Skip to comments.
FDA advisers endorse drug for blacks only
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^
| 6-17-05
| Jeff Nesmith
Posted on 06/19/2005 7:13:19 AM PDT by Turbopilot
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Couldn't find this posted under searches for "FDA" or "drug". The idea that some people are "offended" by this drug makes me worry that the Sharpton/Jackson crew would actually fight this drug on the basis that it's better to let black people die than allow that they may have health issues different from those of other races.
To: Turbopilot
Saying there are differences genetically is a ball of fire.
Jefferson would surely be reading and commenting on this.
2
posted on
06/19/2005 7:19:11 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: Sacajaweau
Having read what he's said about black people in the past, I can only imagine what he'd say.
3
posted on
06/19/2005 7:20:56 AM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: Turbopilot; neverdem
I am very curious as to whether these were tested on black Americans or just black people in general. Not all black people are the same and some people who call themselves black aren't even black.
4
posted on
06/19/2005 7:22:53 AM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: Turbopilot
The PC crowd and Sharpton/Jackson race baiters would rather have Black people die than allow such a "racist" treatment. I'm surprised the researchers even had access to the data on the test subject's race.
To: Sacajaweau
Saying there are differences genetically is a ball of fire.
Well, saying there are genetic differences is trivial. Melanin concentrations are determined by genes. Saying that genetic differences go beyond the obvious is what's going to be controversial. I don't know enough about the science to comment on the likelihood, other than that a 43% success rate for blacks vs. a statistically insignificant change for other races seems to indicate the possibility. I just hope that black "leaders" don't sacrifice the health of their own people on the altar of political correctness.
6
posted on
06/19/2005 7:26:36 AM PDT
by
Turbopilot
(Viva la Reagan Revolucion!)
To: rdb3; Khepera; elwoodp; MAKnight; condolinda; mafree; Trueblackman; FRlurker; Teacher317; ...
Political correctness be damned. If it is a drug that can help people, make it available to help people. Period.
The conspiracy theorist in me wonders about exploitation on this sort of designation (if I can put my tin foil hat on for a moment).
Black conservative ping
If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.
7
posted on
06/19/2005 7:27:52 AM PDT
by
mhking
(The world needs a wake up call gentlemen...we're gonna phone it in.)
To: Turbopilot
The idea that some people are "offended" by this drug makes me worry that the Sharpton/Jackson crew would actually fight this drug on the basis that it's better to let black people die than allow that they may have health issues different from those of other races.Well duh!
8
posted on
06/19/2005 7:27:56 AM PDT
by
null and void
(You will never be really good at anything you do just for the money...)
To: cyborg
Given that it was an FDA advisory committee and that the study in question was performed at the University of Minnesota, it seems reasonable to assume the test group consisted of Americans, and possibly Canadians.
9
posted on
06/19/2005 7:28:57 AM PDT
by
Turbopilot
(Viva la Reagan Revolucion!)
To: Turbopilot
I hope it doesn't get overused as a lot of drugs are already. If this drug helps people, great.
10
posted on
06/19/2005 7:32:39 AM PDT
by
cyborg
(http://mentalmumblings.blogspot.com/)
To: Turbopilot
The drug is a combo of Isorbide dinitrate and Hydralazine. Two long time commonly used Blood Pressure meds.
To: tertiary01
I hit Post to soon, amend that to include vaso dilators too.
To: Turbopilot
As I understood the test, it is efficacious for blacks because there were mostly only blacks in the test group.
But, if it is signficantly better for blacks than whites, Sharpton.Jesse won't fight IT, but will demand that more money (and jobs) be allocated to finding other drugs for blacks.
The racially unacceptable issue arrises only if money is wasted on a health issue that effects white men and a superior drug is found. The effort, itself, would get Sharpton's, well, blood pressure up.
The black racist thugs here, won't be upset by the medicine, but by some silliness like te study should have been done 10 years ago or "if they hired more black scientists, these black problems would be better addressed."
And, if you want to see Jesse, Sharpton and the step-n-fetchit Congressional Black Caucus watch and see should there be some yet unnoticed but nasty side effect of any drug touted as being for blacks!
13
posted on
06/19/2005 7:52:15 AM PDT
by
Tacis
( SEAL THE FRIGGEN BORDER!!!)
To: Turbopilot
In a similar ruling, the FDA has prohibited sales of Viagra to attorneys, apparently it just makes them taller.
14
posted on
06/19/2005 7:54:04 AM PDT
by
gorush
(Exterminate the Moops!)
To: Turbopilot
Let them protest - the test results came about as a result of a trial called A-HeFT - African-American Heart Failure Trial - where they were specifically testing this medication. They'll also be protesting groups such as the ABC (Association of Black Cardiologists), and members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
What's going to be really interesting will be what is done about pricing to begin with. Most new drugs hit the market as a non-preferred medication, with a significantly higher copay than preferred or generic medications. Since it's a combination of two already available generic medications, depending on the dosing, it may be less expensive to go ahead and get two RXs for the generics. Also, since it is targeting a specific group (like Zelnorm originally did), it may even require a prior authorization before you can get it filled. And of course, the benefits managers will be accused of being racist oppressors - but I've been called that before.
15
posted on
06/19/2005 7:54:27 AM PDT
by
Tennessee_Bob
("Nac Mac Feegle! The Wee Free Men! Nae king! Nae quin! Nae laird! We willna be fooled again!")
To: Turbopilot
The 43% that are saved by this drug won't be complaining about the difference.
To: Turbopilot
Minnesota ... you left out Scandinavians
17
posted on
06/19/2005 8:31:25 AM PDT
by
NonValueAdded
(NEWSWEEK LIED, PEOPLE DIED)
To: gorush
apparently it just makes them taller
LOL!!
To: Turbopilot
This is an interesting questions of ethics. If it has been demonstrated to be effective with black heart attack patients and there are no negative side effects, or at least only minimal; I don't think there is a problem. If there were some notable black scientists involved in the research and on the board that approved the drug, that would be rvrn better for appearance sake.
Hesitating to approve the drug might be viewed by some blacks as an attempt withold treatment that would save blacks. On the other hand, if actual results after the drug is approve result in more deaths, there might be a few who claim it is a plot to kill blacks.
To: mhking
I have to agree with you on this one buddy this PC stuff is getting a bit to ludicrous.
I could understand a drug that would interact with say Sicle Cell Anemia [sp] but heart problems are general at best effecting almost everyone in some form or another !
20
posted on
06/19/2005 9:57:13 AM PDT
by
ATOMIC_PUNK
(secus acutulus exspiro ab Acheron bipes actio absol ab Acheron supplico)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson