Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 747760

Shown: posts 1 to 11 of 11. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

New drugs that the FDA are studying and may aprove

Posted by football on April 7, 2007, at 0:01:26

"It takes on average 12 years and over US$350 million to get a new drug from the laboratory onto the pharmacy shelf. Once a company develops a drug, it undergoes around three and a half years of laboratory testing, before an application is made to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) to begin testing the drug in humans. Only one in 1000 of the compounds that enter laboratory testing will ever make it to human testing."

Woozah!


Possible future useful drugs for us:

Nuvigil - Just like Provigil, except that it works twice as long. Sounds great, as long they don't decide to charge twice as much, as well.

Zenvia - The company behind ii is trying to get it approved for "involuntary emotional expression disorder." I have no idea what the hell that is, but it sounds anxiety/depression related, so maybe it could be helpful.

Pristiq - A new SNRI being developed for major depression. Can be taken be by males and females, but has the additional benefit of helping with menopause problems in females.

Bifeprunox - A new atypical antipsychotic that produces far fewer side effects then its rival drugs.

Silenor - New sleep aid that has no possibility of dependency or abuse.

Invega - Already approved by the FDA, Invega is another atypical anti psychotic.

SPD465 - The drug company is trying to get it approved for adult ADHD. Has the same active ingredients as Adderall XR, but works for 16 hours.

Indiplon - Another sleep aid.

 

Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap

Posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 6:52:13

In reply to New drugs that the FDA are studying and may aprove, posted by football on April 7, 2007, at 0:01:26

> "It takes on average 12 years and over US$350 million to get a new drug from the laboratory onto the pharmacy shelf. Once a company develops a drug, it undergoes around three and a half years of laboratory testing, before an application is made to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
> (FDA) to begin testing the drug in humans. Only one in 1000 of the compounds that enter laboratory testing will ever make it to human testing."
>
> Woozah!
>
>
> Possible future useful drugs for us:
>
> Nuvigil - Just like Provigil, except that it works twice as long. Sounds great, as long they don't decide to charge twice as much, as well.
>
> Zenvia - The company behind ii is trying to get it approved for "involuntary emotional expression disorder." I have no idea what the hell that is, but it sounds anxiety/depression related, so maybe it could be helpful.
>
> Pristiq - A new SNRI being developed for major depression. Can be taken be by males and females, but has the additional benefit of helping with menopause problems in females.
>
> Bifeprunox - A new atypical antipsychotic that produces far fewer side effects then its rival drugs.
>
> Silenor - New sleep aid that has no possibility of dependency or abuse.
>
> Invega - Already approved by the FDA, Invega is another atypical anti psychotic.
>
> SPD465 - The drug company is trying to get it approved for adult ADHD. Has the same active ingredients as Adderall XR, but works for 16 hours.
>
> Indiplon - Another sleep aid.
>

So much money, work and bureaucracy, and yet they rarely come up with anything that hasn't been a clone for the past 25 years, or a quality that doesn't have dubious advantages. The no-addiction property sounds like a backfire, as rarely do sedatives work if they are not a little bit addicting.

Why are the old drugs so good in comparison to the new ones? What has happened to scientific research? And why are there so *many* drugs of the same class on the market?

 

Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap Squiggles

Posted by kelv on April 7, 2007, at 7:25:35

In reply to Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap, posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 6:52:13

> "So much money, work and bureaucracy, and yet they rarely come up with anything that hasn't been a clone for the past 25 years",

So true-Prozac comes to mind as a breakthrough, Xanax and other Triazolobenzodiazepines perhaps also, These were simply not different Elavil or Valium, Imipramine.

"or a quality that doesn't have dubious advantages. The no-addiction property sounds like a backfire, as rarely do sedatives work if they are not a little bit addicting".

Agreed to some extent, Ambien is approved for longer term use, it's not a benzo but works like one.
> "Why are the old drugs so good in comparison to the new ones?"

Because they were so heavy hitting and hammer like in their effects. Barbiturates, Meprobamate, the wide range of Meth/Amphetamines in Higher SR doses, and liquid forms, and combos of both, ie Dexamyl, Desbutal, Opium deritives, including Dilaudid, Oxymorphone dispensed for a wide range of ills.
These meds were considered part of medicine until it was realised they were being widely sold on the streets as 'uppers' and 'downers for hedonistic use.

"What has happened to scientific research? And why are there so *many* drugs of the same class on the market?"

Money caused big pharma to put more time into releasing copycat 'me too' pills to compete, while scientific research took a back seat.
>

 

Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap

Posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 8:18:44

In reply to Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap Squiggles, posted by kelv on April 7, 2007, at 7:25:35

> > "So much money, work and bureaucracy, and yet they rarely come up with anything that hasn't been a clone for the past 25 years",
>
> So true-Prozac comes to mind as a breakthrough, Xanax and other Triazolobenzodiazepines perhaps also, These were simply not different Elavil or Valium, Imipramine.
>
> "or a quality that doesn't have dubious advantages. The no-addiction property sounds like a backfire, as rarely do sedatives work if they are not a little bit addicting".
>
> Agreed to some extent, Ambien is approved for longer term use, it's not a benzo but works like one.
> > "Why are the old drugs so good in comparison to the new ones?"
>
> Because they were so heavy hitting and hammer like in their effects. Barbiturates, Meprobamate, the wide range of Meth/Amphetamines in Higher SR doses, and liquid forms, and combos of both, ie Dexamyl, Desbutal, Opium deritives, including Dilaudid, Oxymorphone dispensed for a wide range of ills.
> These meds were considered part of medicine until it was realised they were being widely sold on the streets as 'uppers' and 'downers for hedonistic use.
>
> "What has happened to scientific research? And why are there so *many* drugs of the same class on the market?"
>
> Money caused big pharma to put more time into releasing copycat 'me too' pills to compete, while scientific research took a back seat.
> >
>
>

If there are statistical records of "improvement" in psychiatric conditions with the newer drugs, like Prozac, i would love to see them. There has to be some explicit justification for such a proliferation of SO many drugs-- not just psychiatric ones; maybe you know of where to look?

Squiggles

 

An uninspiring crop!

Posted by Tom Twilight on April 7, 2007, at 8:30:32

In reply to Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap, posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 8:18:44

For the most part these "new" drugs are really uninspiring.

It is depressing to think it takes 12 Years to develop and market a drug.

Sorry to sound cynical, but check this out
http://www.somaxon.com/pages/clinical.htm

Silenor is just Doxepin aproved for insomnia?!
Can't believe it

There are a few promising ones in there like Buprenex.

 

Re: An uninspiring crop!

Posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 9:07:42

In reply to An uninspiring crop!, posted by Tom Twilight on April 7, 2007, at 8:30:32


> Sorry to sound cynical, but check this out
> http://www.somaxon.com/pages/clinical.htm
>

Don't know much about pharmacology, but this
drug does sound like NEO-CITRON. Also, I have
read somewhere that imipramine and histamine are related in the anti-depressant action.

Squiggles

 

Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap Squiggles

Posted by Phillipa on April 7, 2007, at 12:08:14

In reply to Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap, posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 6:52:13

Squiggles good question? Love Phillipa

 

Paradoxical effects of tricyclics?

Posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 15:11:02

In reply to Re: New drugs that the FDA are studying and may ap Squiggles, posted by kelv on April 7, 2007, at 7:25:35

Does anyone know if it is possible to
develop paradoxical effects with the tricyclics?
I know that there is a self-limited reaction of this
nature with benzos, but i have never heard of it with other drugs. The symptom of interest is
hypersomnia (circadian cycle, same time).. could
be something like the brand (weaker for example)
or something else of course. How would one go about diagnosing this? Exclusion is nice but try to get someone with enough time to do that these days.

Thank you for reading.

Squiggles

 

Re: An uninspiring crop!

Posted by notfred on April 7, 2007, at 15:28:11

In reply to An uninspiring crop!, posted by Tom Twilight on April 7, 2007, at 8:30:32

> For the most part these "new" drugs are really uninspiring.
>


How do you know, did you try them ? Many of them have unique actions.


 

Re: Paradoxical effects of tricyclics? Squiggles

Posted by Larry Hoover on April 8, 2007, at 10:04:59

In reply to Paradoxical effects of tricyclics?, posted by Squiggles on April 7, 2007, at 15:11:02

> Does anyone know if it is possible to
> develop paradoxical effects with the tricyclics?

Yes, it is.

> I know that there is a self-limited reaction of this
> nature with benzos, but i have never heard of it with other drugs. The symptom of interest is
> hypersomnia (circadian cycle, same time).. could
> be something like the brand (weaker for example)
> or something else of course. How would one go about diagnosing this? Exclusion is nice but try to get someone with enough time to do that these days.
>
> Thank you for reading.
>
> Squiggles

What you're calling exclusion (sic) is the only way, if I'm guessing correctly about what you meant. It's called a dechallenge/rechallenge trial. You taper off the suspect drug, then retitrate to the old dose. If the offending symptoms disappear, then reappear, you have presumptive evidence for the idiosyncratic reaction.

Lar

 

Re: Paradoxical effects of tricyclics?

Posted by Squiggles on April 8, 2007, at 10:22:27

In reply to Re: Paradoxical effects of tricyclics? Squiggles, posted by Larry Hoover on April 8, 2007, at 10:04:59

Thank you for responding Larry. It's good
advice; there is a slight problem with what
happens when the drug is removed for a test,
but i think it can be done for a short interim;
hopefully short enough to get a positive result.

Squiggles


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.