EMAIL
PRINT
3 COMMENTSShare and save this post:
Also in Health and Wellness
Conservatives' Dangerous Plan for Health Care
Roger Hickey
Income and Education Are Bigger Determinants of Health Than Insurance, Report Shows
Maggie Mahar
Is Chinese Pulse Diagnosis the Key to Preventive Medicine?
Carol Greenhouse
Progressive Voter Guide to Health Care
Cancer at 23: How Health Insurance Failed Me
Carey Purcell
Some state legislators are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
They've seen state outlays for controversial antipsychotics like Zyprexa grow as much as twelvefold since 2000, with a corresponding growth in side effects like weight gain, blood sugar changes and cholesterol problems.
In March, Alaska won a $15 million settlement from Eli Lilly in a suit to recoup medical costs generated by Medicaid patients who developed diabetes while taking Zyprexa.
Last year Bristol-Myers Squibb settled a federal suit for $515 million charging that it illegally hawked the antipsychotic Abilify to children and the elderly, bilking taxpayers.
Now Idaho, Washington, Montana, Connecticut, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, Arkansas and Texas are taking pharma to court over its antipsychotic prescrib-athon that has left the poor and mentally ill in even worse health and legions of children and elderly in chemical straightjackets for treatment of conditions they didn't even have.
The atypical antipsychotics Zyprexa, Risperdal, Seroquel, Abilify and Geodon can be thought of as the credit swaps of the pharmaceutical world.
New with no track record, risky, barely understood and capable of making a lot of money before their long-term effects are apparent, atypical antipsychotics, like credit swaps, could only be sold with friends in high regulatory places and the help of the U.S. taxpayer.
Though atypical antipsychotics were developed to treat schizophrenia and later approved for bipolar disorder (Risperdal is also approved for autism-related irritability in children), pharma lost no time in marketing them for non-FDA-approved uses like ADHD and conduct disorders, dementia, sleep disorders, depression and simple mood swings, netting $8,000 a year per person, usually from state coffers.
When the second-generation atypical antipsychotics debuted in the 1990s, they seemed to lack the "typical" side effects of first-generation antipsychotics like Thorazine and Haldol, such as the movement disorder tardive dyskinesia. But soon further "clinical testing," known as selling it to the public while the patent is hot, revealed that atypicals cause the same side effects as first-generation antipsychotics and more: increased mortality in elderly patients, suicide risk, hyperglycemia, diabetes mellitus and the hematological disorders leukopenia, neutropenia and agranulocytosis.
In fact, Seroquel and Abilify have not one black box warning but two.
Nor do the atypical antipsychotics work better than predecessors.
A National Institute of Mental Health study of 119 children ages 8 to 19 with psychotic symptoms published in September found Risperdal and Zyprexa were no more effective than the older antipsychotic Moban -- but caused such obesity that a safety panel ordered the children off the drugs.
See more stories tagged with: health, health care, big pharma, antipsychotics
Martha Rosenberg is a columnist and cartoonist who frequently writes about the impact of the pharmaceutical, food and gun industries on public health. A former medical copywriter, her work has appeared in the Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, as well as on the BBC and in the original National Lampoon.
No comments:
Post a Comment