General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Polypharmacy and Science

Started by chucks · · Last activity · 1 post · 497 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
13 June 2004
Last activity
13 June 2004
Original author
chucks
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
497
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Presented by the author at the 2003 New England Seminar in Forensic Sciences, Colby
    College:

    Polypharmacy: What Cost in Morbidity and Mortality?©

    It is common practice in Medicine to put patients on
    combinations of drugs. The vast majority of these
    combinations of drugs (especially where 3 or more drugs are
    involved) have never been studied at all, let alone in double-
    blind trials ( with the exception of Oncology/AIDS
    treatment, where the toxicity of the drugs demands study);
    yet it is frequent practice to prescribe these multiple-drug
    combinations.

    It is well accepted in Pharmacology that it is
    scientifically impossible to accurately predict the side
    effects or clinical effects of a combination of drugs
    without studying that particular combination of drugs in
    test subjects. Knowledge of the pharmacologic profiles of
    the individual drugs in question does not in any way assure
    accurate prediction of the side effects of combinations of
    those drugs, especially when they have different mechanisms
    of action, which is very common because polypharmacy is most
    often prescribed to patients with "multiple illnesses". More
    than 100,000 patients in this country die from identified
    adverse drug reactions (perhaps the 4th to 6th leading cause
    of death in the U.S.)3 The number who die as a consequence
    of polypharmacy is, to my knowledge, unknown.

    The argument that the prescribing of drugs is the "Art" of
    Medicine is not valid in defending polypharmacy, because
    drugs are developed (indications, dose and administration,
    etc.) and approved through a "scientific" process (double-
    blind, placebo-controlled studies). The fact that the
    medicines are often prescribed for "different conditions" is
    irrelevant (especially to the patient's physiology). The
    idea that " we are doing the best we can ", a frequent
    defense of Polypharmacy, does not in any way uphold a
    scientific argument in favor of it. (We are, indeed, trying
    the best we can, with tools which do not improve at the rate
    we would wish!) The fact that "there is a limit to how much
    research can be done" in no way makes the research
    unnecessary in order to predict the side effects of specific
    combinations of drugs.

    It has been said in the past that <30% of medical practice
    was backed by controlled studies ¹ · ². Has this changed?
    How do we know? Are we looking closely enough at our way of
    practicing Medicine? Can the use of unstudied polypharmacy
    really be considered evidence-based, "scientific" Medicine?
    Can the Pathology community help initiate meaningful debate
    regarding this subject at a level that will produce more
    widespread awareness?

    Charles Sullivan, D.O. Waterville, ME

    "Science progresses, funeral by funeral." - Max Planck

    1.) Office of Technology Assessment: Assessing the efficacy
    and safety of medical technologies. U.S. Government
    Printing Office, Washington, 1978
    2.) Smith R: Where is the wisdom . . . ? the poverty of
    medical evidence. BMJ 1991;303:798
    3.) Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized
    Patients. JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205

    Additional Refs:

    Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals 509 U.S. 579
    (1993), 509,
    4.

    Goodstein, D. 2000. How Science Works. In U.S. Federal
    Judiciary Reference Manual on Evidence, pp. 66–72.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1990. The philosophical basis of peer review
    and the suppression of innovation. J. Am. Med. Assoc.
    263:1438–1441.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1996. Peer review of grant applications:
    A harbinger for mediocrity in clinical research? Lancet
    348:1293-1295.

    Horrobin, D.F. 1981-1982. Peer review: Is the good the enemy
    of the best? J. Res. Commun. Stud. 3:327–334.

    Rothwell, P.M. and Martyn, C.N. 2000. Reproducibility of
    peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between
    reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance
    alone? Brain
    5:1964–1969.

    Horrobin, D.F. 2000. Innovation in the pharmaceutical
    industry. J.
    R. Soc. Med. 93:341–345.

    Abstracts

    David A. Flockhart, and Jose E. Tanus-Santos Implications of
    Cytochrome P450 Interactions When Prescribing Medication for
    Hypertension Archives of Internal Medicine 162: 405-412.

    Kathryn A. Phillips, David L. Veenstra, Eyal Oren, Jane K.
    Lee, and Wolfgang Sadee Potential Role of Pharmacogenomics
    in Reducing Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review JAMA
    286: 2270-2279.

    Just Ebbesen, Ingebjørg Buajordet, Jan Erikssen, Odd Brørs,
    Thor Hilberg, Helge Svaar, and Leiv Sandvik Drug-Related
    Deaths in a Department of Internal Medicine Archives of
    Internal Medicine 161: 2317-2323.

    Jeffrey M. Rothschild, Frank A. Federico, Tejal K. Gandhi,
    Rainu Kaushal, Deborah H. Williams, and David W. Bates
    Analysis of Medication-Related Malpractice Claims: Causes,
    Preventability, and Costs Archives of Internal Medicine 162:
    2414-2420.

    Mark T. Holdsworth, Richard E. Fichtl, Maryam Behta, Dennis
    W. Raisch, Elena Mendez-Rico, Alexa Adams, Melanie Greifer,
    Susan Bostwick, and Bruce M. Greenwald Incidence and Impact
    of Adverse Drug Events in Pediatric Inpatients Arch Pediatr
    Adolesc Med 157: 60-65.

    David N. Juurlink, Muhammad Mamdani, Alexander Kopp, Andreas
    Laupacis, and Donald A. Redelmeier Drug-Drug Interactions
    Among Elderly Patients Hospitalized for Drug Toxicity JAMA
    289: 1652-1658.

    Jason Lazarou, Bruce H. Pomeranz, and Paul N. Corey
    Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized
    Patients: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies JAMA 279:
    1200-1205.

    Karen E. Lasser, Paul D. Allen, Steffie J. Woolhandler,
    David U. Himmelstein, Sidney M. Wolfe, and David H. Bor
    Timing of New Black Box Warnings and Withdrawals for
    Prescription Medications JAMA 287: 2215-2220.

    Abstract 1 of 8 Implications of Cytochrome P450 Interactions
    When Prescribing Medication for Hypertension David A.
    Flockhart, MD, PhD and Jose E. Tanus-Santos, MD, PhD

    Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:405-412. Many of the estimated 50
    million Americans with high blood pressure receive
    medications for hypertension and for other conditions,
    placing them at risk for adverse drug interactions. The risk
    for hypertension and for adverse drug reactions is highest
    in the elderly, who have the greatest need for pharmacologic
    therapy. The most important class of drug interactions
    involves the cytochrome P450 microsomal enzyme system, which
    handles a variety of xenobiotic substances. A potential for
    interactions with these enzymes exists with calcium channel
    blockers, {beta}-adrenergic blocking agents, angiotensin-
    converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor
    blockers but not with diuretic antihypertensives, which are
    renally eliminated and more vulnerable to drug interactions
    that occur in the kidney. This article reviews the
    cytochrome P450 enzyme system, identifies drugs and foods
    that have been implicated in metabolic interactions with
    antihypertensive agents, and suggests measures for reducing
    the risk of adverse events when drugs are coadministered.

    From the Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Indiana
    University School of Medicine, Indianapolis. Dr Flockhart is
    now with the Department of Medicine, Indiana University
    School of Medicine, Wishard Hospital, Indianapolis.

    Abstract 2 of 8 Potential Role of Pharmacogenomics in
    Reducing Adverse Drug Reactions A Systematic Review Kathryn
    A. Phillips, PhD, David L. Veenstra, PhD, PharmD, Eyal Oren,
    BA, Jane K. Lee, BA and Wolfgang Sadee, PhD

    JAMA. 2001;286:2270-2279. Context Adverse drug reactions are
    a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Although
    many adverse drug reactions are considered nonpreventable,
    recent developments suggest these reactions may be avoided
    through individualization of drug therapies based on genetic
    information, an application known as pharmacogenomics.

    Objective To evaluate the potential role of pharmacogenomics
    in reducing the incidence of adverse drug reactions.

    Data Sources MEDLINE English-language only searches for
    adverse drug reaction studies published between January 1995
    and June 2000 and review articles of variant alleles of drug-
    metabolizing enzymes published between January 1997 and
    August 2000. We also used online resources, texts, and
    expert opinion.

    Study Selection Detailed inclusion criteria were used to
    select studies. We included 18 of 333 adverse drug reaction
    studies and 22 of 61 variant allele review articles.

    Data Extraction All the investigators reviewed and coded
    articles using standardized abstracting forms.

    Data Synthesis We identified 27 drugs frequently cited in
    adverse drug reaction studies. Among these drugs, 59% are
    metabolized by at least 1 enzyme with a variant allele
    known to cause poor metabolism. Conversely, only 7% to
    22% of randomly selected drugs are known to be
    metabolized by enzymes with this genetic variability
    (range, P = 006-P<.001).

    Conclusions Our results suggest that drug therapy based on
    individuals' genetic makeups may result in a clinically
    important reduction in adverse outcomes. Our findings serve
    as a foundation for further research on how pharmacogenomics
    can reduce the incidence of adverse reactions and on the
    resulting clinical, societal, and economic implications.

    Author Affiliations: Department of Clinical Pharmacy (Drs
    Phillips, Mr Oren, and Ms Lee) and Biopharmaceutics (Dr
    Sadee) University of California-San Francisco; Department of
    Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Veenstra).

    Abstract 3 of 8 Drug-Related Deaths in a Department of
    Internal Medicine Just Ebbesen, MD, Ingebjørg Buajordet,
    MSc, Jan Erikssen, MD, PhD, Odd Brørs, MD, PhD, Thor
    Hilberg, MD, PhD, Helge Svaar, MD and Leiv Sandvik, MSc, PhD

    Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:2317-2323. Background Drug therapy
    is associated with adverse effects, and fatal adverse drug
    events (ADEs) have become major hospital problems. Our study
    assesses the incidence of fatal ADEs in a major medical
    department and identifies possible patient characteristics
    signifying fatal ADE risk.

    Methods During a 2-year period, a multidisciplinary study
    group examined all 732 patients who died 5.2% of the 13 992
    patients admitted to the Department of Internal Medicine,
    Central Hospital of Akershus, Nordbyhagen, Norway. Decisions
    about the presence or absence of fatal ADEs were based on
    aggregated clinical records, autopsy results, and findings
    from premortem and postmortem drug analyses.

    Results In 18.2% of the patients (133/732) (95% confidence
    interval, 15.4%-21.0%), deaths were classified as being
    directly (64 [48.1%] of 133) or indirectly (69 [51.9%] of
    133) associated with 1 or more drugs (this equals 9.5
    deaths per 1000 hospitalized patients). Those with fatal
    ADEs (cases) were older, had more diseases, and used more
    drugs than those without fatal ADEs (noncases). In 75 of
    the 133 patients with fatal ADEs, autopsy findings and/or
    drug analysis data were decisive for recognizing the ADEs;
    in 62 of the remaining 595 patients, similar data proved
    necessary to exclude the suspicion of a fatal ADE. Major
    culprit drugs were cardiovascular, antithrombotic, and
    sympathomimetic agents.

    Conclusions Fatal ADEs represent a major hospital problem,
    especially in elderly patients with multiple diseases. A
    higher number of drugs administered was associated with a
    higher frequency of fatal ADEs, but whether a high number of
    drugs is an independent risk factor for fatal ADEs is
    unsettled. Autopsy results and the findings of premortem and
    postmortem drug analyses were important for recognizing and
    excluding suspected fatal ADEs.

    From the Foundation for Health Services Research (Drs
    Ebbesen and Sandvik) and the Departments of Internal
    Medicine (Dr Erikssen) and Pathology (Dr Svaar), Central
    Hospital of Akershus, Nordbyhagen, Norway; and the Norwegian
    Medicines Control Authority (Ms Buajordet), the Division of
    Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Clinical Chemistry
    Department, Ullevaal University Hospital (Dr Brørs), and the
    National Institute of Forensic Toxicology (Dr Hilberg),
    Oslo, Norway.

    Abstract 4 of 8 Analysis of Medication-Related Malpractice
    Claims Causes, Preventability, and Costs Jeffrey M.
    Rothschild, MD,MPH, Frank A. Federico, RPh, Tejal K. Gandhi,
    MD,MPH, Rainu Kaushal, MD,MPH, Deborah H. Williams, MHA and
    David W. Bates, MD,MSc

    Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:2414-2420. Background Adverse drug
    events (ADEs) may lead to serious injury and may result in
    malpractice claims. While ADEs resulting in claims are not
    representative of all ADEs, such data provide a useful
    resource for studying ADEs. Therefore, we conducted a review
    of medication-related malpractice claims to study their
    frequency, nature, and costs and to assess the human factor
    failures associated with preventable ADEs. We also assessed
    the potential benefits of proved effective ADE prevention
    strategies on ADE claims prevention.

    Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of a New
    England malpractice insurance company claims records from
    January 1, 1990, to December 31, 1999. Cases were
    electronically screened for possible ADEs and followed up
    by independent review of abstracts by 2 physician
    reviewers (T.K.G. and R.K.). Additional in-depth claims
    file reviews identified potential human factor failures
    associated with ADEs.

    Results Adverse drug events represented 6.3% (129/2040) of
    claims. Adverse drug events were judged preventable in 73%
    (n = 94) of the cases and were nearly evenly divided between
    outpatient and inpatient settings. The most frequently
    involved medication classes were antibiotics,
    antidepressants or antipsychotics, cardiovascular drugs, and
    anticoagulants. Among these ADEs, 46% were life threatening
    or fatal. System deficiencies and performance errors were
    the most frequent cause of preventable ADEs. The mean costs
    of defending malpractice claims due to ADEs were comparable
    for nonpreventable inpatient and outpatient ADEs and
    preventable outpatient ADEs (mean, $64 700-74 200), but
    costs were considerably greater for preventable inpatient
    ADEs (mean, $376 500).

    Conclusions Adverse drug events associated with malpractice
    claims were often severe, costly, and preventable, and
    about half occurred in outpatients. Many interventions
    could potentially have prevented ADEs, with error proofing
    and process standardization covering the greatest
    proportion of events.

    From the Division of General Medicine, the Department of
    Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital (Drs Rothschild,
    Gandhi, Kaushal, and Bates and Ms Williams), and the Risk
    Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions
    (Mr Federico), Boston, Mass.

    Abstract 5 of 8 Incidence and Impact of Adverse Drug Events
    in Pediatric Inpatients Mark T. Holdsworth, PharmD, Richard
    E. Fichtl, PharmD, Maryam Behta, PharmD, Dennis W. Raisch,
    PhD, Elena Mendez-Rico, PharmD, Alexa Adams, MD, Melanie
    Greifer, MD, Susan Bostwick, MD and Bruce M. Greenwald, MD

    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003;157:60-65. Objectives To
    determine the incidence and causes of adverse drug events
    (ADEs) and potential ADEs in hospitalized children, and to
    examine the consequences of these events.

    Design Prospective review of medical records and staff
    interviews were performed. The ADEs were defined as
    injuries from medications or lack of an intended
    medication, and potential ADEs, as errors with the
    potential to result in injury.

    Setting A general pediatric unit and a pediatric intensive
    care unit in a metropolitan medical center.

    Patients A total of 1197 consecutive patient admissions were
    studied from September 15, 2000, to May 10, 2001. The
    admissions represented a total of 922 patients and 10 164
    patient-days.

    Results The ADEs (6/100 admissions, 7.5/1000 patient-days)
    and potential ADEs (8/100 admissions, 9.3/1000 patient-
    days) were common in hospitalized children. Demographic
    variables associated with the occurrence of these events
    were the length of hospital stay, case-mix index, and
    amount of medication exposure. After adjusting for length
    of stay, medication exposure continued to have a
    significant influence on ADEs and potential ADEs. For ADEs,
    18 (24%) were judged to be serious or life threatening.
    Most ADEs were not associated with major or permanent
    disability. Patients with both ADEs and potential ADEs were
    less likely to be routinely discharged and more likely to
    be discharged with home health care or to another
    institution, suggesting that patient disposition was not
    related to the adverse event.

    Conclusions Both ADEs and potential ADEs are common among
    hospitalized children with greater disease burden and
    medication exposure. These findings suggest that these
    events were a consequence, rather than a cause, of more
    severe illness.

    From the College of Pharmacy, University of New Mexico,
    Albuquerque (Dr Holdsworth); Departments of Pharmacy (Drs
    Fichtl, Behta, and Mendez-Rico) and Pediatrics (Drs Adams
    and Greifer), New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY;
    Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Research
    Pharmacy Coordinating Center, Albuquerque (Dr Raisch); and
    Department of Pediatrics, Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical
    College of Cornell University, New York (Drs Bostwick and
    Greenwald).

    Abstract 6 of 8 Drug-Drug Interactions Among Elderly
    Patients Hospitalized for Drug Toxicity David N. Juurlink,
    MD, FRCPC, Muhammad Mamdani, PharmD, MPH, Alexander Kopp,
    Andreas Laupacis, MD, MSc and Donald A. Redelmeier, MD, MSc

    JAMA. 2003;289:1652-1658. Context Drug-drug interactions are
    a preventable cause of morbidity and mortality, yet their
    consequences in the community are not well characterized.

    Objective To determine whether elderly patients admitted to
    hospital with specific drug toxicities were likely to have
    been prescribed an interacting drug in the week prior to
    admission.

    Design Three population-based, nested case-control studies.

    Setting Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 1994, to
    December 31, 2000.

    Patients All Ontario residents aged 66 years or older
    treated with glyburide, digoxin, or an angiotensin-
    converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. Case patients were those
    admitted to hospital for drug-related toxicity. Prescription
    records of cases were compared with those

    renal disease) for receipt of interacting medications (co-
    trimoxazole with glyburide, clarithromycin with digoxin, and
    potassium-sparing diuretics with ACE inhibitors).

    Main Outcome Measure Odds ratio for association between
    hospital admission for drug toxicity (hypoglycemia, digoxin
    toxicity, or hyperkalemia, respectively) and use of an
    interacting medication in the preceding week, adjusted for
    diagnoses, receipt of other medications, the number of
    prescription drugs, and the number of hospital admissions in
    the year preceding the index date.

    Results During the 7-year study period, 909 elderly patients
    receiving glyburide were admitted with a diagnosis of
    hypoglycemia. In the primary analysis, those patients
    admitted for hypoglycemia were more than 6 times as likely
    to have been treated with co-trimoxazole in the previous
    week (adjusted odds ratio, 6.6; 95% confidence interval,
    4.5-9.7). Patients admitted with digoxin toxicity (n = 1051)
    were about 12 times more likely to have been treated with
    clarithromycin (adjusted odds ratio, 11.7; 95% confidence
    interval, 7.5-18.2) in the previous week, and patients
    treated with ACE inhibitors admitted with a diagnosis of
    hyperkalemia (n = 523) were about 20 times more likely to
    have been treated with a potassium-sparing diuretic
    (adjusted odds ratio, 20.3; 95% confidence interval, 13.4-
    30.7) in the previous week. No increased risk of drug
    toxicity was found for drugs with similar indications but
    no known interactions (amoxicillin, cefuroxime, and
    indapamide, respectively).

    Conclusions Many hospital admissions of elderly patients for
    drug toxicity occur after administration of a drug known to
    cause drug-drug interactions. Many of these interactions
    could have been avoided.

    Author Affiliations: Sunnybrook and Women's College Health
    Sciences Centre; the Clinical Epidemiology and Healthcare
    Research Program, and Departments of Medicine (Drs Juurlink,
    Laupacis, and Redelmeier), and Pharmacy (Dr Mamdani),
    University of Toronto; and the Institute for Clinical
    Evaluative Sciences (Drs Juurlink, Mamdani, Laupacis, and
    Redelmeier, and Mr Kopp), Toronto, Ontario.

    Abstract 7 of 8 Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in
    Hospitalized Patients A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies
    Jason Lazarou, MSc, Bruce H. Pomeranz, MD, PhD and Paul N.
    Corey, PhD

    JAMA. 1998;279:1200-1205. Objective. To estimate the
    incidence of serious and fatal adverse drug reactions (ADR)
    in hospital patients.

    Data Sources. Four electronic databases were searched from
    1966 to 1996.

    Study Selection. Of 153, we selected 39 prospective studies
    from US hospitals.

    Data Extraction. Data extracted independently by 2
    investigators were analyzed by a random-effects model. To
    obtain the overall incidence of ADRs in hospitalized
    patients, we combined the incidence of ADRs occurring while
    in the hospital plus the incidence of ADRs causing admission
    to hospital. We excluded errors in drug administration,
    noncompliance, overdose, drug abuse, therapeutic failures,
    and possible ADRs. Serious ADRs were defined as those that
    required hospitalization, were permanently disabling, or
    resulted in death.

    Data Synthesis. The overall incidence of serious ADRs was
    6.7% (95% confidence interval
    [CI], 5.2%-8.2%) and of fatal ADRs was 0.32% (95% CI, 0.23%-
    0.41%) of hospitalized patients. We estimated that in
    1994 overall 2216000 (1721000-2711000) hospitalized
    patients had serious ADRs and 106000 (76000-137000) had
    fatal ADRs, making these reactions between the fourth
    and sixth leading cause of death.

    Conclusions. The incidence of serious and fatal ADRs in US
    hospitals was found to be extremely high. While our results
    must be viewed with circumspection because of heterogeneity
    among studies and small biases in the samples, these data
    nevertheless suggest that ADRs represent an important
    clinical issue.

    From the Departments of Zoology (Mr Lazarou and Dr
    Pomeranz), Physiology (Dr Pomeranz), and Public Health
    Sciences (Dr Corey), University of Toronto, Toronto,
    Ontario.

    Abstract 8 of 8 Timing of New Black Box Warnings and
    Withdrawals for Prescription Medications Karen E. Lasser,
    MD,MPH, Paul D. Allen, MD,MPH, Steffie J. Woolhandler,
    MD,MPH, David U. Himmelstein, MD, Sidney M. Wolfe, MD and
    David H. Bor, MD

    JAMA. 2002;287:2215-2220. Context Recently approved drugs
    may be more likely to have unrecognized adverse drug
    reactions (ADRs) than established drugs, but no recent
    studies have examined how frequently postmarketing
    surveillance identifies important ADRs.

    Objective To determine the frequency and timing of discovery
    of new ADRs described in black box warnings or necessitating
    withdrawal of the drug from the market.

    Design and Setting Examination of the Physicians' Desk
    Reference for all new chemical entities approved by the US
    Food and Drug Administration between 1975 and 1999, and all
    drugs withdrawn from the market between 1975 and 2000 (with
    or without a prior black box warning).

    Main Outcome Measures Frequency of and time to a new black
    box warning or drug withdrawal.

    Results A total of 548 new chemical entities were approved
    in 1975-1999; 56 (10.2%) acquired a new black box warning or
    were withdrawn. Forty-five drugs (8.2%) acquired 1 or more
    black box warnings and 16 (2.9%) were withdrawn from the
    market. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, the estimated probability
    of acquiring a new black box warning or being withdrawn from
    the market over 25 years was 20%. Eighty-one major changes
    to drug labeling in the Physicians' Desk Reference occurred
    including the addition of 1 or more black box warnings per
    drug, or drug withdrawal. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, half of
    these changes occurred within 7 years of drug introduction;
    half of the withdrawals occurred within 2 years.

    Conclusions Serious ADRs commonly emerge after Food and Drug
    Administration approval. The safety of new agents cannot be
    known with certainty until a drug has been on the market for
    many years.

    Author Affiliations: Department of Medicine, Cambridge
    Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Mass
    (Drs Lasser, Allen, Woolhandler, Himmelstein, and Bor);
    and Public Citizen Health Research Group, Washington, DC
    (Dr Wolfe).

    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    newsfeeds.comnewsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the
    World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different
    Servers! =-----

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.