You know what's odd about the percentages? I think they're slanted or outright lies. I've taken a lot of "new" drugs and on several of them I had the side effects that only happens to 2% or something like that. I called my doctor about one drug, telling him how I was getting bronchitis and then I'd get better after I quit the drug and then I'd start it again and get bronchitis. His answer? "Oh, no, that drug does NOT have that side effect." So I checked the pharmacology myself and guess what? It was listed as a rare side effect. People prone to bronchitis get bronchitis. So the damn doctor was not even aware of the side effects of a drug he was pushing on people. Jerk. Had he said, "I don't know. I'll check," I would have respected him. But the outright denial which meant ignorance was inexcusable.
Off Topic » in reply to Re: Older drugs often safer than new
Re: Older drugs often safer than new
The whole thread (12 posts)
- Older drugs often safer than new (originally from Comestible Zone)
