Documents Link More Deaths to Energy Drinks

CSPI Asks FDA for Labels Warning of Heart Attack, Convulsion, and Other Adverse Reactions Linked to Energy Drinks

Documents obtained from the Food and Drug Administration show that since late 2012, 17 previously unreported deaths have been linked to the controversial caffeinated beverages known as energy drinks. According to adverse event reports collected by the agency since 2004, a total of 34 deaths have now been linked to energy drinks. Of those, 22 deaths have been linked to 5-Hour Energy, 11 deaths have been linked to Monster, and one death, a first, has been linked to Rockstar. Excluding a suicide, these deaths include the 17 deaths previously disclosed by the agency and reported on by the New York Times and other media outlets in the fall of 2012. And these deaths don’t necessarily include other deaths reported in the media, such as that of 16-year-old Lanna Hamman of Arizona, who died on vacation on June 14 in Mexico after consuming several cans of Red Bull. And, of course, some deaths might have been caused by energy drinks without doctors making that association.

The reports do not prove that energy drinks actually caused the deaths. Two years ago the FDA told Congress that it was investigating the reports that it had received, but it has not yet released a report to Congress or the public.

In addition to the newly disclosed deaths, 56 previously undisclosed injuries have been reported to the FDA through its adverse event reporting system. These and other serious events resulted in 54 hospitalizations, as recorded in the adverse event reports, with consumers experiencing high blood pressure, convulsions, heart attacks, and other problems after drinking energy drinks. The documents were obtained under Freedom of Information Act requests by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and a lawyer representing the parents of a Maryland teenager who died after consuming two 24-ounce Monster beverages.

“As I see in my medical practice, energy drinks are clearly causing symptomatic arrhythmias,” said Dr. Stacy Fisher, director of complex heart diseases at University of Maryland School of Medicine. “These new reports of deaths and other injuries raise the level of concern about the adverse effects of energy drinks.”

CSPI today asked FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg to require warning labels on energy drink containers notifying consumers of the risk of heart attack, convulsion, and other adverse reaction to energy drinks. As a further precaution, the group asked the agency to require manufacturers to lower caffeine levels in the drinks to 0.02 percent, or 71 milligrams per 12 ounces—the maximum amount the FDA considers safe in cola-style beverages. Also, CSPI asked the agency to require careful studies on the health effects of the various chemical and herbal ingredients (such as taurine, glucuronolactone, carnitine, ginseng, ginkgo biloba, milk thistle extract, and guarana seed) used in energy drinks and their possible interactions with caffeine.

 

Warning labels such as this one on energy drink containers would inform consumers of their dangerous–and possibly deadly–risks.

“How many deaths will it take to get the FDA to protect consumers from energy drinks, with their high levels of caffeine and untested herbal and chemical ingredients?” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Since the first batch of adverse event reports became public, the death count has essentially doubled, with dozens more injured. Yet the FDA is just standing by—no public warnings, no regulations, no testing required—nothing.“

Besides the health risks posed by the combination of caffeine and supplement ingredients in energy drinks, some products are also high in sugars. One 8.4-ounce of non-diet Red Bull contains 110 calories from almost 7 teaspoons of added sugars, a 16-ounce can of Monster has 200 calories from 13.5 teaspoons of added sugars, and a 24-ounce can of Rockstar has 420 calories from 23 teaspoons of added sugars. To put those numbers into context, the American Heart Association recommends that men consume no more than nine teaspoons of added sugars per day and that women consume no more than six teaspoons. Sugar-sweetened beverages promote weight gain, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other health problems.

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »

What is EMTALA?

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/florida-law/hospital-liability-the-federal-emergency-medical-treatment-and-l.html

When I chronic pain pt ends up in a ER with a “pain crisis” .. if the pt is denied any treatment at all… is the healthcare professional/hospital in violation of the  The Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act  determining if a valid (EMC) emergency medical condition is can be a thin line and probably is a good reason for audio/video recording of what is say/done or not said/not done. To document if the determination that a EMC does or does not exist is based on FACTS and not personal biases of the healthcare professional.  Besides the possibility of violating this Federal law, there is also the possibility that the pt is denied care and their insurance and the pt is charged as if care was provided… which could be considered insurance fraud.  If the pt is not aware of these laws, they will be discharged/leave the hospital without realizing that they have been denied care that Federal Law guarantees them and may end up paying out of pocket (deductible/co-pays) for charges that should not have been incurred.

Hospital Liability & The Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act in Florida

Imagine taking a loved one to the hospital for an emergency only to be turned away because you cannot afford the treatment. You know that without immediate medical care he or she may not survive. Can a hospital refuse to treat a patient simply based on that person’s ability to pay? Luckily, federal law known as “EMTALA” prohibits hospitals from doing so. This article provides an overview of EMTALA in Florida.                                

What is EMTALA?

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, EMTALA, is known as the “anti-dumping” statute for its ban on patient dumping. Congress passed EMTALA in 1986 in response to a number of widely reported horror stories about emergency rooms turning away seriously ill or injured patients who had no insurance and no money to pay for treatment. Prior to EMTALA, there was no requirement that hospitals treat everyone who came to the emergency room and, in many states, hospitals were not held responsible for damages caused by their refusal to treat patients. A hospital could choose not to treat a patient who lacked insurance or enough money to pay for the required medical treatment. In some cases, patients died or suffered serious injuries because of a transfer or delay in treatment.

Does EMTALA Apply to All Hospitals?

EMTALA applies to all hospitals that have emergency rooms and participate in the Medicare program. Since almost all hospitals, public and private, receive Medicare funds, nearly all hospitals are covered by EMTALA.

What Actions Must a Hospital Take Under EMTALA?

EMTALA imposes two essential obligations on hospitals:

1. When a person seeks treatment at a hospital emergency room, the hospital must provide an appropriate medical screening examination (MSE) to determine whether an emergency medical condition (EMC exists). Generally, an EMC is a medical condition where failure to provide immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in serious harm to bodily functions, serious damage of a bodily organ or part, or serious risk to the health of an individual and/or unborn child.The hospital does not have an obligation under EMTALA to treat the patient if after the MSE the hospital determines there is no EMC.
2. If the MSE reveals an EMC, the hospital must treat the patient and “stabilize” the medical condition before transferring the patient to another hospital or discharging the patient from the emergency room. Under EMTALA, “stabilized” means that no significant worsening of the patient’s medical condition is likely to result because of a transfer or discharge. In the circumstance of a woman in active labor, stabilization means the woman has delivered the child and placenta. An unstabilized patient may be transferred if the hospital cannot further stabilize the patient and a different facility has the necessary treatment. Hospitals must follow very specific procedures for such transfers.

What If a Hospital Does Not Follow EMTALA?

If a person is injured because a hospital did not provide an MSE or because it did not stabilize the patient before release or transfer, the patient may sue the hospital for money damages based on a violation of EMTALA. Suing a hospital under EMTALA is different than suing for state medical malpractice. EMTALA is not a substitute for suing for a wrong diagnosis or improper performance of a medical procedure.  

Generally, if a patient is properly given a MSE but misdiagnosed, the hospital has followed EMTALA but may be responsible for damages under state malpractice law. However, an inadequate MSE may still violate EMTALA. Many courts have concluded that an appropriate MSE is one that the hospital would have offered to any other patient with the same symptoms, regardless of whether the patient was insured or could pay for the medical screening. Therefore, a hospital violates the MSE requirement of EMTALA only when individuals who are perceived to have the same medical condition receive different treatment.

Similarly, EMTALA’s stabilization requirement is intended only to regulate a hospital’s care of a patient immediately after admitting the patient for emergency care. Once a patient is admitted to the hospital and placed under the care of physicians, state medical malpractice law, not EMTALA, covers the actions of hospital and doctors.

What Does a Patient Have to Prove in a Lawsuit?

In a lawsuit, the patient must establish that the hospital treated him or her differently from other patients. Some courts have determined that in order to prove he or she did not receive an appropriate MSE, the patient must show there was an improper motive on the part of the hospital. That means, the decision as to what type of screening to provide was motivated by improper factors such as the inability to pay, race, or the sex of the patient. The majority of courts, however, no longer apply the “bad motive” requirement. The United States Supreme Court has ruled there is no such bad-motive requirement to establish that a hospital failed to adequately stabilize a patient before transferring or discharging.

Is There a Penalty for Violating EMTALA?

Depending on the facts of the case, hospitals or physicians that violate EMTALA are subject to fines and may lose Medicare provider agreements.

If you are concerned about how you were screened or treated at a hospital emergency room, you should seek the advice of an experienced attorney.

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »

How foes quickly stymied a Texas bill restricting painkillers

http://www.statesman.com/news/lifestyles/medical/how-foes-quickly-stymied-a-texas-bill-restricting-/nsZSc/

This is a good example if voters/constituents start voicing against some proposed bill/law before it gains traction.  This is another good example why DEA chose the time frame it did to reschedule Kratom… no incumbent President running for reelection.. it is after Labor Day when all of Congress is focused on getting reelected and the DEA elected to have an EMERGENCY RULE CHANGE .. to avoid the public comment period.  EMERGENCY RULE CHANGE on a herbal substance that has been used for centuries and the poison control center has had 600 phone calls over FIVE YEARS.. and claim there has been a TOTAL OF 30 DEATHS reported WORLD WIDE… about the same number of kids/baby that die from being accidentally left in a closed/hot car – EVERY YEAR IN THE USA.  Unlike trying to UNWIND something like the CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE ACT that has been on the books for 46 YEARS and there is a substantial bureaucratic infrastructure in place with tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs depending on the continuation … and .. you are going to get a lot of push back… by all those bureaucrats whose jobs will be put risk.

State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione wanted to do something about pill mills.

The Southlake Republican had heard about phony pain management clinics dispensing opioids to people who didn’t medically need them, knew it cost the state money to deal with the problem and sympathized with people hooked on these drugs. So he decided to tackle the issue through legislation.

In March 2015, several months after the last legislative session had begun, Capriglione filed a bill that would have banned pharmacies from dispensing more than 10 days worth of opioid painkillers in a 60-day period unless a doctor filled out a form granting the patient an exemption. Pill mill doctors would never fill out those forms, Capriglione figured, and that would separate the good physicians from the bad.

Deborah Cannon

State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, speaks with a colleague at the House chamber at the Capitol during the 2015 legislative session.

“I filed the bill, and it was about 10 minutes before I started getting some push-back,” Capriglione said.

Individual doctors, pharmacists and about a half-dozen pharmaceutical companies quickly contacted him to register their complaints, saying the requirement was just more red tape that would cause them more work, he said. Capriglione said he couldn’t remember who approached him since it was more than 18 months ago.

Instead, he remembers them saying, the state should focus on improving a Texas database designed to identify physicians who overprescribe opioids and patients who doctor-shop to get them.

At the time, responsibility for keeping that database was being moved from Department of Public Safety to the state pharmacy board.

Capriglione, who said he was surprised by the strong response, backed off. He says he wasn’t intimated by the lobbyists, but he hadn’t anticipated the blowback and wasn’t prepared to fight back so late in the session.

“It didn’t affect me at all,” he said. “It’s clear what their intent was.”

So he agreed to let the database changes play out. Capriglione says he plans to check in with the pharmacy board this fall to see what effect, if any, the database has had in curbing the problem.

“If it’s working, fine,” he said. “If it’s not, if I don’t see some actual evidence … then I may consider refiling the bill.”

Records show that Capriglione, first elected in 2012, has received a total of $5,000 in campaign contributions from the Pain Care Forum.

Pain Care Forum in Texas

Top 10 recipients of contributions from members of the Pain Care Forum, which includes Pfizer, Merck and allied companies:

U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville: $292,000

U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Ennis: $210,000

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas: $203,750

U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Dallas: $197,250

U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands: $184,250

U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston: $147,200

U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo: $85,900

U.S. Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Plano: $84,250

Gov. Greg Abbott, R: $75,500

Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound: $74,500

Politics of Pain: Texas report

• From 2006 to 2015, Texas leaders received $4.4 million in campaign contributions from the Pain Care Forum, a national coalition of advocacy groups and pharmaceutical companies, such as Merck or Pfizer, that meets monthly to discuss opioid-related issues.
• In 2015, Texas had 63 lobbyists representing members of the Pain Care Forum.
• Legislative efforts to battle the opioid abuse problem in Texas met with mixed results in 2015. A bill allowing pharmacists to prescribe the anti-overdose drug Naloxone passed. A bill that gave some legal protection to drug users seeking medical help for an overdose victim was vetoed.
• According to a 2014 interim report by the Texas House Committee on Public Health, the mortality rate for overdoses in Texas between the years 1999 and 2010 increased by 78 percent.
• That same report states that Texas ranks 44th in the nation for drug overdose death rates in the nation and 33rd for highest opioid pain relief prescribing rates.
• Because of reporting issues — death certificates don’t always reveal the drugs involved in overdoses — it is impossible to know exactly how many people in Texas are dying from opioids. In 2013, for example, 622 deaths reported across Texas were blamed on opioids — mostly painkillers, based on death certificate data. But 798 prescription drug-related deaths were recorded by local medical examiners that year in just 17 of the state’s 254 counties, a joint investigation between the American-Statesman and the Houston Chronicle found.

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

St. Louis on pace to beat 10 year heroin death record

ST. LOUIS (KTVI) – Despite years of stories about the horrors of heroin, the City of St. Louis is on pace to see the highest heroin overdose death total in a decade.

The DEA warned in April that agents were seeing the deadliest strain yet, hitting the streets back. It did not stop people from buying heroin and we saw a spike in deaths.

St. Louis police have reported finding much of the heroin mixed with fentanyl, which is a synthetic opioid intended for cancer patients.

DEA Special Agent in Charge James Shroba warned on April 8 that his agents were seeing drug traffickers tweaking the chemical compound of fentanyl.

“Hundreds—if not thousands—of times more potent than heroin or other opioids; this will, there will certainly be tragic consequences with these,” Shroba said.

Right after he said that, St. Louis had its worst month this year, with 24 accidental heroin deaths. So far this the year, the total number of heroin overdose deaths has reached 121. The city saw 136 heroin overdose deaths in 2015.

Meanwhile, St. Louis County has already equaled last year’s total, with 26 overdose deaths to date.

As an example of how deadly fentanyl can be, the DEA said an amount the size of a sugar packet could contain one thousand fatal doses.

Filed under: General Problems | 2 Comments »

Lawyers: The unelected legislators of our rights

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-judiciary/296437-lawyers-the-unelected-legislators-of-our-rights

Millions of people in the United States believe that our systems of government and justice are rigged, and they are right. What most people may not realize, however, is that their individual rights — rights supposedly protected by the Constitution of the United States – are being taken away by the very institution sworn to uphold those rights.

Our elected representatives rely on huge sums of money to be elected and then re-elected. Without a steady stream of campaign funds, they have little to no hope of holding their seats. Most of this money is provided by large corporations, through their contributions to political action committees.

This system leaves all our representatives, congressmen, senators, and even the president, beholden to the large corporations — the very corporations they are supposed to regulate. It is also important to be understanding FINRA arbitration to know how to resolve the security related disputes.

The loser in this equation is the average American. Congress no longer fights for consumers and average people the way it is supposed to. We have to look no further than the overall approval rating for both parties, which hovers around 18%. You don’t have to be a math whiz to figure out that this means that a whopping 82% of Americans don’t approve of the job being done by the very representatives that we elected.

So who are the ones fighting every day to keep the corporations from smashing the rest into the ground and running roughshod over the very people who elected them?

Trial lawyers. Yes, trial lawyers. The trial lawyers, who the Chamber of Commerce, the attack dog for the large corporations, spends millions of dollars to attack and belittle.

Large corporations are using corporate money to take away many of our rights. The most important right that is being taken away is the right for a jury of our peers to decide civil trials, because corporations have pushed disputes from the courts into arbitration.

Consider that in 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that AT&T could not be sued for  allegedly misleading customers by promising unlimited data that could slow down if you used 3GB or more in a given month. Why?

Because affected subscribers all signed contracts allowing AT&T to send disputes to individual arbitration. In other words, your right to a class action or trial by jury was, in essence, contracted away – buried in the fine print of a massive contract. Most consumers are likely not even aware that they’ve given up this right. Without class action and the right to trial, a company can cheat millions of people out of two dollars a month.

On the surface, arbitration might sound like a good idea. It lessens the workload of the courts and judges and lightens up the docket. However, when a judge hears your case in front of a jury of your peers, you don’t have to pay that judge’s bill at the end of the trial. His or her salary is already paid.

In arbitration, you not only have to pay the hourly rate of an arbiter, you likely have to pay the hourly rate of three arbiters. And they will most likely be chosen by the corporation you are suing! The cost of a one-week arbitration can easily cost tens of thousands of dollars, all of which YOU are liable to pay!  

Or how about those of us who take pharmaceutical drugs?  Most people are not aware that (1) your insurance company can refuse to allow you a name-brand pharmaceutical and can force you to take a generic; and (2) if the generic medication causes you severe harm, you have no legal recourse because the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that a generic drug manufacturer is immune from any lawsuit for damages caused the by the drug.

Once again, giant pharmaceutical corporations make millions of dollars of donations to a political candidate, and then receive favorable rulings from our nation’s highest court, effectively shutting down your legal rights under the Constitution – and most likely shuts them down without your knowledge. [See, Mutual Pharmaceutical Co v. Karen Bartlett, 570 U.S. __ (2013); Pliva v. Mensing, 564 U.S. __ (2011)] 

Article VII of the Constitution of the United States guarantees all American citizens the right to a trial by jury. “In Suits at common law where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.”

This Constitutional right should remain sacred in our justice system, and should not, under any circumstances, be for sale. All cases should be decided using the rules of law and the rules of evidence — by you, your neighbors and your fellow citizens.

If you have a cell phone, if you rent a car, if you have health insurance, or even auto insurance, and you’ve signed the lengthy, hard-to-read, hard-to-understand contract that accompanies these items, chances are you have given up your Constitutional right to a trial by a jury of your peers, and have unwittingly agreed to binding arbitration for any potential legal claim.   

Do you know where your elected representatives stand on the issue of mandatory arbitration, or on protecting your Constitutional rights?  If not, you need to find out. Congressmen and senators will almost uniformly support it — even though their job is to support YOU! They have been told by the corporations that fund them that arbitration will eliminate frivolous lawsuits, keep the courts unclogged, and prevent needless legal fees. But what it really does is eliminate your Constitutional rights.

The only thing standing between you and corporations bulldozing your rights are trial lawyers. We fight every day to keep the wealthy and the giant corporations from rigging the system beyond repair. Take a moment to find out your elected officials’ positions on these very important issues, and vote accordingly!  

Mike Burg is the founding shareholder in the law firm Burg Simpson Eldredge Hersh Jardine PC, of which former Senator Alan K. Simpson is a partner. He has tried over 185 cases, and his clients have received settlements, judgments, and verdicts in excess of $500 million. Mr. Burg is the author of Trial By Fire: One Man’s Battle to End Corporate Greed and Save Lives. He can be reached via email at gclement@burgsimpson.com.

Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »

There are few American left alive from when the seeds of the war on drugs was started with The Harrison Narcotic Act 1914

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

Whether it makes a difference or not, the Democrats were in the majority in both houses of Congress and Woodrow Wilson (D) signed it into law.  The driving force behind the law was racism and bigotry.   Three years later our “all knowing” court system ruled that being a opiate addict was a CRIME and no longer a disease. This was the turning point for prescribers to treat/maintain addicts… it became illegal and prescribers were threatened with prison for doing so.  This is where our bureaucracy created the “black drug market” to satisfy a certain per-cent of our population  demand for opiates

Several decades passed before the bureaucrats decided to “up their game”. Many of us have watched since the Controlled Substance Act was signed into law in 1970… the “screws” keep getting tightened on those who have a valid medical necessity for taking controlled substances.  Once again it was a Democratic controlled Congress that passed this law, which was signed into law by Pres Nixon (R)

Every succeeding administration and Congress seems to have put their own “additional touches” and/or allowed the DEA to have their “own head” in determining what, how, when they did what they wanted to do… reinterpreting the 1970 law to meet the agency’s agenda on any particular day.

It may be just a coincidence, but under the current administration, it would seem that the original war on drugs has turned into a war on pt and healthcare providers. Whipped up into almost a frenzy.

Some believe that writing to your congressional representative will get their attention, but how many have received letters from different members of Congress that have nearly identical paragraphs ?

Years ago, I received a reply to a letter to my Federal Senator.. first first was agreeing with me being in favor of the issue I had sent a letter about and the next day I received a letter from the same office agreeing with me being AGAINST the issue I had sent the original letter about.  This was not from a novice Senator, but one who had been in office for a couple of terms.  At that point is when I became very skeptical/cynical of our bureaucratic system.

Over the years, I have went to DC on numerous occasions with organized legislative days with different national associations that I have belonged to, as well as organized legislative days at the state level.   I have even went as far as meeting with my Federal Representative in a one to one meeting when they are back in their district.

Time and again, they all sound emphatic and understanding, but even following up with their Legislative Assistants (LA)… things tend to “drop off the edge”  and communication ceases.

Let’s face it… the only things that the members of Congress are concerned about is votes and getting donations to their re-election fund.  Lobbyists spend NINE MILLION/day – 7 days a week on Congress… that is abt $17,000.00 per member of Congress PER DAY.  Some claim that businesses that hire lobbyists get back $10 for every dollar invested in lobbying Congress.

DC is not the center of power to try and influence members of Congress.. members of Congress are back in their district several times a year… willing to make appts for a one to one meeting and/or having scheduled community meetings where they can be reached and a constituent can express their concerns.

There was a survey posted on one of the on line chronic pain newsletter that stated that 90% of the families with a chronic pain pts… were struggling financially because one spouse could not work and/or the cost of therapy puts a strain on the family’s finances.

This would suggest that trying to get chronic painers to come to a organized event some distance from the home, is probably futile because of the typical family’s poor financial status.

The chronic pain community’s most viable option is their ability to control who gets into office….by using their voting power… last presidential election.. there was 126 total votes cast… 5 million separated winner from loser.

How some of those from the “Republican establishment” have reacted to the nomination of Trump is very telling… unless one of “the establishment” gets nominated… they are not going to support the party that they are suppose to belong to… so it would appear that a member of the establishment getting into office  is all that is important… doesn’t matter which party they belong to… because they can only be in office for 4 to 8 yrs max.

Many forget that Congress operates on a seniority basis.. unless the entire seniority structure gets tossed out… there are enough in the middle of the seniority structure has been around long enough to have been indoctrinated in how “things are suppose to happen” and will pick up the baton and it will be back to business as usual.

Chronic painers don’t have to travel or incur any expenses to MAKE A DIFFERENCE… register to vote by mail and vote by mail… unless the chronic painer can’t afford a couple of stamps.. there is really no excuse … not to vote….

99% of those in Congress who run for reelection .. historically suggests that they will get reelected… causing a total disruption of this assured reelection will grant the chronic pain community POWER AND INFLUENCE.

We are trying to undo something that has 100+ yrs in its creation..  “flash in the pan” demonstrations/rally will DO NOTHING… the chronic pain community has to act like a SNIPER..  take ONE SHOT and TAKE THEM OUT !

Filed under: General Problems | 3 Comments »

This Should Superbug You

https://www.propublica.org/article/srsly-this-should-superbug-you

A new Reuters investigation shows that 15 years after drug-resistant infections were declared a “grave threat,” the situation is far worse, and the country has no system in place to track the tens of thousands of deaths that occur each year.

TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PREVENTABLE DEATHS each year…  Nothing NEWSWORTHY here… just move along… no where near a EPIDEMIC LEVEL …. not like the total of  30 WORLD WIDE DEATHS from KRATOM…

You have the flu. You also have an important deadline coming up, and the slave-driving editor at the non-profit investigative newsroom where you work is breathing down your butterfly collar. You have to get it together, or risk your editor trying to write much more incoherent things into your story to get it done in time. To make the deadline, you pop some penicillin … Ok, joke’s on you, because the flu is a virus, not a bacterial infection, and you just took an antibiotic. (Don’t do that.) But let’s say you had an infection, so you take an antibiotic to get back to work. While you’re convalescing, evolution is happening. A few of the microbes the antibiotic are attacking happen to have some gene mutation that allows them to survive the attack. The surviving enemy microbes spawn a new population, all of which have the gene mutation for laughing in the face of your puny antibiotic. Now multiply that scenario by millions of people taking antibiotics when they probably don’t really need them, and you begin to understand how we’ve created “superbug” infections via the overuse of antibiotics. A new Reuters investigation shows that 15 years after drug-resistant infections were declared a “grave threat,” the situation is far worse, and the country has no system in place to track the tens of thousands of deaths that occur each year. (Editors, however, manage to track exactly how long I, I mean you, procrastinate.) Your five Ws:

What is the death toll?

What else?

The words that CDC officials used with Reuters to describe the agency’s death toll estimate are truly confidence inspiring: “jerry rig,” “ballpark figure,” “a searchlight in the dark attempt;” and, my personal favorite because I love 19th Century art, from Michael Craig, the CDC’s senior adviser for antibiotic resistance coordination and strategy, “an impressionist painting rather than something that is much more technical.” Excuse you, Mike, do you know how much technical skill it took to create Waterloo Bridge, Effect of Fog? … Art before science, I bet Mr. Craig was a star pupil in Miss Jean Brodie’s class.

Why?

… are drug-resistant infections often left off of death certificates? According to Reuters: a) Doctors frequently aren’t well-trained in filling out the appropriate forms – or in the importance of doing so – and often don’t wait the few days it would take after a patient passes away for a lab to confirm the infection. b) “Counting deaths is tantamount to documenting your own failures,” exposing a doctor and hospital to risk of legal action and loss of insurance reimbursement.

What can be done?

When bacteria becomes resistant, you have to develop a new drug. That’s why people are dying, until you develop something new, you’re screwed. Right now, doctors typically bombard patients with different existing antibiotics hoping one will blast out the bug – and worrying about when none will.

What is the bright side?

Well, at least the FDA just banned from over-the-counter soaps ingredients that cause bacterial resistance. Antibacterial soap-makers could not provide data to show that any of 19 ingredients they were using were safe and effective.

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »

FDA Rejects Eliquis Antidote

If you start bleeding when using one of the new NOAC (New Oral Anti-cogulants)..  Isn’t it reassuring that if you start to HEMORRHAGE… 79% of the pts will get excellent/good blood clotting within TWELVE HOURS.. Maybe the other 21% JUST BLEEDS TO DEATH ?

Filed under: General Problems | Leave a Comment »

White House Manual Details How to Deal With Protesters

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/21/AR2007082101662.html

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »

Camel Smoker John Boehner’s New Job: Tobacco Lobbyist

Former House Speaker joins tobacco company board of directors

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pulmonology/Smoking/60264

Former House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is one of two new board members for the tobacco giant Reynolds American (RAI), the company announced Thursday.

In a press statement, Thomas C. Wajnert, who chairs Reynolds’ board of directors noted that move comes “as RAI gains momentum in its strategy to transform the tobacco industry.”

The appointment comes just days after an African American health group made a public appeal to President Obama to move on a long-stalled ban on menthol cigarettes, charging that tobacco companies have effectively targeted black youth and communities with menthol-flavored products.

Reynolds’ markets Newport, which is America’s top selling menthol cigarette brand. The company also makes Camel, which is the brand the heavy-smoking Boehner reportedly favors.

Boehner, who left Congress last year, will serve on the RAI board’s corporate governance, nominating and sustainability committee.

A spokesman for Boehner told The Wall Street Journal Thursday that the former House Speaker looks forward to helping RAI achieve its objective of “speeding the decline in tobacco use among young people and reducing the harm caused by smoking.”

In a strongly worded statement, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids’ president Matthew L. Myers rejected that claim saying, “It is truly absurd that tobacco giant Reynolds American and former House Speaker John Boehner, who was elected to Reynolds’ board of directors today, would express a commitment to “speeding the decline in tobacco use among young people,”Myers said. “Their records show the exact opposite. Reynolds’ announcement pairs the tobacco company with the most egregious record of marketing to kids and a politician with a long record of fighting policies to reduce youth tobacco use.”

Myers noted that in the same week Boehner was appointed to the RAI board, The Wall Street Journal published a story highlighting efforts by the company to market Newport cigarettes to young people with coupons for cigarettes at just $1 per pack and “Newport Pleasure Lounges” at music festivals.

Myers said RAI and other tobacco companies are also spending millions to fight ballot initiatives to significantly increase cigarette taxes in California, Colorado, and North Dakota.

“Reynolds, Altria/Philip Morris and other tobacco companies have already spent about $60 million to run deceptive ads against these initiatives,” he said. “Reynolds is opposing these initiatives for the very same reason it is offering cheap Newports: It knows that increasing the price of cigarettes is one of the most effective ways to reduce smoking, especially among kids.”

On Tuesday, the black advocacy group African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council (AATCLC) held a press conference in Washington D.C. asking the Obama Administration to act to ban menthol cigarettes from the market. The NAACP, which had long opposed such a ban, also recently voted to support efforts to restrict the sale of menthol cigarettes.

In an interview with MedPage Today, AATCLC co-chairman Phillip Gardiner, DrPH, said tobacco companies have historically provided economic support to groups like the NAACP and the National Urban League to essentially buy their silence.

“Things have changed some in the last few years, but, unfortunately since Day 1 the tobacco industry has invested heavily in African American civic, religious, sports and political organizations,” he said.

Filed under: General Problems | 1 Comment »