Q. I have diabetes and took a medicine that cause my heart to lose over 50% of capacity. My cardiologist and this doctor who prescribed the wrong medicine never communicated with each other as to which medicine I was taking and if the one that I took for diabetes was bad for my heart.
A. It would really be helpful to know what medication you are talking about. If a physician prescribes the 'wrong medication' and it this medication lead to 'harm' then yes you have a solid basis for a malpractice suit. The initial problem is in defining what is the right and / or wrong medication. It is not uncommon for a drug to be widely utilized before we become aware of potential problems. I am not able to think of a diabetic medication that might cause your heart to lose 50% of capacity (I am not certain what you mean by this). The thiazolidinediones pioglitazone (Actos) and rosiglitazone (Avandia) are both presumed to have the potential for cardiovascular complications. Rosiglitazone should have been abandoned several years ago after it became clear that there was a link with myocardial infarctions (heart attacks) although this was not known when the drug was approved. Pioglitazone carries a warning that it may cause or worsen systolic heart failure. If the clinical studies are examined carefully the data does not support this conclusion. It is true that pioglitazone may lead to swelling in the feet and ankles but this does not in and of itself indicate heart failure. If you provide me with more specific information I will try to be of further assistance. I wish you the very best of health and in all things may God bless.
How are volunteers selected to test a medicine in human clinical trials before it is released for sale?
Q. Do the volunteers already have some illness that there is a chance the medicine could cure in testing?
If so, for most illnesses (e.g. diabetes) medicines already exist that would be safer for the patient to use. Also the people who may look to untested medicines because no existing medicine works would not make up a reliable sample for people affected by the illness, right?
Are the volunteers given money? If so, how do they acquire the illness the medicine is designed to cure?
What is the main motivation for volunteering in human clinical trials?
If so, for most illnesses (e.g. diabetes) medicines already exist that would be safer for the patient to use. Also the people who may look to untested medicines because no existing medicine works would not make up a reliable sample for people affected by the illness, right?
Are the volunteers given money? If so, how do they acquire the illness the medicine is designed to cure?
What is the main motivation for volunteering in human clinical trials?
A. Clinical trials are highly regulated by the FDA with a clear set of guidelines and procedures that must be followed. The selection of potential candidates must be clearly defined by a very specific criteria, which is in turn must also be approved by the FDA. This criteria largely depends on a number of factors, including the type of drug, age, lifestyle, etc.
Usually, there is two types of testing: compensated and uncompensated. The uncompensated is what most people are familiar with, which usually comes in the form of treating patients with a terminal illness or a disorder that currently has no effective treatments. The compensation for participation is being possibility of being cured or at least have improved symptoms instead of monetary values. The other form, compensated testing, is found typically in elective products, like cosmetics and weight loss pills, where the volunteer will get paid a certain amount upon completing the trial successfully and adhering to their protocols.
"How do they acquire the illness the medicine is designed to cure?" Humans aren't lab rats, so it is unethical and illegal to induce any condition that alter health of an individual negatively. Again, the individuals selected must either already have the condition the product is intended to treat or at least show clear signs that they can benefit from its use. In most cases, even the latter is not enough to volunteer.
Usually, there is two types of testing: compensated and uncompensated. The uncompensated is what most people are familiar with, which usually comes in the form of treating patients with a terminal illness or a disorder that currently has no effective treatments. The compensation for participation is being possibility of being cured or at least have improved symptoms instead of monetary values. The other form, compensated testing, is found typically in elective products, like cosmetics and weight loss pills, where the volunteer will get paid a certain amount upon completing the trial successfully and adhering to their protocols.
"How do they acquire the illness the medicine is designed to cure?" Humans aren't lab rats, so it is unethical and illegal to induce any condition that alter health of an individual negatively. Again, the individuals selected must either already have the condition the product is intended to treat or at least show clear signs that they can benefit from its use. In most cases, even the latter is not enough to volunteer.
Could you have undiagnosed type 2 Diabetes since childhood and not have any serious complications?
Q. I have been reading up on the symptoms of Diabetes and I had recurring lesions on my feet as a child that correspond with Diabetes but I never had it diagnosed. Could somebody have this condition for a long time and not have serious complications?.
A. Yes it is quite possible to have diabetes for quite some time before it is diagnosed and this is most especially true for type 2 diabetes. In most cases there is a 10 year lead-in time of pathological damage prior to the glucose being consistently elevated. Thus prompt diagnosis and decisive intervention is essential. I must say however that recurring lesions on the feet as a child would be an extremely unusual presentation for diabetes. This does not mean that you should not see your physician as every problem warrants a diagnosis in order to define a cure. It simply means that I would be really surprised if you have diabetes. If I may be of further assistance please let me know. I wish you the very best of health and happiness and in all things may God bless. JR
Could they have diagnosed me wrong with diabetes?
Q. I got tested for diabetes and the results came back border line, but not fully diabetic. Except now i think i am a full diabetic.
I have EXTREME thirst, fatigue, sometimes blurred vision, weakness, dry skin, charly horses almost everytime i sleep sometimes so bad i almost cry, and numb legs which used to get really bad at night when i lay on my stomache but have gotten less frequent.
I have EXTREME thirst, fatigue, sometimes blurred vision, weakness, dry skin, charly horses almost everytime i sleep sometimes so bad i almost cry, and numb legs which used to get really bad at night when i lay on my stomache but have gotten less frequent.
A. It would have been helpful if you had provided more information most especially your glucose readings. When physicians use the term 'borderline' they are most often saying that you are an 'early' diabetic. Since the term borderline is - to my knowledge - never used in reference to type 1 diabetes I must assume that you have early type 2 diabetes. The initial approach is most often life-style modification rather than pharmacologic intervention. A low glycemic index diet with little to no refined carbohydrates, weight loss if you are over weight, and regular exercise. It would not be appropriate to suggest that you start taking a medication - such as metformin hydrochloride - as one respondent has suggested. This is because we do not know your glucose readings and if they are only mildly elevated - which is what I suspect - prescribing metformin might lead to hypoglycemia. The symptoms that you provide are not typical of type 2 diabetes. Yes diabetics may experience thirst, fatigue (although this is a common symptom even without diabetes), and blurred vision. Dry skin and muscle cramping however are not symptoms of diabetes. Numbness in the legs is potentially related to diabetes as diabetes may cause peripheral neuropathy. There is a qualifying comment. Peripheral neuropathy most often starts in the feet and gradually progresses to the legs which does not match your very limited description. My advice would be to return to your physician. Obtain the actual glucose result(s). Inquire about your symptoms. If your physician believes that they are related to diabetes then 'treating' the diabetes is the place to start. If your physician does not believe that they are related to diabetes then it is the physician's responsibility to determine the diagnosis in order to define the treatment. These symptoms sound as if they really interfere with your activities and sleep so I would pursue this until a physician has managed to relieve you symptoms. If I may be of further assistance please let me know. I wish you the very best of health and in all things may God bless.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment