3 ms·

My question is why is time and money being spend on researching this, as opposed to something like its long term effects on the brain or what happens when it’s

My question is why is time and money being spend on researching this, as opposed to something like its long term effects on the brain or what happens when it’s use stopped. Sure this finding is a fun thing that might be lumped into a psychiatrist’s spiel, but is there any utility for this research? I certainly hope that someone at risk for sepsis wouldn’t be prescribed an antidepressant to treat it, or that someone already on it wouldn’t be prescribed an antibiotic anyway. Even as an adjunct for sepsis I would be highly skeptical of its practicality. Perhaps the research may provide insights into mechanisms that future drugs may be designed to exploit, but even that seems like a stretch as a justification.

wk_end 2y ago
> as opposed to something like its long term effects on the brain or what happens when it’s use stopped. There is no "as opposed". The people studying that sort of thing - and people do study that sort of thing - aren't the same people who are studying sepsis. > Perhaps the research may provide insights into mechanisms that future drugs may be designed to exploit, but even that seems like a stretch as a justification. Why does that seem like a stretch? A better understanding of how the body works and/or responds to/metabolizes various drugs can absolutely guide drug discovery.
volkl48 2y ago
Sepsis is one of the leading causes of death and causes ~20% of all global deaths. Research into quite literally anything that might give additional help to treating it is so obviously one of the most beneficial things we could be doing in terms of medical research that reading your post sounds completely foreign to me. ------- Many cases of sepsis are relatively predictable in that they already know that this person is at high risk of it due to their condition or the type of intervention that's going to be required for their condition. We're just not that great at stopping it from occurring with the tools currently available - antibiotics are not sufficient to solve/prevent it like you seem to think they are, or there'd be a lot less people dying of it. ----- Presumably, if this research panned out in many additional trials, it's something that might be added to treatment protocols. Even if it turned out to be useful but had limitations like being needed to be administered days in advance - there would still be significant utility for a lot of medically necessary but not immediate high-risk surgeries.
AStonesThrow 2y ago
Prozac's patents expired about 23 years ago, and therefore the market pressure from generic manufacture, as well as more stylish Kardashian/Hiltonesque designs such as Sertraline, Pristique, Paxil, and Femoxitene, necessitates a neverending quest for additional ways to stand out during successive seasons of leisurely luncheons with psychiatrists, and compete for shrinking shelf/Dumpster space, as was accurately depocted in the recent documentary "Love & Other Drugs" There's an expansion of applications, and There's a Wideness in God's pharMacy yet to be exploited, and let's face it, consumers and prescribers alike may have a gut reaction to rumors that the etiology of depression isn't necessarily a neurotransmitter deficiency. The study long-term effects, neglect, and abuse of fluidetine is indeed already underway. However we've made a rookie mistake of forgetting that this heavy lifting is done by the attorneys and courts of civil law, where class-action suits litigate with billions at stake if they can produce enough obese 14-year-old boys who now wear underwire brassieres that harsh everyone's mellow. Long-term-effect study is a money loser and a reputation liller. No sane pill factory dares to venture into probing whatever a drug does once it's passed the cash registers and Visa terminals. Heaven forefend.

wk_end 2y ago

> as opposed to something like its long term effects on the brain or what happens when it’s use stopped. There is no "as opposed". The people studying that sort of thing - and people do study that sort of thing - aren't the same people who are studying sepsis. > Perhaps the research may provide insights into mechanisms that future drugs may be designed to exploit, but even that seems like a stretch as a justification. Why does that seem like a stretch? A better understanding of how the body works and/or responds to/metabolizes various drugs can absolutely guide drug discovery.

volkl48 2y ago

Sepsis is one of the leading causes of death and causes ~20% of all global deaths. Research into quite literally anything that might give additional help to treating it is so obviously one of the most beneficial things we could be doing in terms of medical research that reading your post sounds completely foreign to me. ------- Many cases of sepsis are relatively predictable in that they already know that this person is at high risk of it due to their condition or the type of intervention that's going to be required for their condition. We're just not that great at stopping it from occurring with the tools currently available - antibiotics are not sufficient to solve/prevent it like you seem to think they are, or there'd be a lot less people dying of it. ----- Presumably, if this research panned out in many additional trials, it's something that might be added to treatment protocols. Even if it turned out to be useful but had limitations like being needed to be administered days in advance - there would still be significant utility for a lot of medically necessary but not immediate high-risk surgeries.

AStonesThrow 2y ago

Prozac's patents expired about 23 years ago, and therefore the market pressure from generic manufacture, as well as more stylish Kardashian/Hiltonesque designs such as Sertraline, Pristique, Paxil, and Femoxitene, necessitates a neverending quest for additional ways to stand out during successive seasons of leisurely luncheons with psychiatrists, and compete for shrinking shelf/Dumpster space, as was accurately depocted in the recent documentary "Love & Other Drugs" There's an expansion of applications, and There's a Wideness in God's pharMacy yet to be exploited, and let's face it, consumers and prescribers alike may have a gut reaction to rumors that the etiology of depression isn't necessarily a neurotransmitter deficiency. The study long-term effects, neglect, and abuse of fluidetine is indeed already underway. However we've made a rookie mistake of forgetting that this heavy lifting is done by the attorneys and courts of civil law, where class-action suits litigate with billions at stake if they can produce enough obese 14-year-old boys who now wear underwire brassieres that harsh everyone's mellow. Long-term-effect study is a money loser and a reputation liller. No sane pill factory dares to venture into probing whatever a drug does once it's passed the cash registers and Visa terminals. Heaven forefend.