This covers them all....Mercola, Becker, Cesar and a few more.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

No, I had not heard this. Where are those figures from?

Yay!!! A question I can answer!!! From Systemic review on drug related hospital admissions ? A pubmed based search :

Abstract

Background

Drug related admissions have significantly increased over the past few decades. According to various studies on drug related hospital admissions, it was estimated that around 5–10% of hospital admissions were due to drug related problems (DRP), in which 50% of them are avoidable.
Objective

The objective of the study was to derive results from various studies conducted on drug related hospital admissions and have an overall view about the incidence, frequency, cost of treatment, major causative drugs, problems for drug related hospital admissions, and preventable drug related admissions and summarize the factors responsible for the occurrence of DRP.
Method

Relevant literatures related to ‘drug related hospital admissions’ were obtained from PubMed database. Articles that were published from October 2007 to September 2012 were collected. All the studies being shown in the search results were considered for the study irrespective of the specialty department.
Results

A total of 366 articles were found based on the keyword ‘drug related hospital admission’, ‘drug related problem admission’, and ‘adverse drug event admissions’ search. Out of which 49 articles were identified to be showing relevance to the study. Non-English, abstract-only articles, and out-patient adverse drug reaction (ADR) studies were filtered from 49 articles. Finally 15 articles were taken up for the study. Systemic analysis was made on these articles and the results were summarized.
Conclusion

Most of DRP studies were retrospective, multicenter studies conducted in general populations in Europe. The main objective of the studies was to estimate DRP frequency, incidence, risk factors and trends of DRP hospital admissions. Anti-neoplastic agents, CVS drugs and CNS drugs were related to most of the drug related problems. These studies concluded polypharmacy and older age were the major risk factors for developing drug related problems. It was found that the cost for the management of DRP was directly proportional to severity.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly

Anyway, back to what Gail was asking about. Did we ever get an answer to Gail's question? Is there anything to prove that test is not a valid test - that it's results are worthless or something? I like source documents to read where available and would like to know what other research has disproved the test.

We concluded amongst ourselves that a peer-reviewed clinical study with experimental and control groups would be needed to demonstrate that the Nutriscan test works. Nothing has disproved the test yet. Dr. Remillard and the Skeptvet have said that they would take a look at Dr. Dodds' work (Dr. Remillard will check out the Canine Nutrigenomics book; and Skeptvet will look at the Nutriscan test and the Canine Nutrigenomics book) and get back to us. Gail plans to follow up with Dr. Dodds directly to see if a peer-reviewed study will be coming out soon.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Yay!!! A question I can answer!!! From Systemic review on drug related hospital admissions ? A pubmed based search :

Abstract

Background

Drug related admissions have significantly increased over the past few decades. According to various studies on drug related hospital admissions, it was estimated that around 5–10% of hospital admissions were due to drug related problems (DRP), in which 50% of them are avoidable.
Objective

The objective of the study was to derive results from various studies conducted on drug related hospital admissions and have an overall view about the incidence, frequency, cost of treatment, major causative drugs, problems for drug related hospital admissions, and preventable drug related admissions and summarize the factors responsible for the occurrence of DRP.
Method

Relevant literatures related to ‘drug related hospital admissions’ were obtained from PubMed database. Articles that were published from October 2007 to September 2012 were collected. All the studies being shown in the search results were considered for the study irrespective of the specialty department.
Results

A total of 366 articles were found based on the keyword ‘drug related hospital admission’, ‘drug related problem admission’, and ‘adverse drug event admissions’ search. Out of which 49 articles were identified to be showing relevance to the study. Non-English, abstract-only articles, and out-patient adverse drug reaction (ADR) studies were filtered from 49 articles. Finally 15 articles were taken up for the study. Systemic analysis was made on these articles and the results were summarized.
Conclusion

Most of DRP studies were retrospective, multicenter studies conducted in general populations in Europe. The main objective of the studies was to estimate DRP frequency, incidence, risk factors and trends of DRP hospital admissions. Anti-neoplastic agents, CVS drugs and CNS drugs were related to most of the drug related problems. These studies concluded polypharmacy and older age were the major risk factors for developing drug related problems. It was found that the cost for the management of DRP was directly proportional to severity.

Here's some info copy and pasted from this article about what kinds of drugs we're taking about:

One-third of the studies reported that antineoplastic agents (Brvar et al., 2009, Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2010, Menéndez-Conde et al., 2011, Posthumus et al., 2012 and Rodenburg et al., 2011) as the major contributing drugs causing secondary infection, agranulocytosis, poisoning and constipation (Table 3). Same number of studies showed similar results by CNS drugs (Hartholt et al., 2010, Posthumus et al., 2012, Rodenburg et al., 2011, Shamliyan, 2010 and Wu et al., 2012). Seven studies indicated that cardiovascular drugs (Brvar et al., 2009, Conforti et al., 2012, Davies et al., 2010, Hartholt et al., 2010, Rodenburg et al., 2011, Singh et al., 2011 and Wu et al., 2010) as the major contributing class in which two studies showed diuretics (Conforti et al., 2012 and Davies et al., 2010) as the major contributing drugs causing problems such as electrolyte imbalance. Antidiabetic drugs (Brvar et al., 2009, Singh et al., 2011 and Shamliyan, 2010), immunosuppressive drugs (Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2010, Posthumus et al., 2012 and Rodenburg et al., 2011) antibiotics (Posthumus et al., 2012, Rodenburg et al., 2011 and Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2010) and anticoagulants (Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2010, Rodenburg et al., 2011 and Shamliyan, 2010) were found as the major causal drug in 20% of the studies causing problems like hypoglycemia, osteoporosis, GI bleed, gastroenteritis and hemorrhage. Two studies each suggested that systemic agents and analgesics as the major drugs causing GI bleed and nephropathy. (Hartholt et al., 2010 and Wu et al., 2010) One study implied warfarin (Brvar et al., 2009) and aniplatelets (Davies et al., 2010) as major contributing drugs causing complications such as bleeding.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Yay!!! A question I can answer!!! From Systemic review on drug related hospital admissions ? A pubmed based search :

Abstract

Background

Drug related admissions have significantly increased over the past few decades. According to various studies on drug related hospital admissions, it was estimated that around 5–10% of hospital admissions were due to drug related problems (DRP), in which 50% of them are avoidable.
Objective

The objective of the study was to derive results from various studies conducted on drug related hospital admissions and have an overall view about the incidence, frequency, cost of treatment, major causative drugs, problems for drug related hospital admissions, and preventable drug related admissions and summarize the factors responsible for the occurrence of DRP.
Method

Relevant literatures related to ‘drug related hospital admissions’ were obtained from PubMed database. Articles that were published from October 2007 to September 2012 were collected. All the studies being shown in the search results were considered for the study irrespective of the specialty department.
Results

A total of 366 articles were found based on the keyword ‘drug related hospital admission’, ‘drug related problem admission’, and ‘adverse drug event admissions’ search. Out of which 49 articles were identified to be showing relevance to the study. Non-English, abstract-only articles, and out-patient adverse drug reaction (ADR) studies were filtered from 49 articles. Finally 15 articles were taken up for the study. Systemic analysis was made on these articles and the results were summarized.
Conclusion

Most of DRP studies were retrospective, multicenter studies conducted in general populations in Europe. The main objective of the studies was to estimate DRP frequency, incidence, risk factors and trends of DRP hospital admissions. Anti-neoplastic agents, CVS drugs and CNS drugs were related to most of the drug related problems. These studies concluded polypharmacy and older age were the major risk factors for developing drug related problems. It was found that the cost for the management of DRP was directly proportional to severity.

The above article discusses the rate of admission for ALL drug related problems. If you just look at Drug-Drug Interactions, the percentage is much smaller (0 to 2.8%):

Epidemiology of Drug-Drug Interactions as a Cause of Hospital Admissions - Springer

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Yay!!! A question I can answer!!! From Systemic review on drug related hospital admissions ? A pubmed based search :

Abstract

Background

Drug related admissions have significantly increased over the past few decades. According to various studies on drug related hospital admissions, it was estimated that around 5–10% of hospital admissions were due to drug related problems (DRP), in which 50% of them are avoidable.
Objective

The objective of the study was to derive results from various studies conducted on drug related hospital admissions and have an overall view about the incidence, frequency, cost of treatment, major causative drugs, problems for drug related hospital admissions, and preventable drug related admissions and summarize the factors responsible for the occurrence of DRP.
Method

Relevant literatures related to ‘drug related hospital admissions’ were obtained from PubMed database. Articles that were published from October 2007 to September 2012 were collected. All the studies being shown in the search results were considered for the study irrespective of the specialty department.
Results

A total of 366 articles were found based on the keyword ‘drug related hospital admission’, ‘drug related problem admission’, and ‘adverse drug event admissions’ search. Out of which 49 articles were identified to be showing relevance to the study. Non-English, abstract-only articles, and out-patient adverse drug reaction (ADR) studies were filtered from 49 articles. Finally 15 articles were taken up for the study. Systemic analysis was made on these articles and the results were summarized.
Conclusion

Most of DRP studies were retrospective, multicenter studies conducted in general populations in Europe. The main objective of the studies was to estimate DRP frequency, incidence, risk factors and trends of DRP hospital admissions. Anti-neoplastic agents, CVS drugs and CNS drugs were related to most of the drug related problems. These studies concluded polypharmacy and older age were the major risk factors for developing drug related problems. It was found that the cost for the management of DRP was directly proportional to severity.

OK....Gemy said it was 15 - 20% ... this says 5 - 10%. Big difference. I was just wondering where she got her figures.

I just scanned this and will try to concentrate on it later on today. It is an interesting topic.

Thanks, Phil!

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

OK....Gemy said it was 15 - 20% ... this says 5 - 10%. Big difference. I was just wondering where she got her figures.

I just scanned this and will try to concentrate on it later on today. It is an interesting topic.

Thanks, Phil!

The paper gives a range of values from 1% to 20%, depending on the study and the hospital. The problem is worse among the elderly. The 5 to 10% is the average for all admissions at all hospitals.

[gracielove]

This did not need to be brought up again.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by pstinard

The paper gives a range of values from 1% to 20%, depending on the study and the hospital. The problem is worse among the elderly. The 5 to 10% is the average for all admissions at all hospitals.

Yes, I did get that part...about the elderly and also the average. The elderly have always been an issue. So many different meds and sometimes doctors. In an ideal world they would have one doctor and one pharmacy .. but even then you would find some drug to drug issues.

I just think that to make a statement like Gemy did is frightening to people who may already be afraid of meds. I don't know that she meant that but it did come off that way to me... that it could lead to people being afraid. There are so many factors that come into play and it is not like all of these are life threatening side effects and/or anaphylactic reactions. To say there should be a public outcry is a bit of a stretch in my way of thinking. We should ALL be informed consumers and certainly be aware of what we are taking in terms of meds. The bottom line though is that many of these numbers are from people who may have used insulin and not eaten or who took warfarin and didn't recognize bleeding symptoms OR who failed to get their blood work done .. doctors cannot monitor if people are non compliant. There is abuse of rx drugs on the streets, but they say the number is not huge. It is just that there are, as I said, too many variables imo to lump them together as something out of control and scary.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by gracielove

This did not need to be brought up again.

Definitely just got the email with what you actually said before "editing".........

[ladyjane]

hmmm...interesting

Need to check my emails.

[ladyjane]

For anyone who happens to be reading and missing things here, the OP gave credit to the author in her original post.

Here it is again for those who appear to have missed it:

https://www.thedodo.com/community/do...091066497.html

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

Yes, I did get that part...about the elderly and also the average. The elderly have always been an issue. So many different meds and sometimes doctors. In an ideal world they would have one doctor and one pharmacy .. but even then you would find some drug to drug issues.

I just think that to make a statement like Gemy did is frightening to people who may already be afraid of meds. I don't know that she meant that but it did come off that way to me... that it could lead to people being afraid. There are so many factors that come into play and it is not like all of these are life threatening side effects and/or anaphylactic reactions. To say there should be a public outcry is a bit of a stretch in my way of thinking. We should ALL be informed consumers and certainly be aware of what we are taking in terms of meds. The bottom line though is that many of these numbers are from people who may have used insulin and not eaten or who took warfarin and didn't recognize bleeding symptoms OR who failed to get their blood work done .. doctors cannot monitor if people are non compliant. There is abuse of rx drugs on the streets, but they say the number is not huge. It is just that there are, as I said, too many variables imo to lump them together as something out of control and scary.

Different people cope differently with all of the information that is out there. I'm taking several medications myself, one of which is necessary for my survival. That one drug has many interactions with other drugs that make treatment for other conditions much more difficult. I basically have to triage what illnesses I can be treated for, and whether the side effects are worth it. I have high cholesterol that can't be controlled by diet, and even though my main drug does not have any known interactions with the statin drugs, I can't tolerate Crestor or Lipitor. My doctor has started me on a third, less effective statin in one last Hail Mary to see if I can be treated for my high cholesterol. If I can't, I'll just have to live with high cholesterol. It's very interesting to me that my main drug/cholesterol drug interactions have never been documented--it could be that those combinations were not tested before these drugs were released, but hey, I'm willing to live with high cholesterol, and I don't feel any animosity towards the drug companies, because my life span will be much longer than it would have been 20 or 30 years ago, thanks to the drugs that I CAN tolerate.

From my point of view, some drugs are essential for the treatment of certain conditions--if you don't take them, you will die a premature death. But when you are prescribed a drug, you need to inform yourself thoroughly about the risks and benefits, and when you add another drug to your regime to treat another condition, you need to proceed very cautiously, starting out with a low dose, just to make sure something unusual and never-before-seen happens. This happens often enough to me that my doctor understands my situation thoroughly. I wish all doctors were as cautious. But, I don't blame the FDA or drug companies--it's impossible to test every combination of drugs under ever circumstance in animals or humans before a drug is released, and ultimately, even if they did, some individuals have their own unique interactions with medications. I have reached the stage of acceptance and caution.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

For anyone who happens to be reading and missing things here, the OP gave credit to the author in her original post.

Here it is again for those who appear to have missed it:

https://www.thedodo.com/community/do...091066497.html

That link is giving me a "URL not found" error. This link might work better:

https://www.thedodo.com/community/do...091066497.html

Now as for this other cryptic comment:

Originally Posted by gracielove

This did not need to be brought up again.

Am I missing something, or should I let it pass over my head?

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Different people cope differently with all of the information that is out there. I'm taking several medications myself, one of which is necessary for my survival. That one drug has many interactions with other drugs that make treatment for other conditions much more difficult. I basically have to triage what illnesses I can be treated for, and whether the side effects are worth it. I have high cholesterol that can't be controlled by diet, and even though my main drug does not have any known interactions with the statin drugs, I can't tolerate Crestor or Lipitor. My doctor has started me on a third, less effective statin in one last Hail Mary to see if I can be treated for my high cholesterol. If I can't, I'll just have to live with high cholesterol. It's very interesting to me that my main drug/cholesterol drug interactions have never been documented--it could be that those combinations were not tested before these drugs were released, but hey, I'm willing to live with high cholesterol, and I don't feel any animosity towards the drug companies, because my life span will be much longer than it would have been 20 or 30 years ago, thanks to the drugs that I CAN tolerate.

From my point of view, some drugs are essential for the treatment of certain conditions--if you don't take them, you will die a premature death. But when you are prescribed a drug, you need to inform yourself thoroughly about the risks and benefits, and when you add another drug to your regime to treat another condition, you need to proceed very cautiously, starting out with a low dose, just to make sure something unusual and never-before-seen happens. This happens often enough to me that my doctor understands my situation thoroughly. I wish all doctors were as cautious. But, I don't blame the FDA or drug companies--it's impossible to test every combination of drugs under ever circumstance in animals or humans before a drug is released, and ultimately, even if they did, some individuals have their own unique interactions with medications. I have reached the stage of acceptance and caution.

I took estrogen for years for severe menopausal issues. The doctor was hesitant to provide it to me and started me on a med that simply did not work. I finally told her I would rather use her for my gyn care but that if she did not give me what I needed, I would go elsewhere. I offered to sign a release. I knew the risks and I was willing to take them because the symptoms I had were interfering with my life. I did get breast cancer a couple of years ago...was it the estrogen? Perhaps,,, perhaps not. I choose to not think about it. I made an informed choice. Do I blame anyone? NO

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by pstinard

That link is giving me a "URL not found" error. This link might work better:

https://www.thedodo.com/community/do...091066497.html

Now as for this other cryptic comment:



Am I missing something, or should I let it pass over my head?

Thanks, Phil......I didn't check that link.

Yes, best to let it go....lol