening, and is illustrative of how people make judgements about the risks they are willing to accept from treatment in the face of a disease.
The Daily Mailâs latest MMR story
Gives space to Andrew Wakefield, suggests a conspiracy to brain wash children, and allows the regular JABS anti-vaccine crew to vent off. Lay Scientist lays into them.
Homeopathic victory?
About three years ago there was considerable concern about the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) becoming associated with homeopathy.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is introducing rules to allow remedies to specify the ailments for which they can be used.
But critics argue the treatments will not be rigorously tested as they do not need to undergo the clinical trials orthodox drugs do to get a licence.
Sense about Science argued this was a move away from science, and Professor David Colquhoun was slightly more forthright.
The Pharmaceutical Journal reports that the first homoeopathic remedy has now received approval to be labelled with therapeutic indications. A homeopathy remedy called “Nelsons arnica ClikPak” is now labelled for the “symptomatic relief of sprains, muscular aches and bruising and swelling after contusions. The MHRA told The Pharmaceutical Journal that:
The purpose of the National Rules Scheme is to address the anomalies in regulating homoeopathic medicinal products and enable consumers to make an informed choice.
It is not to encourage new users to make their first-time purchase, nor to give homoeopathy added credibility as a safe and natural complement to conventional medicine.
Homeopaths don’t agree. Here’s the Chairmen of the company who obtained the approval:
The fact that therapeutic indications may now be included on the packaging of licensed homoeopathic medicines not only opens the practice of homoeopathy up to new users but also gives it added credibility as a safe and natural complement to conventional medicine.
The company have no scientific proof for its efficacy, nor can they provide a credible scientific basis for the whole practice of homeopathy, but they can now cite the MHRA approval as adding credibility. I find it hard to beleive that the public will not see approval of homeopathic preparations by a drug regulator as a “scientific” blessing of the product.
On the other hand, the MHRA’s move into this arena, might allow them to stamp out the worst examples of this fraudulent pseudoscience.