|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Aug 4, 2016 11:33:05 GMT -5
...who resist writing Afrezza scripts and continue to prescribe common prandial insulin options that are not ultra-rapid acting and therefore remain in the body longer causing long-term damage to internal organs. The resulting hospitalizations, amputations and premature deaths from the effects of traditional insulin options to treat diabetes will become a target of lawyers. I'm not predicting this will happen soon, just that it will happen once the first attorney sees the potential. Doctors are probably safe for awhile based on using existing "standards of care" but this can change almost overnight with one class-action lawsuit. I can already visualize the attorney commercials...not that we need more!
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Aug 4, 2016 12:51:56 GMT -5
...who resist writing Afrezza scripts and continue to prescribe common prandial insulin options that are not ultra-rapid acting and therefore remain in the body longer causing long-term damage to internal organs. The resulting hospitalizations, amputations and premature deaths from the effects of traditional insulin options to treat diabetes will become a target of lawyers. I'm not predicting this will happen soon, just that it will happen once the first attorney sees the potential. Doctors are probably safe for awhile based on using existing "standards of care" but this can change almost overnight with one class-action lawsuit. I can already visualize the attorney commercials...not that we need more! Never going to happen. And no, standards of care do not change that radically overnight. |
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Aug 4, 2016 14:51:25 GMT -5
Total fantasy.
|
|
|
|
Post by longinvstr on Aug 4, 2016 16:18:56 GMT -5
Liable because they didn't persue/prescribe a non-inferior option? Tuff case
|
|
|
|
Post by akemp3000 on Aug 4, 2016 16:43:01 GMT -5
No one said it would happen quickly. Agreed that Afrezza is legally and technically considered "non-inferior" at the moment because of having to use antiquated FDA trial protocols that required improper dosing, diabetics are now learning, when used correctly, it is actually "significantly superior". The clamp studies proved this. Future studies will solidify the position. This will happen at a point in the future. It's fantasy to think otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by tayl5 on Aug 4, 2016 21:41:43 GMT -5
If standard of care says shoot the patient in the head, a doctor will not lose a case if he shoots the patient in the head. If he doesn't shoot the patient in the head, he's fair game.
The trick for suppliers of better treatments is to work with specialist medical societies to get the standards changed. As others noted, this can be a slow process, taking years if not decades. You might see a lawsuit in 2030.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 5, 2016 9:02:56 GMT -5
No doctor has ever lost a lawsuit for using an FDA approved drug in the manner specified on the label, and state laws to the contrary are preempted. Like the others have said, the goal is to assemble a critical number of controlled studies that clearly demonstrate that use of Afrezza is clinically superior, and that those benefits are not outweighed by the side effects.
Mannkind has not come close to meeting that level of evidence, but if they do you will see medical practice change quickly and especially for newly diagnosed patients. Medical practice is not static, but it is increasingly evidence-based which is precisely how it should be, but collecting evidence is expensive and time consuming.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 9:30:05 GMT -5
Genius post. Thankfully no one liked. This should honestly get deleted......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 9:45:53 GMT -5
Dont delete. It's a perfect reminder of what not to do when working thru investment decisions. Unless, of course, your goal is to consistently lose all your money.
|
|
|
|
Post by end2war on Aug 5, 2016 11:01:09 GMT -5
I agree with this post that big changes would be required before failure to prescribe Afrezza could be considered medical negligence. So long as a doctor follows the currently accepted standards of care, he is not negligent even if there is something on the horizon that might supplant the current standards. But, if that something becomes the new standard of care and a doctor ignores this improvement, some lawyers might attack a result that doctor gets when he could have gotten a better result following the new standard of care. But, this is all theoretical unless Afrezza proves it is the new standard and gets its label changed to show it is superior. Without superiority, there will never be an argument that a doctor should have used it, as doctors would not be negligent by using equivalent products.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 11:40:34 GMT -5
Dont delete. It's a perfect reminder of what not to do when working thru investment decisions. Unless, of course, your goal is to consistently lose all your money. I don't know if it is investors in general or its investors from this stocks community but some people are out there. |
|
