Julianne,
Uh, so what you are saying is that those who performed the studies
which would lead the FDA to make such statements, did not account for
your explanation in their study? If so, do you have evidence to prove
that their study did not account for your explanation?
Joe
>Uh, when you consider what kind of kids are prescribed these drugs, it sort
>of makes sense, doesn't it?
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>> FDA Warns of Drug-Suicide Risk In Kids
>> http://tinyurl.com/u0xv
Wendy - 08 Nov 2003 19:55 GMT
> Julianne,
> Uh, so what you are saying is that those who performed the studies
> which would lead the FDA to make such statements, did not account for
> your explanation in their study? If so, do you have evidence to prove
> that their study did not account for your explanation?
The study reported findings. Interpretation is up to the individual
listening to the findings. If suicidal kids commit suicide while on a
drug designed to treat their depression there is room to consider all
sorts of reasons why that might happen.
The problem with taking this sort of indictment in a vacuum is that even
imperfect drugs may well be the best hope of saving suicidal
children. It's difficult to do a study control where you set it up so
that some people are NOT treated with the understanding that a significant
percentage of them will then commit suicide. But without adequate
controls you just can't say whether the suicide risk is less, equal or
greater than if they didn't receive this drug treatment.
So, back to Jayjay's question: what's your point? Do you expect every
product to work perfectly in all situations? Do you expect full
disclosure of the suitability of every product to every person? Do you
expect a 100% paternalistic society where you have no responsibility to
weigh risks and make judgments for yourself? That seems to be your
overall focus in these threads.
-- Wendy