I think it is precisely because of the all the good that pharma does - and the responsibility that goes with it - that makes so many furious when trust is genuinely betrayed. I know that outrage is shared by many in industry as well, both because of principle and because of what it does to public images/stereoypes of what _they_ do as a group. They are obviously right to be furious on both counts.

It is also true that, in some instances, the good _has_ been used by some industry spokespeople as a kind of “pass” for what is not so good.

Lisa I know what CafePharma is like but if you want to learn you need to listen to the opinions of those who you disagree with. Besides there are alot of other posts that expose corrupt aspects of the Pharmaceutical Industry that would not be available to me otherwise.

No drug is safe and even if the drugs that your child received had been labeled, depending on the frequency and severity of the AE it still may have been acceptable for a limited number of cases for illnesses where the alternative is worse. However to determine this you need all the information. Which companies tend to withhold and FDA tends to coverup. In spite of this the prescriber may need to be held accountable for the misdiagnosis and not realizing there was a drug induced injury.

Lisa I have had to make medical decisions for children and let me say the preventable drug toxicities I have seen are way worse than anything that happened to you child.

You are right that I have never had to make the medical decisions for someone else, but will in the near future with the birth of my first child. I have been lucky to not have had to decide the care of my parents, sisters, or grandparents. I don’t relish the thought and don’t think it makes me less “mature” for not having to do that.

On the other hand I don’t think that pharma should ever excuse bad behavior by saying - we do much good. I hope that they would at least acknowledge that they can do better, that just OK is not good enough, that one person’s death warrants some investigation and improvement or that statistical acceptability doesn’t warrant success. Slow down a little bit and forgo some profit for more care for the consumer. We are not your adversary we are your livelihood.

In any event, I am a psychologist, I do not rx, and my work now is as a university prof rather than a clinician in any case.

Do I have something to gain or lose, besides rights?

Im a bit curious, are you a psychiatrist, or a psychologist, seeking to obtain prescribing priviledges?.. If so, Maybe you have something to gain or loose if preemption succeeds.

Salmon…I spent my first few years doing clinical (animal models) and saw the toxicity as well. But people react to that toxicity differently. We all know smoking causes cancer, but my grandparents were 2 pack a day smokers and never developed lung cancer. People react to each drug differently. I do think companies send drugs to market a little too fast sometimes and pick and choose the data.

We go through our cGMP training each year and the final thought that we always leave with our people is that we don’t work for the company, we work for the people that take our medications every day. In the long run it doesn’t make sense for our company to kill off or cripple the people we make medication for.

Give me a break!! You cite cafe pharma as a reliable source,.A potty mouth internet site. I sure hope you are not an individual who treats children,.. Wow that can be catostrophic!!