Re: cytotec attorney website
From: Charlie Chambers (cchamber@gorge.net)
Sun Jan 6 20:21:08 2002
They are going to criticize either way. If we used the more expensive
drugs, then they'd claim that we only use them because they cost more
and make more money for the drug companies whose pens/pads we enjoy so
much.
On Sunday, January 6, 2002, at 06:43 PM, Geffrey Klein, MD wrote:
> At 3:33 PM -0600 on 1/6/02, D. Ashley Hill, MD wrote:
>
>> Fellow listmembers:
>>
>> A relative of mine was prescribed misoprostol prior to a cervical
>> dilation and paid 7 dollars US for two tablets. As I was looking on
>> the
>> web to find the production cost for cytotec (about 25-50
>> cents/tablet) I
>> came across this website:
>>
>> http://www.cytotecattorney.com/
>>
>> If for nothing other than a good laugh, you should read the
>> "information" on the site. Who knew that cytotec increased the risk of
>> fluid overload or amniotic fluid embolism? It's great that the lawyers
>> at this firm are so well versed in the current medical literature.
>> It's
>> a war, but our problem is we play by the rules.
>
> I would like to encourage everyone on the list to go to this website
> and let them know how you feel.. They have a link to contact them. It
> is really to submit a case for evaluation. I submitted my comments:
>
> this is an exerpt from your website:
>
> Cytotec is no more effective, and much less safe than Prepidil or
> Cervidil ( prostaglandin E2), another agent used in the hope of
> reducing the cesarean rate in labors induced with an unripe cervix.
> Cytotec's only attribute is its price. Cytotec is very inexpensive,
> whereas Prepidil and Cervidil cost close to $100 per dose. Cytotec also
> reduces the need for intravenous oxytocin (Pitocin), the hormone that
> stimulates contractions, which further contributes to the savings
>
> -----
>
> The inference here is that we greedy doctors are putting people at risk
> for financial gain. It is interesting to note that in addition to
> being wrong about misoprostol being equally effective as the other
> listed agents (because it is clearly more effective), you are also
> wrong in assuming that we get any financial gain from using
> misoprostol. We don't pay for it or get paid any more if we do use
> it. My main motivation is to use an effective medication that has been
> repeatedly shown to be the best agent to help my patient deliver safely.
>
> The fact that Searle has not sought FDA approval for the use of the
> drug in this fashion is not because it is a harmful or ineffective
> drug, but rather their concern that any adverse outcome from its use
> will result in civil litigation. I personally think that they are
> spineless, but who could blame them. They are used to dealing with the
> unethical industry of the product liability attorney.. So thanks again
> for putting your avarice ahead of scientific advancement... Sleep well..
> -- _______________________
> Geffrey H. Klein, MD
> -- _______________________
> geffrey.klein@obgyn.net
> 450 Blossom Suite C
> Webster, Texas 77598
> 832 553 5430
>
> http://www.geffreyklein.com
>
**************************************************************************
**
Charlie Chambers
--
Hood River, OR
cchamber@alumni.rice.edu
"Almost anything you do will seem insignificant but it is very important
that you do it....You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
-- Mahatma Ghandi.
**************************************************************************
*****
