5 ms·

There is a real world example of a complex, critical, domain that has followed this approach religiously for years: prescription drugs. Every prescription dru

There is a real world example of a complex, critical, domain that has followed this approach religiously for years: prescription drugs. Every prescription drug is given an essentially nonsense non-proprietary (generic) name, with only broad categories identified by a stem (drugs ending in "mab," e.g., are monoclonal antibodies, those ending in "vir," are anti-virals). Names that are suggestive of medical target or use, beyond what is implied in the stem, are not allowed. The system is international, with international bodies ultimately approving naming of drugs. The result - well, it works in some respects, but it would take a real optimist to say that brings any clarity or long term order to the process by which medical professionals learn or refer to the drugs they prescribe and administer, or that it plays much role in getting the right prescription into the right medicine cabinet and ultimately, patient. The names are confusing as hell, often unpronouncable (despite the orthographic and oral qualities of the names being considerations in name assignment) to anyone who doesn't know them well, professionally. And the common drugs - well, let's just say, you're far more likely to tell someone you're on Lipitor (a brand name, for marketing) than "atorvastatin".

Tomis02 4y ago
That's actually a great example and it illustrates OP's point. If prescription drugs were given names based on their perceived meaning or target, things could get extremely confusing and/or misleading later when the meaning or target change (but the name stays the same). As it stands, choosing "random" names definitely seems like the lesser of two evils. The names may seem awkward at first but once you get used to them there's nothing particularly bad about them. > it would take a real optimist to say that brings any clarity or long term order to the process by which medical professionals learn or refer to the drugs they prescribe and administer In this case I don't think you can have the cake and eat it too, unless you can somehow prove that the chosen descriptive name will forever remain meaningful and descriptive.
smsm42 4y ago
> well, let's just say, you're far more likely to tell someone you're on Lipitor (a brand name, for marketing) than "atorvastatin". The part missing here is that there's a doctor in the middle that knows about the "atorvastatin" part, and that's usually who prescribes you the Lipitor. Another part is that the name should be a) unique, so you could make it a trademark, b) distinct, so the patient won't tell their other doctor they take a wrong drug (less important now with electronic databases but still important) and c) shouldn't mean anything to the patient, because they aren't the one deciding whether to take it or not - but they will be the ones taking it. That's usually not the case with software packages. Of course, sometimes it is the case that the manager decides to buy software because it sounds good without technically understanding what it actually does - but it's not a common case, especially for more technologically complex software. So the naming considerations here are very different.
- walnutclosefarm 4y ago
  > Another part is that the name should be a) unique, so you could make it a trademark, b) distinct, so the patient won't tell their other doctor they take a wrong drug (less important now with electronic databases but still important) and c) shouldn't mean anything to the patient, because they aren't the one deciding whether to take it or not - but they will be the ones taking it a) The official (that is, generic) drug name is guaranteed to be unique, but they cannot be trademarked. That's one part of why drugs are typically marketed under names other than the official name ("Lipitor" is a market name, "atorvastatin" is the actual drug name). b) Most patients don't know the names of the drugs they are taking, and what they do know are as often as not, not the official name, but a marketing name. Ask any doctor why they ask patients to bring their prescriptions with them to office visits (hint: because in m any cases, it's the only way to get an accurate picture of what a patient is actually taking.) c) I don't follow this at all. It's a bad think that I know that the three drugs I take are a diuretic, a beta blocker, and an angiotensin receptor blocker? I think it's interesting to compare drug naming with other medical interventions. We don't call a Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy a "gandalf" or "vartafoprodson." We use medically meaningful names. Why is "losartan" better than "angiotension receptor blocker 95-1" (first ARB approved in 1995)?
  - smsm42 4y ago
    I am being regularly asked by my healthcare provider which drugs I take, on each visit's checkin. They'd be happy to have the Rx, but in many cases the patient doesn't even have one - it's buried somewhere "in the system", and if you change providers, you don't get anything from the old one - hopefully the new one knows how to talk to the old one to get the info. So there's nothing to "bring" to the office. > It's a bad think that I know that the three drugs I take are a diuretic, a beta blocker, and an angiotensin receptor blocker? No, it's not a bad thing that you know that, it's just about 99.999% of people have no idea what a "beta blocker" is. So for them that information is completely useless, moreover, if they plan to act on it, it may be dangerous, because they may confuse "beta blocker" with some other "blocker" and make some important decision based on that, without understanding the real consequences. If you are knowledgeable enough to know what "beta blocker" is and how it works - sure, it's useful for you, but vast majority of people don't know that and never will.
kemiller2002 4y ago
I've been on medication for years, and I still can't pronounce let alone remember it's name. God help me if it becomes critical I tell someone what it is, because I'm screwed if so.

Tomis02 4y ago

That's actually a great example and it illustrates OP's point. If prescription drugs were given names based on their perceived meaning or target, things could get extremely confusing and/or misleading later when the meaning or target change (but the name stays the same). As it stands, choosing "random" names definitely seems like the lesser of two evils. The names may seem awkward at first but once you get used to them there's nothing particularly bad about them. > it would take a real optimist to say that brings any clarity or long term order to the process by which medical professionals learn or refer to the drugs they prescribe and administer In this case I don't think you can have the cake and eat it too, unless you can somehow prove that the chosen descriptive name will forever remain meaningful and descriptive.

smsm42 4y ago

> well, let's just say, you're far more likely to tell someone you're on Lipitor (a brand name, for marketing) than "atorvastatin". The part missing here is that there's a doctor in the middle that knows about the "atorvastatin" part, and that's usually who prescribes you the Lipitor. Another part is that the name should be a) unique, so you could make it a trademark, b) distinct, so the patient won't tell their other doctor they take a wrong drug (less important now with electronic databases but still important) and c) shouldn't mean anything to the patient, because they aren't the one deciding whether to take it or not - but they will be the ones taking it. That's usually not the case with software packages. Of course, sometimes it is the case that the manager decides to buy software because it sounds good without technically understanding what it actually does - but it's not a common case, especially for more technologically complex software. So the naming considerations here are very different.

walnutclosefarm 4y ago
> Another part is that the name should be a) unique, so you could make it a trademark, b) distinct, so the patient won't tell their other doctor they take a wrong drug (less important now with electronic databases but still important) and c) shouldn't mean anything to the patient, because they aren't the one deciding whether to take it or not - but they will be the ones taking it a) The official (that is, generic) drug name is guaranteed to be unique, but they cannot be trademarked. That's one part of why drugs are typically marketed under names other than the official name ("Lipitor" is a market name, "atorvastatin" is the actual drug name). b) Most patients don't know the names of the drugs they are taking, and what they do know are as often as not, not the official name, but a marketing name. Ask any doctor why they ask patients to bring their prescriptions with them to office visits (hint: because in m any cases, it's the only way to get an accurate picture of what a patient is actually taking.) c) I don't follow this at all. It's a bad think that I know that the three drugs I take are a diuretic, a beta blocker, and an angiotensin receptor blocker? I think it's interesting to compare drug naming with other medical interventions. We don't call a Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy a "gandalf" or "vartafoprodson." We use medically meaningful names. Why is "losartan" better than "angiotension receptor blocker 95-1" (first ARB approved in 1995)?
- smsm42 4y ago
  I am being regularly asked by my healthcare provider which drugs I take, on each visit's checkin. They'd be happy to have the Rx, but in many cases the patient doesn't even have one - it's buried somewhere "in the system", and if you change providers, you don't get anything from the old one - hopefully the new one knows how to talk to the old one to get the info. So there's nothing to "bring" to the office. > It's a bad think that I know that the three drugs I take are a diuretic, a beta blocker, and an angiotensin receptor blocker? No, it's not a bad thing that you know that, it's just about 99.999% of people have no idea what a "beta blocker" is. So for them that information is completely useless, moreover, if they plan to act on it, it may be dangerous, because they may confuse "beta blocker" with some other "blocker" and make some important decision based on that, without understanding the real consequences. If you are knowledgeable enough to know what "beta blocker" is and how it works - sure, it's useful for you, but vast majority of people don't know that and never will.

kemiller2002 4y ago

I've been on medication for years, and I still can't pronounce let alone remember it's name. God help me if it becomes critical I tell someone what it is, because I'm screwed if so.