[nfb-talk] A little concerned about this new drug aimed at totally blind population

Mike Freeman k7uij at panix.com
Sun Feb 2 15:59:20 UTC 2014 

Hey, man! Tone down the rhetoric.

If you read carefully one of my last messages, I admitted to you that I
stood corrected and that one of the articles did say they did a double-blind
study.

Please do not confuse skepticism with antipathy. I don't think any of us
begrudge  Vanda Pharmaceuticals the right to develop a non-24 drug. But
their advertising hype tends to prejudice some of us against their research
in that some of us think that a truly scientific study wouldn't appeal as
much to problems of the blind in terms that are all-too-familiar to many of
us.

Those of us with diabetes are unfortunately very familiar with research hype
-- "they" have been going to have a cure for Type 1 diabetes "just around
the corner" for the past half-century, for example. And there has been
research here in the Pacific Northwest on the non-24 problem since something
like 1985. I remember a doctor from Oregon State or the University of Oregon
writing to Dr. Jernigan asking what we thought of such research about that
time and he replied, in effect, that if the research was carefully done, NFB
would have no problem with it. IMO this is still what many of us think.

But you'll have to admit that their advertisements seem to take us for fools
-- not an auspicious way to win friends and influence people.

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Todor Fassl
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2014 7:08 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] A little concerned about this new drug aimed at
totally blind population

Mike,

I asked you a question. How in the world did you come to the conclusion that
the FDA approved this drug without a double blind study? That's an important
question. You should try to figure out what caused you to make 
such a ridiculous mistake.   Maybe you're not looking at this issue 
objectively. Maybe you should try to be more careful. That's always
important but even more so when dealing with medical issues.

All this stuff below is nothing but a smoke screen you're throwing up to
avoid admitting you shot your mouth off on a topic you know nothing about.
Now, get out there, do some research about this drug, and then get back to
us if you still have something to say.



On 02/02/2014 12:31 AM, Mike Freeman wrote:
> Sir:
>
> I sit corrected about a double-blind study and am glad to be informed.
> However, I assure you that FDA isn't always as careful as you might
believe.
> The announcement itself gives some indication of this in that FDA 
> fast-tracked experimental use of this drug, presumably because of the 
> blindness angle. And be assured that until various specialists in 
> statistical medicine and epidemiology insisted otherwise, the original 
> trial of the Salk poleo vaccine was going to be a single-blind, not a 
> double-blind study. But wiser heads prevailed so it was a full 
> pluscebo-controlled, double-blind study with something like fifty 
> thousand participants -- enough to give truly valid statistical results.
>
> And way back in 1936,Dilantin was fast-tracked for epilepsy control 
> because at that time, it was about the only drug other than 
> phenobarbital that was effective.
>
> And can you say viox or celibrex? Or Avandia, which was originally 
> approved, then got a strong warning label and now has been shown 
> largely not to merit that label?
>
> We're all (including scientists and medical personnel) human.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Mike
>   
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfb-talk [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Todor 
> Fassl
> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2014 4:50 PM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] A little concerned about this new drug aimed 
> at totally blind population
>
> Mike,
>
> How in the world did you come to the conclusion that no double-blind 
> studies have been done? That's *crazy*. The FDA doesn't approve drugs 
> w/o double blind studies. No wonder people accuse you of not knowing 
> what you are talking about.  This is so typical of your behaviour. You 
> never seem to care whether you know  the first thing about a subject 
> before shooting your mouth off. Do you realize how irresponsible you 
> are being? This is a medical issue, What the f**k do you know about
medicine?
>
> Here's a link to an article that specifically mentions a double blind 
> study that was done:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130617142045.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 02/01/2014 05:37 PM, Mike Freeman wrote:
>> Steve:
>>
>> Obviously, I agree with you on all counts.
>>
>> In addition, while at the national Center, I heard a number of ads 
>> pushing hetlioz and I found it amusing that they start out with a 
>> supposedly blind person saying: "You can't see me because this is 
>> radio. I can't see you because I'm totally blind." AS if he wasn't also
on the radio!
>>
>> While not denying that some may find the drug helpful, I must say 
>> that,
> like
>> you, I do not think nearly enough work has been done using controls 
>> and
> I'd
>> bet good money that no pluscebo-controlled, double-blind studies have 
>> been done.
>>
>> Mike Freeman
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfb-talk [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2014 2:24 PM
>> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] A little concerned about this new drug aimed 
>> at totally blind population
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have also been uneasy about all of this, but I recognize I don't 
>> know
> all
>> there is to know about all this.  Because One is blind and doesn't 
>> seem to have a sleep problem like this doesn't mean nobody does.
>> Because ablind person has a sleep disorder doesn't mean it is related 
>> to blindness, either.  I have seen firsthand where sleep clinics 
>> dealing with
> a
>> blind person assume the problems are related to blindness without 
>> running normal tests.  I've seen doctors actually get excited like 
>> little kids when they think they have a blind person with a sleep
problem.
>> It also appears that the drug Vanda has has now been approved and was 
>> put on a sort of fast track because it deals with a rare and severe 
>> condition.  Blind people will have a disservice done if this
> drug
>> is prescribed before a thorough evaluation is performed to analyze 
>> serious sleep disorders.  I also think that painting blind people
> in
>> their mass-marketing efforts as struggling to stay awake all day is 
>> not helpful in our efforts to get jobs.  There have been other 
>> marketing efforts, though, where people have not been paid, so I 
>> don't know if that
> is
>> Vanda or not.
>>
>>
>> I will forward the note I received regarding the approval of this drug.
> I'm
>> afraid I had to laugh a little when I saw that one side-effect is 
>> drousiness.  I want to be clear, though, that I do not claim that 
>> there
> are
>> not people with serious disorders who may be helped.  I also can't 
>> say
> that
>> I know for certain that this particular disorder doesn't exist.  I 
>> just think we need to be sure that we are not stereotyped into this 
>> disorder in a way that leaves other disorders undiagnosed.  We also 
>> need
> to
>> recognize that for such research to be real accurate, a control group 
>> who
> is
>> not blind but shares other similarities, such as the same 
>> unemployment rate, would need to have been used, and I have not been 
>> convinced that was done in the reading I've done, but I don't claim 
>> I've read every word of every study.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Steve Jacobson
>>
>> On Sat, 1 Feb 2014 13:48:39 -0800, Mike Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> Beth:
>>> I absolutely agree with you! Although a few blind folks may have a 
>>> sleep disorder (I know of one such person), so do many sighted 
>>> people and it is
>> my
>>> experience that when most blind persons with sleeping problems are 
>>> put on
> a
>>> regular schedule (i.e., no odd hours, working a nine-to-five day, 
>>> etc.)
> and
>>> get enough vigorous exercise, either on the job or as a program, 
>>> their
>> sleep
>>> problems disappear. For example, I know a lady who used to have 
>>> sleep problems when she wasn't working. But when she started working 
>>> a regular
>> day
>>> at a Head Start program, up and down all day with the kids, miracle 
>>> of miracles, her sleep problem disappeared!
>>> So I'm very much a doubter. Trouble is that when I voice such 
>>> skepticism with much vigor, I get a lot of push-back from other 
>>> blind people (both
> in
>>> ACB and NFB),maintaining I don't know what I'm talking about.
>>> Also, I know a couple of people who are participating in their 
>>> so-called studies and haven't received payment yet.
>>> Can you say "snake-oil"?
>>> Mike Freeman
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nfb-talk [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
>>> beth.wright at mindspring.com
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2014 1:33 PM
>>> To: nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> Subject: [nfb-talk] A little concerned about this new drug aimed at
> totally
>>> blind population
>>> Hi, folks. Just wanted to see if I could get the scoop on this new 
>>> drug that's supposed to correct the sleep/wake cycles in people who 
>>> are
> totally
>>> blind. I'm totally blind myself, but haven't had any problems with 
>>> my
> sleep
>>> patterns, so, even though I've seen lots of ads for it on
> blindness-related
>>> web sites and know that they've been a major sponsor at our 
>>> conventions,
> I
>>> wasn't all that concerned about it one way or the other. As far as I 
>>> can tell, their ads have been pretty tastelike and their recruitment
>> techniques,
>>> fairly low key. Lately, though, they seem to be ramping up the message.
>> From
>>> what I can tell, they now seem to be claiming that this sleep/wake 
>>> thing
> is
>>> a serious problem, affcting around eighty thousand people in the US, 
>>> the majority ofthe totally-blind population. I think that's 
>>> deceptive. I know that they need to reach the largest number of 
>>> people possible in order to make a sufficient profit, but I don't 
>>> think they should exaggerate the seriousness of this s o-called 
>>> disorder.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>> for
>>> nfb-talk:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.
>>> com _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>> for
>> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%4
> 0visi
>> .com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfb-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.c
>> om
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/fassl.tod%40gmai
> l.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.co
> m
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/fassl.tod%40gmai
> l.com


_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com

More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list