Japan Today Get your ticket to GaijinPot Expo 2024
health

New migraine drugs no better than cheap painkillers: big study

18 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2024 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

18 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

No way! Pharmaceutical companies promote expensive drugs that are no better than cheap, existing ones? Tell me it ain't so. Funny the ineffective ones have "pants" in their name. "Pants" is slang for rubbish.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

what, you don’t trust the honest, truthful pharmaceutical industry?

my vet said my dog needed a probiotic. a special one for dogs. it was over $50 with a prescription, but turned out to be the same thing as a $10 over the counter one for people.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

You misunderstand the drug approval process in the US, where the experts first review the drugs' benefits and risks.

You fail to understand what phase 4 trials are and their purpose, and do nothing to refute the fact that the only one failing to do their job is the FDA, not "the experts" in general.

The experts are infallible, even those paid by corporations over the years like the tobacco industry and fast food outlets. Their judgement is sincere and without bias as are their payments to the FDA etc.

Exactly what I am talking about on my first comment, people that believe global conspiracies pretend this (experts proving a profitable drug is not effective) even when it is actually happening.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Vets don't issue prescriptions for animals. Not covered.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The only thing that is surprising about all this is that it was reported by AFP and JT.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Triptans work well for me. I'm sorry to hear that there are no better drugs out there for migraines but it is good to know that the researchers stated that the newer medications are not any better if that is what they found out in their trials. Better than singing for big pharmaceuticals.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The "experts" got this wrong at first. Bolstered by pharma promotions.

The experts are the ones that studied the benefits and found there were none.

If anything the failure is of the FDA, an agency that have shown these kind of deficiencies before, but because of that puts a lot of emphasis on phase 4 trials to confirm or deny possible benefits of drugs recently approved.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

You're skipping over the phase 2 and phase 3 trials and the experts involvement.

Still wrong, phase 4 is the one you didn't know about and now trying to excuse yourself by still not even recognizing it exist.

Which follow the phase 0 trial--where the studies are performed by the pharma companies.

Which of course means this is not what the experts said about the drugs, they are more interested in the phase 4, specially when there are already options available for the public. Not the experts in general, just one single agency, which according to you failed in its duties.

For someone that likes to pretend to know what other people do for a living you don't seem to grasp how the industry works or how it is regulated.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The "experts" got this wrong at first. Bolstered by pharma promotions.

Nothing wrong, the "experts" in general have not got this wrong, one single agency, of one single country may have (according to you) but the obvious explanation is that they allowed the sell to conduct phase 4 trials to actually make a decision with enough data.

As you acknowledge, and with your not being part of the medical field,, the pharma companies performed the phase 0 studies.

Congratulations, you successfully defended something nobody refuted, and at the same time you failed to defend the claim that is mistaken.

Phase 4, which is irrelevant to this discussion, is conducted after the drug is already marketed and available to the general public

Finally you got the time to research this extremely relevant part of the discussion, the FDA with all the failures an agency can have can opt to allow Phase 4 trials to make a final decision, which means not even the agency itself would be at fault, much less the experts in general.

which makes sense as you are not in the industry.

So, are you going to explain now why do you claim to know what other commenters do for a living? or are you accepting this was just a baseless accusation?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"Yet people that believe impossible global conspiracies will tell you that no scientists will ever be able to find out any profitable drug is ineffective so they don't waste time even studying them, will never be able to publish a scientific study about those findings they are not getting, and the media will never pick up those impossible reports about the impossible findings that nobody is even looking for anyway."

True enough, virusrex. Can't deny what you say. There are disingenuous on all sides.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The only thing that is surprising about all this is that it was reported by AFP and JT.

Which is exactly what I commented about, bias and selective memory is what makes this surprising, in reality this is the rule and not the exception. The next time it happens some people will pretend it was the first time ever.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The experts are the ones that studied the benefits and found there were none.

You misunderstand the drug approval process in the US, where the experts first review the drugs' benefits and risks.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

You fail to understand what phase 4 trials are and their purpose, and do nothing to refute the fact that the only one failing to do their job is the FDA, not "the experts" in general.

No.

You're skipping over the phase 2 and phase 3 trials and the experts involvement.

Which follow the phase 0 trial--where the studies are performed by the pharma companies.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Still wrong, phase 4 is the one you didn't know about and now trying to excuse yourself by still not even recognizing it exist.

Wrong again.

Let's see my original comment:

The "experts" got this wrong at first. Bolstered by pharma promotions.

As you acknowledge, and with your not being part of the medical field,, the pharma companies performed the phase 0 studies.

Phase 4, which is irrelevant to this discussion, is conducted after the drug is already marketed and available to the general public--so logically phase 1, 2, and 3--where the experts perform their studies, take place before phase 4 trials.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

No way! Pharmaceutical companies promote expensive drugs that are no better than cheap,

Yet people that believe impossible global conspiracies will tell you that no scientists will ever be able to find out any profitable drug is ineffective so they don't waste time even studying them, will never be able to publish a scientific study about those findings they are not getting, and the media will never pick up those impossible reports about the impossible findings that nobody is even looking for anyway.

Yet here we are.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

The experts are infallible, even those paid by corporations over the years like the tobacco industry and fast food outlets. Their judgement is sincere and without bias as are their payments to the FDA etc.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The "experts" got this wrong at first. Bolstered by pharma promotions.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

You fail to understand what phase 4 trials are and their purpose, and do nothing to refute the fact that the only one failing to do their job is the FDA, not "the experts" in general.

You don't understand the experts role in getting these drugs approved in the first olace, which makes sense as you are not in the industry.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites