Court: No Unapproved Meds For The Dying

Federal Appeals Court Says Terminally Ill Patients Have No Constitutional Right To Experimental Drugs

(AP)  Terminally ill patients do not have a constitutional right to be treated with experimental drugs, even if they likely will be dead before the medicine is approved, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned last year's decision by a smaller panel of the same court, which held that terminally ill patients may not be denied access to potentially lifesaving drugs.

The full court disagreed, saying in an 8-2 ruling that it would not create a constitutional right for patients to assume "any level of risk" without regard to medical testing.

"Terminally ill patients desperately need curative treatments," Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote for the majority. But "their deaths can certainly be hastened by the use of a potentially toxic drug with no proven therapeutic benefit."

Food and Drug Administration approval of drugs generally requires extensive testing that can involve years of trials and thousands of patients.

The Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs and the Washington Legal Foundation sued the FDA in 2003, seeking access for terminally ill patients to drugs that have undergone preliminary safety testing in as few as 20 people but have yet to be approved.

Abigail Alliance founder Frank Burroughs pledged an appeal to the Supreme Court. Burroughs' daughter, Abigail, was denied access to experimental cancer drugs and died in 2001. The drug she was seeking was approved years later.

"What the opinion by Judge Griffith is saying is, 'We don't want to risk one life or a few lives, even at the expense of the lives of hundreds or thousands of people,"' Burroughs said. "The logic of that escapes me."

In a sharply worded dissent, Judge Judith W. Rogers called the ruling "startling." She said courts have established the right "to marry, to fornicate, to have children, to control the education and upbringing of children, to perform varied sexual acts in private, and to control one's own body even if it results in one's own death or the death of a fetus."

"But the right to try to save one's life is left out in the cold despite its textual anchor in the right to life," Rogers wrote.

Rogers was joined by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg. The case cut across party lines, with conservative and liberal judges taking both sides of the dispute.

A spokeswoman for the FDA did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The court noted that there are government programs that provide access to experimental drugs in certain situations. It said the matter is not closed and said Congress might be a better venue than the courts to address the issue.

Burroughs said he expects such legislation to be introduced this session. Both the Senate and House have considered such legislation but it languished in committee.

[john0211]

Hopefully someday soon. Americans will have tax supported universal health care like other civilized, humane, developed countries. With strong government oversight to assure good quality of health care for all. Its up to the American people. If they bring enough pressure on the congress, the white house, Governors, and State legislatures they could have it by the new year. It's as simple as Medicare for all. The system is already in place. All they have to do is expand it to cover all Americans. Of course the AMA, and drug companies will pour in more billions to politicians to sell out the American People. But the American people have the power to make it clear to the politicians that there is not enough AMA, and drug company money in the world to get elected if they don't support Medicare for all. It's up to each of YOU!

Best of luck to you.

God bless America...

[john0211]

rational_1 and seandgreen, Of course we will never agree. You are part of the pharmaceutical, and medical industry that has led America to rank #37 in quality of health care for developed countries. Though we used to be considered #1, and the finest in the world. You are part of the establishment that has 45-60 million American citizens with no health care coverage at all. And medical bills as the #1 reason for bankruptcy's. Though Americans spend more on health care than any other country in the world. Many of witch have full health care coverage for all it citizens. You are the reason that thousands of Americans die every year because they cant afford health care. And millions more get sicker, and loose limbs, and organs because they cant afford health care. Women, children, and babies. Though they are citizens of the riches country in the world. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! on you. And on all of us. No, you and I don't agree. And we never will.

Continued...

[john0211]

rational_1 and seandgreen - As I have said before. Some pharmaceutical poisons can have some useful effects. But prescription pharmaceuticals are highly toxic poisons. And patients need to know that. They need to do their homework. And ask tough questions before taking meds.

Like, do I really need this med. And why. What are the toxic effects of this drug. Are there any less invasive things I can do that will eliminate, or reduce my need to take pharmaceutical poisons daily. Like diet, exercise, and life style changes. Are there any older cheaper generic drugs I can use that are just as safe. And just as effective. Rather than the highly expensive. Less proven newer brand name drugs.

When a Doctor recommends newer brand name drugs to you. That should always send up a RED FLAG to you. When it comes to drugs, and medical treatments. Newer does not necessarily mean better. What it does mean is that the drug will be highly costly, less proven, and potentially less effective than older proven drugs. And potentially less safe. Even deadly to you. You should always be more concerned about newer drugs, and treatments. Than proven treatments that have stood the test of time. Newer drugs means brand name drugs that have only been on the market approx 5-10 years.

They don't give a D*M about you.

"Dad, what is Gradual School. Mom said she teaches Gradual School."

"Gradual School is where you go and gradually learn that you don't want to go to school anymore." (The World According To Garp) :-)

[rational_1]

"rational_1 - ...as far as your body is concerned. Most all drugs are first, and for most poisons."

No, some drugs can have toxic effects if used inappropriately, not that they are first and foremost toxic. Eg., digoxin can be toxic but if you have congestive heart failure you're worse off foregoing treatment than risking a side effect. MOST patients, however, are treated MOST of the time, with minimal side effects. Sure, sometimes patients have adverse drug reactions, I won't deny it. But if you ask people whether they're ready to give up their medications they won't, because they're aware that the consequences of not treating their diseases are far worse. Ever seen the positive effects drugs have for patients with Parkinsons disease or schizophrenia? It's striking; antipsychotics have revolutionized psychiatry. Would you like to have surgery on your burst appendix without general anaesthesia? So, some drugs can have toxic effects (eg. anesthetics could cause respiratory arrest), but that doesn't mean you should be so fearful you deny the usefulness of therapeutics outright.

"...DA thinks you need medical supervision to use it without being injured, or killed by it's toxic effects."

Sure if you're an idiot who thinks that if one dose of digoxin is good then 10 times as much must be better.

"See you learn something new every day. Even when you have a "Ph.D in pharmacology""

Yes today I did learn something new, but I learned it from one of my graduate students!

[john0211]

seandgreen - We live in the information age. Look it up for your-self. They only give you 1500 characters on this board. I only post 1/8 of my response most of the time. As to the numbers. They are just what I recall off the top of my head. But the facts speak for them-self. Anyone can find them. And they are disgraceful.

You miss quoted me. I said you "kill, and injure millions for profit" And I stand by that. I also got the drug references that you think I'm crazy. I expect that. Since you cant really dispute the truth of what I said. And trust me. No one would hate to rely on American medical care less than I. Talk about a nightmare come true.

rational_1 - If you have a "Ph.D in pharmacology". Then you now realize what I said is true. That as far as your body is concerned. Most all drugs are first, and for most poisons. The rationale behind the FDA making a drug prescription only. Is because the drug is considered so poisones that the FDA thinks you need medical supervision to use it without being injured, or killed by it's toxic effects.

See you learn something new every day. Even when you have a "Ph.D in pharmacology"

Now I have to go work out. Lord knows. I would not want to get sick in America. :-(

[rational_1]

You sound like you could use some Seroquel. Might want to look that one up.
Posted by seandgreen at 08:48 PM : Aug 08, 2007

I defer to the physician in the choice of antipsychotic to be used in the treatment of this case.
:-)

[rational_1]

Sorry to disappoint you John0211 but I couldn't immediately answer your taunt.

"Americans make up only about 2% of the world population. Yet Americans purchase, and consume almost 50% of all pharmaceutical drugs consumed"

Given that you can't do basic math (300M/6.6B = 4.5%) I don't know how much credence to give the 50% drug use part of your assertion (source?).

"This is why Americans are generally much less healthy ..."

Of course it's the doctors' fault that Americans are sedentary fat slobs at much higher rates than people in other countries.

"...developed countries. This is why Americans live shorter life's than that of developed countries."

No, it's because they eat too many potato chips while disguised as Oprah-watching coach ornaments.

"Because all drugs are first, and for most poisons.... not supported by the science,..."

I have a Ph.D in pharmacology that says drugs have a well-supported basis for their use. We know exactly how many drugs work and why they are clinically effective. Take a look through Goodman & Gilmans The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics sometime.

"You injure, and kill patients. And that is what is happening to millions of Americans daily."

I was joking earlier with the other guy to increase his dose of Haldol (an antipsychotic used to treat paranoia), but I'm starting to think you really are paranoid.

[john0211]

Just as I suspected. None of you so-called good doctors have a answer for the facts below.

Have a good day Doctors. LOL :-)

[john0211]

rational_1 - I'm going to try and convince you anyway.

Americans make up only about 2% of the world population. Yet Americans purchase, and consume almost 50% of all pharmaceutical drugs consumed world wide. Because American doctors poison their patients at an astounding rate in America.

This is part of the reason Americans rank near the bottom in quality of health care of all developed countries, #37. This is why Americans are generally much less healthy than people in other developed countries. This is why Americans live shorter life's than that of developed countries. This is why the health and life expectancy of Americas children is plummeting at a tragic rate. Yet Americans spend more on health care than any other country. But has 45-60 million Americans with no insurance. And most of the people with health insurance cant afford it. Medical bills are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in America.

Because all drugs are first, and for most poisons. When you put a patient on drugs and treatments, that are not supported by the science, and prudent medical care solely focused on the best interest of the patient. You injure, and kill patients. And that is what is happening to millions of Americans daily.

Do you care? Do the doctors care? Not really. They are to busy counting their money. And living those million dollar life style's. (champagne wishes, and caviar dreams) That is what they are about.

[rational_1]

The problem is. That is not what is happening. The only thing many of you are dedicated to is getting rich. You don't give a D*M about your patients. Except the money you can make off of them. That is why you recklessly poison, injure, and kill so many of your patients with inappropriate, and unnecessary drugs, and medical treatments.
You are Doctors in name, and licenses only. What you really are is a cancer, and plague upon America that must be cutout, and stopped. :-)
Posted by john0211 at 03:22 PM : Aug 08, 2007

Sticks and stones... especially in my case since I'm a Ph.D. scientist instead of an M.D. You and I clearly differ on how great this 'problem' of doctors in it just for the money really is. Frankly I've never encountered it. My family physician cares and spends time with me and my wife and the specialists my wife saw during her pregnancies were all invariably decent and caring people. So are pretty well all the students for whom I write med school recommendation letters - they're decent kids who aren't just money grubbing scoundrels. You incur too much debt and spend too many years in medical training before you make any real money as a physician; you're better off going into real estate. I frankly just don't agree with you in your assessment of the characters of physicians and I think you insult a lot of hardworking and caring people with your very wide brushstrokes. I obviously won't convince you and you certainly will never convince me - simple as that.