Posted on 06/05/2019 10:33:08 AM PDT by RummyChick
One of the world's biggest drug firms deliberately buried data showing one of its arthritis medications could slash the risk of Alzheimer's.
Pfizer kept its finding under wraps for more than three years because, it claims, it didn't believe the evidence was strong enough.
It found the link between Alzheimer's and the drug Enbrel when analysing medical insurance claims in hundreds of thousands of people in the US.
People taking Enbrel, an anti-inflammatory used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, appeared to be 64 per cent less likely to develop the memory-robbing disorder.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
NO. It is not very simple. Let me guess. You didn’t read the article.
Well, if the formulation is the PEDIATRIC vial package shown, I can think of one reason why patients who take PEDIATRIC Embrel might be 65% less likely to get alzheimer’s than the general population... ;-)
I know pharmas are about $$$$$$$.
Ive also read of cases, as with Lymes Disease, where medical/insurance boards block effective treatments with available regimens (long-term doxy), because a vaccine is on the way (providing $$$$$ pharma income),
Democrats have also found that eye sight improvement surgery also decreases amount of sexual activity!
I am not sure when the patent runs out.
Here is info talking about 2029
Pfizer outside of US. Amgen inside US.
I THINK. Not sure
???????
No sense at all.
But then these companies have gone to market without staggering test results.
Maybe there is a factor that is different outside of any studies?
Interesting
I dont know what the hell I am talking about :)
What does "buried the data" mean? Does the fact they chose not to publicize certain data mean they "buried" it? They could easily have made the business decision that the data wasn't solid enough to justify spending millions and millions to research the drug for this new purpose. Especially if there are already other, more promising, drugs for this undergoing clinical trials.
I dont think there are any really realistic promising studies. I got nailed in the Biogen stock cascade.
Just taking a wild guess here:
They feared that if word got out off-label use of their drug for this purpose would skyrocket. Then later, if some horrible risk was discovered, they’d be on the hook for untold billions in liabilities.
Article says they were urged INTERNALLY to do clinical trials and rejected it.
Amgen has a longer hold on the patent so maybe they will work on it.
So they can introduce it as a patented new medication with the big bucks that brings, I suppose.
Cancer would probably be cured by now, if we didn't have an FDA.
This itself could justify a decision that the preliminary studies didn't justify sinking millions, if not hundreds of millions, in future research and trials. I'd not saying Pfizer may not have ulterior, more shady, motives but the mere fact they chose not to publicize certain preliminary research results doesn't necessarily mean they do.
Does a psoeiasis patch correlate to Alzheimer’s development? Not being snarky. Would really like to know.
By doing nothing, they lost whatever advantage they would have had in trying to develop a version of the drug specifically targeted at Alzheimers.
That leads me to believe that Pfizer was telling the truth about why they didn't pursue it.
along with the cost for government approval for a different treatment line.
You have to have a disease that warrants use of the drug via your insurance.
Not sure some psoriasis is enough. Maybe you need it on many parts of your body. have never pursued any medication for it.
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.