FDA: Anti smoking drug Chantix linked to more than 500 suicides

[Uma]

To be honest, the more I learn about "prepping", underground cities, underground bunkers, prepared by and for the Gov and the rich, the more I believe it's a huge push to gain money for those projects, plus to avoid saying to the public "bomb shelter is open to everyone in town, EXCEPT to smokers and vapers". That would rile too many folk. Yet, it's also the ONLY way to actually incite enough inward drive to drive a person to quit smoking. But, the bunkers hold 10,ooo people, and there are 300,000 in town.
The WHO and all those stats people downplay the smokers who smoke, because
1. The smoke tax money isn't accounted for, without telling the truth
2. They don't want to you to see just how many people who paid to build these bunkers via smoke tax, will be the ones perishing in ww3 or solar flare fires or ice age or Financial downfall, whatever it is they prepare for.

Tinfoil hat needed? I doubt it. I really really doubt it.
Soldiers at the entrances, trained and ready to protect the bunkers from overflow...

There's a method to their madness.

Everything you buy by cc is recorded. They Know who does what.

 

[rvc]

Are 500 suicides out of 20 million who have taken the drug a lot?

20 million is the worldwide use. The 544 suicides are for the USA as reported to the FDA, not the worldwide number of suicides.

 

[stevegmu]

20 million is the worldwide use. The 544 suicides are for the USA as reported to the FDA, not the worldwide number of suicides.

Say it is 500 out of millions. Is that a lot statistically? I was under the impression no one believes what the FDA puts out anyway. Are they suddenly correct when it comes to Chantix?

 

[rvc]

Say it is 500 out of millions. Is that a lot statistically? I was under the impression no one believes what the FDA puts out anyway. Are they suddenly correct when it comes to Chantix?

The FDA was forced by the Freedom of Information Act to give this information. Should someone want to try their luck with this drug it's OK with me.

 

[rothenbj]

Say it is 500 out of millions. Is that a lot statistically? I was under the impression no one believes what the FDA puts out anyway. Are they suddenly correct when it comes to Chantix?

Heck, they may include those 500 as successful quits.

 

[Anjaffm]

Heck, they may include those 500 as successful quits.

Yes, I was wondering about that.
After all, a person who commits suicide under the influence of Chantix is then dead. A dead person does not / cannot smoke.
Thus, the person has stopped smoking while / due to using Chantix.
Yes, that definitely sounds like a "successful quitter" to me.

And what is more: that person will never take up smoking again. After 12 months or whenever.
Yeah... a very successful quitter indeed.
Makes for great success statistics, does it not?

 

[AgentAnia]

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the 500+ deaths the FDA was forced to disclose are only the tip of the iceberg, but of course we'll never know, with Pfizer and FDA having such... er... close... er... ties one to the other...

 

[Luisa]

More than 500 people out of 20 million who have smoked have died from health issues tied to smoking. If 501 lives are saved due to taking Chantix and quitting smoking, it would seem there is a benefit.

I would never have taken the drug, either. I don't believe in taking prescriptions for something that can be cured without them, but, I do think there is a bit of sensationalism involved here.

For every horror story there are probably 1000 that have a happy ending.

One suicide from taking this drug is one suicide too many.

 

[stevegmu]

One suicide from taking this drug is one suicide too many.

So are deaths related to smoking, but people still choose to smoke.

 

[Uma]

So are deaths related to smoking, but people still choose to smoke.

The 2500 lawsuits during the few years it's been on the market, says quite a bit. Nobody knows the LONG TERM damage (associated damage) this drug has caused. What other damage is lurking beneath the surface? Kidney failure? There are so many unknowns with this drug.
Whereas 80% of smokers lungs are healthy enough to transplant into lung transplant patients.
I imagine it's 90.9% with Vapers lungs.

 

[jpargana]

(...)
Quit or die, eh?

That's exacly it... Chantix can help you reach any of those goals !!

 

[jpargana]

There's no way of knowing how many did do themselves in (I don't like the word suicide). In those cases, I'm sure they would show "Smoker" in the death certificate as the cause.

Yes... nevermind that the guy died with a rope around his neck. tobacco killed him...!


(I believe the twisted logic must be something like this: if the guy did not smoke, he would not have the need to take drugs to stop smoking. If the drug then makes him kill himself, smoking is to blame, otherwise he would not be taking the drug... QED...)




ETA:

"Smoking, and hanging yourself, can cause shortness of breath..."

 

[jpargana]

More than 500 people out of 20 million who have smoked have died from health issues tied to smoking. If 501 lives are saved due to taking Chantix and quitting smoking, it would seem there is a benefit.

I would never have taken the drug, either. I don't believe in taking prescriptions for something that can be cured without them, but, I do think there is a bit of sensationalism involved here.

For every horror story there are probably 1000 that have a happy ending.

Well, sorry, but there are, at least, two flaws with your math: one, taking Chantix is not the only way to quit smoking. And second, not all people who have taken it have actually quit smoking...!

There are countless other 'happy endings' without the use of Chantix. And by seeing the statistics, the 1000 cases you mentioned would probably be 'happy' if other methods were used - without the associated risks.

Anyway, I think the OP's concern was something like:

On one hand, BP is allowed to proceed the selling of a drug when there are already proven cases of serious side effects. It is 'not unknown', by now, that Chantix can actually harm it's users. And even considering that Chantix actually helps only a small percentage of smokers to quit. And even considering that 'long-term studies' will be presented by Pfizer only in 2017, if I have read it correcly.
On the other hand, the e-cig has been vilified countless times. Whithout proof. Even ignoring several studies that are actually favourable to the device. There are zero reported side-effects. Some of those ignored studies actually present a much higher sucess rate.

So... an high success rate, combined with zero side effects... what do they do ?? Try to ban it, because it may be harmful, and there are no 'long-term studies'...

 

[stevegmu]

Well, sorry, but there are, at least, two flaws with your math: one, taking Chantix is not the only way to quit smoking. And second, not all people who have taken it have actually quit smoking...!

There are countless other 'happy endings' without the use of Chantix. And by seeing the statistics, the 1000 cases you mentioned would probably be 'happy' if other methods were used - without the associated risks.

Anyway, I think the OP's concern was something like:

On one hand, BP is allowed to proceed the selling of a drug when there are already proven cases of serious side effects. It is 'not unknown', by now, that Chantix can actually harm it's users. And even considering that Chantix actually helps only a small percentage of smokers to quit. And even considering that 'long-term studies' will be presented by Pfizer only in 2017, if I have read it correcly.
On the other hand, the e-cig has been vilified countless times. Whithout proof. Even ignoring several studies that are actually favourable to the device. There are zero reported side-effects. Some of those ignored studies actually present a much higher sucess rate.

So... an high success rate, combined with zero side effects... what do they do ?? Try to ban it, because it may be harmful, and there are no 'long-term studies'...

Can you name 1 prescription medication that doesn't have serious side effects for at least some people?

Not quite sure who is vilifying e-cigs? Democrats? The FDA missed their deadline and went home for the holidays. What ban are you speaking of?

 

[Uma]

The FDA is passing the buck to individual towns. NYC, Boston, San Rapael, you name it, they're doing the devils dirty work for them.
It all began with a nice little meager statement consisting of "we have no power to ban eCigs or tobacco, but you towns, cities, and states do".

 

[Anjaffm]

@jpargana:

Very well said. Very well said indeed!

And never mind the words of stevegmu, dear. If I remember correctly. stevegmu is one of those people who are convinced that "vaping is as bad as smoking". Thus, I wonder why he has not taken that wonderful miracle drug instead of smoking tobacco or inhaling vapor and hanging out in a vapers forum with the rest of us.

Maybe.. just maybe... when it comes to one's own person, one's own life, one's own sanity ... well.. then.. just maybe... a drug which is directly related to 544 suicides and 1800+ suicide attempts in the US alone - cases that were admitted by Pfizer (= in all probability many less than actually happened) - is not such a wonderful, safe miracle drug after all

A suicide attempt now... is no itty bitty little side effect, either.
If I am not mistaken, a (failed) suicide attempt entailes a prologned stay in a closed psychiatric ward.
I bet that can be quite mind-broadening. And it most definitely interrupts a person's life.

Maybe... just maybe... stevegmu does not wish to take this risk himself.
Downplaying risks when it comes to other people is quite easy, after all

..............
/edit:
@stevegmu:

What ban are you speaking of?

jpargana is speaking of the proposed ban in the EU. That is a union of countries in Europe. Europe is a continent on the other side of what is generally referred to as "the big pond".

 

[AgentAnia]

....Not quite sure who is vilifying e-cigs?

Oh c'mon. Really?!

 

[jpargana]

Can you name 1 prescription medication that doesn't have serious side effects for at least some people?

Not quite sure who is vilifying e-cigs? Democrats? The FDA missed their deadline and went home for the holidays. What ban are you speaking of?

I believe I can name several whose side effects are almost nothing compared to those of Chantix...

Who is vilifying the e-cig? Just about every 'health' organization or expert who just happens to have some tiny conflict of interest because of BP founding... oh, and some governamental agencies too. Also recently, an Italian MEP complained in the European Parliament that Italy had already lost 7.6 per cent in 'sin tax' revenue. And that the e-cig was certainly responsible for a good deal of those losses... and what was the EU 'planning' to do about it.

Which leads me to the ban: I live on the other side of the pond... I was refering to the EU tobacco directive that, among other things, was intended to medicalise the e-cig in the European Union (That would have been a ban, for all practical purposes).

Fortunately, a majority of MP's voted against the directive. That was only in the 8th October, and already the 'powers' have moved again... this time, confidential documents are being discussed behind closed doors...!

From what little is known, the idea now is to treat the e-cig as a tobacco product. No cross-border (Internet) sales, disposable cartos only (maximum concentration of 20mg, and maximum quantity of 10mg nicotine per carto), no flavours (except maybe menthol, already used in cigarettes also), warning labels like with cigarettes (e-cigarettes can kill you ?), yada, yada...

Guess it's time to fight yet again...

 

[stevegmu]

The FDA is passing the buck to individual towns. NYC, Boston, San Rapael, you name it, they're doing the devils dirty work for them.
It all began with a nice little meager statement consisting of "we have no power to ban eCigs or tobacco, but you towns, cities, and states do".

These are politicians with an agenda, not the FDA. The FDA does what is directed to do by Congress and the Administration. Ultimately, it comes down to do-gooders and nanny-staters.

 

[stevegmu]

@jpargana:

Very well said. Very well said indeed!

And never mind the words of stevegmu, dear. If I remember correctly. stevegmu is one of those people who are convinced that "vaping is as bad as smoking". Thus, I wonder why he has not taken that wonderful miracle drug instead of smoking tobacco or inhaling vapor and hanging out in a vapers forum with the rest of us.

Maybe.. just maybe... when it comes to one's own person, one's own life, one's own sanity ... well.. then.. just maybe... a drug which is directly related to 544 suicides and 1800+ suicide attempts in the US alone - cases that were admitted by Pfizer (= in all probability many less than actually happened) - is not such a wonderful, safe miracle drug after all

A suicide attempt now... is no itty bitty little side effect, either.
If I am not mistaken, a (failed) suicide attempt entailes a prologned stay in a closed psychiatric ward.
I bet that can be quite mind-broadening. And it most definitely interrupts a person's life.

Maybe... just maybe... stevegmu does not wish to take this risk himself.
Downplaying risks when it comes to other people is quite easy, after all

..............
/edit:
@stevegmu:



jpargana is speaking of the proposed ban in the EU. That is a union of countries in Europe. Europe is a continent on the other side of what is generally referred to as "the big pond".

Really? Find me some posts where I said any such thing.

I don't care what people choose to take or not take. It is up to them. If the possible side effects are worth it to them, so be it.

Wow, I had no idea Europe is a continent. Please explain more...