Posted by Marty on June 30, 2008, at 17:31:10
In reply to Re: That's very interesting, considering..., posted by WickedGirl on June 30, 2008, at 16:09:53
> Oh its a conspiracy Racer. For sure. The >government and FDA are determined to prevent any >drug that actually enhances the libido in any >way (not just whether a man can get it up mind >you) from making it to market here. They will >say and do anything to prevent that.
I don't know if 'conspiracy' is the good term to describe what happened but... Servier, the maker of Amineptine and Tianeptine (note: SURVECTOR is the trademark name of Amineptine, not the maker name), wanted to market Tianeptine (Stablon) for other disorder than depression/anxiety at the beginning. It was that good for the first label they choose and wasn't approvable for that in any decent country. By the time they choose to sell it for depression/anxiety (end 80's) their PATENT WAS EXPIRED and so there was little money to be made with it in the USA especially considering the money it takes to play the FDA games (clinical trials etc). What makes look the whole thing like a conspiracy is that it's TRUE that the FDA wasn't interested in having this drug approved: FDA is not only interested in protecting the health of the Americans, they are also interested in PROTECTING THE US MARKET AND THE AMERICAN PLAYER IN THIS MARKET. Servier is an european bigpharm company, not an American one. The fact is that the FDA WOULD ALLOW Tianeptine to be approve here, BUT NOT BEFORE ANOTHER GOOD TIANEPTINE-LIKE (SSRE?) antidepressant MADE IN USA got approved and marketed. One of the MANY example of this trend is PROZAC which has been, is and will always be labeled as the FIRST SSRI. Well the fact is that there were many other SSRIs before PROZAC but there were not MADE IN USA and so they didn't approved them UNTIL they got their first one approved.. All American Prozac. It's a form of (Market) PROTECTIONISM. For the record: Americans then was targetting norepinephine and NOT serotonin. Europeans was the one targeting serotonin and Americans was making fun of them and are sometimes doing even today; they consider Europeans science calibre to be inferior to theirs.
So we can conclude the FDA was quite happy to NOT have to do ANYTHING in order to protect their market against Tianeptine: Servier shoot themself in the foot because of the time they took to cash on their patents in the USA. After that the cost of entry to market in the USA (the FDA $$$ game of approval) was enough to discourage Servier to EVEN TRY SERIOUSLY. Game Over.
>Tianeptine was developed by Survector after >their original creation Amineptine was shot down >once it was discovered that women were often >having spontaneous orgasms while taking it (no >joke).This is not even one of the main reasons Amineptine (Survector) was withdraw from the market around the WORLD. MANY meds, (even SSRIs!) has this side effect for some woman. Tianeptine wasn't inducing this RARE side effect more often than any other.
> The FDA disapproved the drug citing the >possibility that it would promote drug-seeking >behavior.'Drug-Seeking' behaviour IS the main reason why it was withdraw. It is a fact Amineptine was addictive, but it was wrong to withdraw it totaly just like it would be wrong to withdraw the benzos and all other FDA Scheduled drugs. It should have been Scheduled so that a limited numbers of treatment resistant patient could benefit from it. When someone is depressed and had never tried any AD before then Amineptine would have been a unacceptable risk from a medical practionner point of view, BUT is someone else is depressed AND FAILED SEVERAL AD TRIALS ETC... then it becomes a calculated and acceptable risk : Chances of suicide > Chances of 'evil drug-seeking behaviours'.
> Enter Tianeptine......after being shot down >with Amineptine, Survector developed Tianeptine >and applied for the right to manufacture and >market it here. But heavens, this drug has also >been known to increase sexual desire, >particularly in women, although it is not as >potent as the originating drug, Amineptine. "Oh >no", says Mr. FDA man. Disapproved. This might >encourage dependency as well (note...no evidence >of such, just the FDA stating it might be so).
There's evidences Tianeptine is potentially addictive FOR PEOPLE UNDER 25. What about labelling it "PROHIBITED FOR PEOPLE UNDER 25" then ? That said, the whole thing isn't about libido/orgasmic effects. What about the "Barbie Drug" that is coming ? supposed to give us a good tan, full of libido and makes us loose weight ? You think the FDA wouldn't approve it ? Possible.
> By the way, if a drug works to improve the >quality of life that all of us experience, I do >believe that we are all going to want it. So, if >that is drug-seeking behavior, then yes, that >will occur. And the problem is.......................is that it's not the point. drug-seeking behaviours (dependancy) isn't the same thing as something that induce desires. Porsches and Ferrari aren't ban because everyone would want one and Porches and Ferrari doesn't possess the ability to BYPASS our jugement/rational faculties and REWIRED our brains to be obsess by them to the point of causing trouble to ourself and others. Got my point ?
Did you tried Tineptine ? If so what do you think of it ? any orgasms ? ;)
/\/\artykeywords: FDA, Tianeptine, Stablon, approval, US, Canada, the history of tianeptine, amineptine.
poster:Marty
thread:835336
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20080626/msgs/837368.html