I meant television and print advertising.
Yes, I know “category X” is real. But “Category X for children under 6” is not.
The difference is between ‘do not’ and ‘you should not’. The second warning is less strong that the first.
True.
Prescribers make mistakes. I have a friend who had a really bad experience-- like a “bad trip,” quite honestly, and I know, because I was the person she called when she realized something was very wrong-- from mixing an SSRI with an OTC cough medicine.
This is a very bad thing to do, as the result can be hallucinations that are apparently akin to taking LSD, or getting weed cut with PCP, or something. But she had a cold, and was coughing to the point that she couldn’t get to sleep, and a PA, someone legally allowed to write prescriptions, saw her at the acute clinic, KNEW what meds she was on, and told her to buy cough medicine with dextromethorphan in it.
What she needed was a prescription for tessalon, and for her prescriber to call her insurance provider, and explain that they needed to pay for it, because OTC cough medicine did not mix with her antidepressant. But that didn’t happen.
I took her to the ER when she was tripping, and they diagnosed “serotonin storm,” and said the only thing to do was to wait for it to pass. They had a psychiatrist interview her and verify that she wasn’t suicidal or homicidal, and didn’t need to be admitted, asked me if I was able to stay with her for at least the next six hours, and sent her home.
It was an interesting afternoon. She kept insisting we needed to move the furniture, because someone was bringing over rugs, and the dog was going to help install them (no, not carpet, rugs). Then she’d sleep a while, then she’d wake up, and get all crazy about the furniture again.
The point being, that people should be aware of the parameters of medications. If you hear on X commercial that drug A should not be given to children under 6, and your 5-yr-old’s doctor wants to prescribe it, call her attention to your child’s age. Don’t just assume that the doctor can’t make a mistake. Or if drug A should not be given to children under 18, and your doctor wants to prescribe it for your 16-yr-old, call your doctor’s attention to your child’s age-- but maybe you will be told that because your particular 16-yr-old is 5’11 and 225lbs, the drug is safe.
That’s my guess too - probably some sort of legal requirement that they specifically call out under-6, and under-18 for usage requirements, even if they happen to be the same.
Sorry, right, I meant to specify that. Yes, direct to consumer advertising is allowed that way, but drug reps can’t do it in person.
It’s not just a legal requirement for calling out-- it’s the testing. I’m not sure that there are legal requirements for testing, but because there are particular physiological changes that happen to the brain around 6, and because 12 is when a high enough percentage of people reach a weight suitable for standard adult doses, >6 and 6-12 are typical ages that are looked at in testing.
Or, at least, this was the case when I attended a lot of symposia regarding prescription drugs. Which I’ll state FTR, was a while ago-- but the ads dovetail pretty well with what I learned, so I don’t think too much has changed.
I suspect the “under 18” has something to do with the ads being projected at parents. Parents have not been unknown to give other people in the household drugs that are already there, rather than schedule a doctor’s appointment, wait, then get a new Rx that may or may not work. You can’t come out and say “Don’t share your prescription with your kids,” because you might give that idea to the one parent out there who didn’t think of it on their own; but I’m guessing that is at least part of the intent here.
Mainly, it has to do with testing, though:
“We tested on under 6. Don’t use.”
“We also tested on under 12. Don’t use.”
“In fact, just to cover our asses, let’s say ‘under 18.’”
Ask your doctor if a drug with 20 pages of side effects is right for you
Bumping this thread to report that I heard a commercial for Linzess today (the same drug that inspired this thread) and the disclaimer now says “…don’t give Linzess to children under two.” Clearly more research has been done and thus only one group is disclaimed.
Couldn’t people become generally educated to the extent that they do not need to be told not to take drugs they are allergic too? Perhaps a general notion that doctors do not recommend consuming anything you are allergic to. Also a few extra things people should learn too, do not step on the tines of a rake lying on the ground, always inhale after exhaling, do not wear a metal hat in a thunder storm, never eat anything bigger than your head, etc.
There’s still some (probably unavoidable) redundancy there. It’s not like there are any adults under two.
The disclaimer I’ve heard which strikes me as odd is “do not take Gleemonex if you are allergic to it, or any of its ingredients.” For that to work, don’t they need to tell me what’s in it?
I like the one that warns of a “life-threatening infection of the perineum.” That sounds like a side-effect to avoid, and I am not sure the benefit of whatever drug that is is worth that risk. I dont remember what drug that is, but it’s a side-effect that’s pretty catchy.
I could never figure out how a drug could have such a specific infection as a side effect but the drug I know has this side effect is Jardiance , for Type 2 diabetes. Apparently the drug helps eliminate sugar through urination, and the sugar in the urine increases the amount of bacteria near the genitals which can get under the skin if there us a break or irritation and destroy the tissue and even kill you if it’s. not treated quickly enough.
Sorry. Trade secret.
Heh-heh. “Please tell your doctor if you have a break in the skin or irritation around your perineum”. Uh, okay, does that mean I have to stop the activity that’s causing that? Heh-heh.
I know. Someone will stop by soon to post something informative about normal irritation and skin breaks in that area and my ignorance will be fought. I guess I live a sheltered life.
Yeah that’s my personal bug bear (they don’t typically even bother saying its ingredient, literally just “Don’t take Gleemonex if you are allergic to it”, how useless is that as a warning?!?) How absolutely obvious do they need to make it that these warnings are for the lawyers and not for the patients? They might as well be honest and say “Please don’t sue us if you take Gleemonex and something bad happens”
Am I being whooshed here? For (eg) Jardinace [PDF WARNING] see p34 of
What are the ingredients in JARDIANCE?
Active Ingredient: empagliflozin
Inactive Ingredients: lactose monohydrate, microcrystalline cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, croscarmellose sodium, colloidal silicon dioxide and magnesium stearate. In addition, the film coating contains the following inactive ingredients: hypromellose, titanium dioxide, talc, polyethylene glycol, and yellow ferric oxide.
I googled jardinace us pack insert. Have they stopped putting the printed version in the pack?
j
Dude! 
We think alike.
I have worried and wondered about poor peeps dying of a life threatening peritoneal infection. That is a seriously hard thing to think about.
God I hope it’s very very rare.
That’s just not fair, powers that be. You hear me?!
My endocrinologist put me on Jardiance back in January. Trust me when I tell you that I’m becoming even more vigilant about hygiene in that particular region now.