Why not say that any dangerous pharmaceutical is purely a public health issue...

[Boojatta]

and should not be addressed by the law, even if the pharmaceutical is manufactured and sold by a big, profitable company?

After all, a particular pharmaceutical may be beneficial for some users. Why should the fact that some of users experience dangerous side-effects prevent other users from using the pharmaceutical or prevent the pharmaceutical from being sold?

[Boojatta]

1. Kick

[TZ]

2. Most pharmaceuticals

if not used properly are dangerous. Most have side effects that a certain percentage of the population will experience.
However, if the drug is found to have excessive dangerous side effects that could in theory be passed on (such as birth defects) than its in everyone's best interest to either pull it or severely curtail it. Think about also how much worse a strain that could put on the system if no dangerous drug were ever pulled. Think about what damage a lot of vaccines that actually infects the patient could do (it has happened rarely in the past)
Also it would NOT encourage the pharma companies to keep strict quality control. I can tell you, the threat of FDA action has saved a lot of grief, believe it or not..Most people don't know the horror stories of companies/studies the FDA has squashed.

[Boojatta]

3. Some people say that recreational drug use should be treated

as purely a public health issue and shouldn't be addressed by law. I'm wondering whether or not their arguments apply to other drugs.

[High Plains]

4. I'm not sure what you're getting at...

If you're saying, treat recreational and medical drug use the same way, as a public health issue, I say sounds good. Decriminalize or legalize it all. No law enforcement involvement, except when others laws are violated, as with alcohol, for example.

If you're saying allow the sale of drugs with known horrible side effects, say thalidomide, as a classic example, because they might benefit someone else? Hmmm...I could see arguments either way on that. If drug X might cure you of terminal disease, but is known to cause another fatal condition in Y% of the people who take it, should the state make it impossible for you to obtain it legally?

Interesting question. I guess you try to find the balance between overall harms and benefits associated with the drug. Ideally, you would then regulate them more or less stringently according to that assessment, but our current system of drug controls isn't based on anything remotely resembling a balanced assessment of each drug...

[flashl]

7. This may help ...

America's Love-Hate Relationship with Drugs

Many prescription drugs have effects similar to those of illegal drugs. But we still view some users as criminals -- the others as patients.

Author and science writer Michael Pollan observed the following about Americans' illegal-psychiatric drug hypocrisy: "Historians of the future will wonder how a people possessed of such a deep faith in the power of drugs also found themselves fighting a war against certain other drugs with not-dissimilar powers. ... We hate drugs. We love drugs. Or could it be that we hate the fact that we love drugs?"

When we recognize that psychotropic prescription drugs are chemically similar to illegal psychotropic drugs, and that all of these substances are used for similar purposes, we see two injustices. First, we see the classification of millions of Americans as criminals for using certain drugs, while millions of others, using essentially similar drugs for similar purposes, are seen as patients. Second, we see a denial of those societal realities that compel increasing numbers of Americans to use psychotropic drugs.

It is politically -- and economically -- incorrect for the corporate press, dependent on Big Pharma advertising revenue, to compare psychiatric drugs with illegal drugs. However, the psychiatry drug textbook A Primer of Drug Action notes that individuals who have used cocaine have difficulty distinguishing between the subjective effects of cocaine and dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine) when both are administered intravenously. The amphetamines Dexedrine and Adderall, besides being prescribed for ADHD, are used by many college kids, truck drivers, and others to pull all-nighters.

Alter Net

[gatorboy]

5. You know how much time is spent on testing these meds for side effects? 6 weeks.

This is deplorable.

[ManiacJoe]

6. That does not sound reasonable.

Can you document the 6-week claim?