What is the cost of lasix

Q. What happens if I donât buy ACA-compliant health insurance?. A. It depends on where you live and what medical care you end up needing during the year. If I don't buy an ACA-compliant plan, will I have to pay a penalty?.

The Affordable Care Actâs individual mandate penalty was reduced to $0 as of 2019, so there is no longer a federal penalty for not having minimum essential health coverage.But unless you qualify for an exemption, there is a penalty for being without minimum essential coverage if you live in California, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey, or the District of Columbia. You donât necessarily need ACA-compliant coverage in order to avoid the penalty in those states, and there are some types of minimum essential coverage that arenât ACA-compliant (for example, grandmothered and grandfathered health plans are not fully ACA-compliant, and yet they count as minimum essential coverage). But an ACA-compliant plan is going to give you the most robust coverage. If my plan is not ACA-compliant, how will my benefits differ?. All ACA-compliant plans in the individual and small group markets are required to cover the ACAâs essential health benefits without any caps on the total amount that the plan spends on your care.

So theyâll provide a solid safety net if you end up needing significant medical care (although ACA-compliant large group plans are not required to cover the essential health benefits, most do so voluntarily in an effort to attract and retain employees). And all ACA-compliant plans are required to cover pre-existing conditions without any waiting periods.But if you buy a plan thatâs not ACA-compliant, the insurer will be likely to use medical underwriting to adjust the premiums or the coverage based on your medical history, and the plan wonât have to cover the essential health benefits unless the state has its own requirements (Idahoâs enhanced short-term health plans, for example, are not fully compliant with the ACA, but are required to cover the essential health benefits). What health insurance plans are not considered ACA-compliant?. If youâre purchasing your own coverage, there is a wide range of plans that arenât required to comply with the ACAâs rules. These include short-term health insurance, Farm Bureau plans in Iowa, Indiana, Tennessee, and Kansas, travel insurance, accident supplements, limited benefit plans, fixed indemnity plans, and other supplemental or limited coverage.As long as youâre not in a state that has its own penalty for people who go without minimum essential coverage, youâre free to purchase a plan thatâs not compliant with the ACA, and you wonât be penalized for doing so.

But your coverage wonât be anywhere near a solid as it would be under an ACA-compliant plan. If you stay healthy, youâll be fine. But if you end up needing extensive medical care, your non-ACA-compliant plan could leave you on the hook for substantial medical bills. Is a grandmothered or grandfathered plan ACA-compliant?. If youâve got coverage under a pre-ACA plan (a grandmothered or grandfathered plan), itâs likely not compliant with the ACA.

But it is considered minimum essential coverage â so it will fulfill a state-based individual mandate and you wonât be subject to a penalty.Itâs in your best interest, however, to make sure you carefully compare it with the ACA-compliant plans that will be available for purchase during open enrollment. And even if you looked a few years ago and werenât eligible for premium subsidies, you may be subsidy-eligible now due to increases in the poverty level. (For 2014 coverage, a family of four could only earn up to $94,200 to be subsidy-eligible. For 2021, that amount will have increased to $104,800.)Louise Norris is an individual health insurance broker who has been writing about health insurance and health reform since 2006. She has written dozens of opinions and educational pieces about the Affordable Care Act for healthinsurance.org.

Her state health exchange updates are regularly cited by media who cover health reform and by other health insurance experts..

Lasix 1 mg

	Lasix	Micardis hct	Microzide	Isoptin sr
Can women take	At cvs	On the market	At cvs	At cvs
Buy with echeck	18h	22h	19h	16h
Best way to get	RX pharmacy	At walgreens	Online Pharmacy	On the market
Best price	100mg 30 tablet $32.95	40mg + 12.5mg 30 tablet $259.95	25mg 60 tablet $105.95	$
Best price for brand	Yes	Depends on the weight	Not always	Not always
Female dosage	Online	No	Yes	No
Can you get a sample	Drugstore on the corner	At walmart	Online Pharmacy	On the market

People receive the hypertension medications test at a hypertension medications testing site in street at Manhattan on December 8, 2021 in New York.Liao Pan | China News Service | Getty ImagesThe omicron hypertension medications variant first detected in southern Africa about a month ago now makes up about 3% of cases sequenced in the U.S., according to data from the lasix 1 mg Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.While the delta variant still dominates the U.S. At about 97% of all hypertension medications cases lasix 1 mg analyzed, omicron is quickly gaining ground. The new variant represented an estimated 2.9% of all cases sequenced last week, lasix 1 mg up from 0.4% the previous week, according to the CDC.More than two dozen states have reported omicron cases so far. California was first to confirm an omicron case in the U.S. On Dec lasix 1 mg.

1 in a resident who flew into San Francisco from South lasix 1 mg Africa. But the CDC on Friday said they've confirmed an earlier case of omicron in a patient who developed symptoms on Nov. 15. It's not clear when the variant first arrived in the U.S.The CDC on Friday said one vaccinated person has been hospitalized with omicron, but no deaths have been reported among the 43 patients that have been followed up on. The most common symptoms so far are cough, fatigue, congestion and a runny nose.Among those patients, 58% were between the ages of 18 and 39 years of age and 79% were fully vaccinated at least 14 days before symptom onset or testing positive.The CDC reported that 33% of the 43 patients traveled internationally during the 14 days prior to developing symptoms or testing positive, indicating that community spread is underway in the U.S.CNBC Health &.

Science Scientists and public health experts have said omicron is very contagious, though little is known about whether the variant causes more mild or more severe disease than delta. The United Kingdom issued a level 4 hypertension medications alert on Sunday, a step below the highest warning level. Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday confirmed the first omicron death in the U.K. On Monday, warning that Britain faces a "tidal wave" of omicron s.U.K. Health Secretary Sajid Javid said on Monday that omicron is spreading at a "phenomenal rate" with cases doubling every few days.

Last week, Javid warned that the U.K. Faces more than 1 million omicron cases by year end.CDC Director Rochelle Walenksy said on Friday that the U.S. Is not facing the same urgent timeline as the U.K. On omicron. "I don't expect will be on the same time horizon as U.K.

And we're continuing to follow cases and we'll look at that carefully," she said during a White House hypertension medications update on Friday.However, Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, believes omicron will likely overtake delta in the U.S. Soon."It's just a matter of time before omicron becomes the dominant variant here, and I think that could happen relatively quickly," Osterholm told CNBC on Thursday.The U.S. Is reporting nearly 120,00 new cases per day, based on a seven-day average of data compiled by Johns Hopkins University, flat over the past week but up 25% from before ThanksgivingAbout 66,500 Americans are hospitalized with hypertension medications, according to a seven-day average of Department of Health and Human Services data through Monday, up 22% over the past two weeks. Though rising, that is still lower than the delta wave's peak when more than 100,000 patients were hospitalized with the lasix in early September..

People receive the hypertension medications test at a hypertension medications testing site in street at https://kompatech.de/where-to-buy-generic-seroquel/ Manhattan on December 8, 2021 in New York.Liao Pan | China News Service | Getty ImagesThe omicron what is the cost of lasix hypertension medications variant first detected in southern Africa about a month ago now makes up about 3% of cases sequenced in the U.S., according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.While the delta variant still dominates the U.S. At about 97% of all hypertension medications what is the cost of lasix cases analyzed, omicron is quickly gaining ground. The new variant represented an estimated 2.9% of all cases sequenced last week, up from 0.4% the previous week, according to the CDC.More than two dozen states have reported omicron cases so what is the cost of lasix far. California was first to confirm an omicron case in the U.S.

On Dec what is the cost of lasix. 1 in what is the cost of lasix a resident who flew into San Francisco from South Africa. But the CDC on Friday said they've confirmed an earlier case of omicron in a patient who developed symptoms on Nov. 15.

It's not clear when the variant first arrived in the U.S.The CDC on Friday said one vaccinated person has been hospitalized with omicron, but no deaths have been reported among the 43 patients that have been followed up on. The most common symptoms so far are cough, fatigue, congestion and a runny nose.Among those patients, 58% were between the ages of 18 and 39 years of age and 79% were fully vaccinated at least 14 days before symptom onset or testing positive.The CDC reported that 33% of the 43 patients traveled internationally during the 14 days prior to developing symptoms or testing positive, indicating that community spread is underway in the U.S.CNBC Health &. Science Scientists and public health experts have said omicron is very contagious, though little is known about whether the variant causes more mild or more severe disease than delta. The United Kingdom issued a level 4 hypertension medications alert on Sunday, a step below the highest warning level.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday confirmed the first omicron death in the U.K. On Monday, warning that Britain faces a "tidal wave" of omicron s.U.K. Health Secretary Sajid Javid said on Monday that omicron is spreading at a "phenomenal rate" with cases doubling every few days. Last week, Javid warned that the U.K.

Faces more than 1 million omicron cases by year end.CDC Director Rochelle Walenksy said on Friday that the U.S. Is not facing the same urgent timeline as the U.K. On omicron. "I don't expect will be on the same time horizon as U.K.

Though rising, that is still lower than the delta wave's peak when more than 100,000 patients were hospitalized with the lasix in early September..

How should I use Lasix?

Take Lasix by mouth with a glass of water. You may take Lasix with or without food. If it upsets your stomach, take it with food or milk. Do not take your medicine more often than directed. Remember that you will need to pass more urine after taking Lasix. Do not take your medicine at a time of day that will cause you problems. Do not take at bedtime.

Talk to your pediatrician regarding the use of Lasix in children. While this drug may be prescribed for selected conditions, precautions do apply.

Overdosage: If you think you have taken too much of Lasix contact a poison control center or emergency room at once.

NOTE: Lasix is only for you. Do not share Lasix with others.

Natural lasix for humans

What order lasix overnight delivery if natural lasix for humans I misunderstand someone and embarrass myself?. What if my hearing aid batteries run out?. What if I get passed up for a promotion because of my hearing loss?. What if natural lasix for humans my tinnitus gets worse?. And so on.

Physical signs of anxiety Anxiety can trigger physical symptoms. Nausea, dizziness, muscle aches, insomnia and trouble concentrating, among natural lasix for humans others. You may feel a sense of dread or doom, as if you're standing on the edge of windy cliff. If these thoughts and physical sensations are becoming persistent, intrusive and affecting your quality of life, it may be time to seek professional help. This may require treating both natural lasix for humans your hearing loss and your anxiety.

How this plays out day-to-day varies by your unique circumstances, however. Why are you anxious?. Mental health professionals generally natural lasix for humans categorize anxiety into five buckets. Obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. If you have a car accident and banged your head, you might experience rapid hearing loss and possibly other symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Your symptoms and treatment plan might look very different from someone who has slowly been losing her hearing and is constantly looking for signs that she's developing natural lasix for humans dementia (when it's really just hearing loss). Complicating the picture is that people with hearing loss may have a related condition that causes tinnitus and dizziness, which can be unsettling and anxiety inducing, as well. Related. Why anxiety often accompanies balance disorders, and what to natural lasix for humans do about it What the research shows Struggling in everyday situations that arenât difficult for other people is stressful. Anxiety is one response to stress.

In a 12-year study of nearly 4,000 French people age 65 and up, participants diagnosed with hearing loss at the beginning had a greater chance of developing anxiety symptoms over time. Interestingly, people with vision loss werenât more natural lasix for humans likely to become anxious. Itâs often observed that people accept wearing glasses more easily than hearing aidsâpossibly because of the anxiety associated with hearing loss. In general, evidence of a tie is stronger when it corresponds with severity. In a study of more than 1,700 adults aged 76 to 85 who were not living in an natural lasix for humans institution, those with mild hearing loss had a 32 percent higher risk of reporting anxiety.

If you had a moderate or higher loss, your chance of anxiety rose by 59 percent. Hearing loss severity and tinnitus increase risk The tie to severity also showed up in research among adults of all ages. In an overview of 25 studies that evaluated more than 17,000 adults in all, the team found a higher risk of natural lasix for humans anxiety if your hearing loss was more severe or if you had tinnitus. None of this means that youâre doomed to be anxious because of your hearing loss. Within the overview, in five studies that looked at symptoms among the hearing impaired at one point in time, between 15 percent and 31 percent of the participants had clinically significant anxiety symptoms.

In other natural lasix for humans words, most didnât. Those numbers are higher than weâd likeâbut anxiety is common. About 18 percent of American adults qualify as having an anxiety disorder in any year, the Anxiety and Depression Association of America (ADAA) reports. Do I have social anxiety or am natural lasix for humans I just frustrated by not hearing?. Age-related hearing loss, called presbycusis, typically sneaks up on you over time.

You may not even notice that youâre giving up on noisy social occasions because of your hearing loss. Instead, you accept that you âjust donât like parties.â Loneliness can creep up on natural lasix for humans you as well, and contribute to medical problems and yes, anxiety. People with social anxiety are afraid of any situation in which they might be negatively judged, from conversations with superiors on the job to dates, small-talk and parties. Hearing loss does create situations that can irritate other people. When you canât natural lasix for humans hear well, you may miss clues that let you know when someone is about to talk or hasnât yet finished, and end up interrupting.

You might pretend to hear, or guess, or think you heard someoneâand reply inappropriately. You didnât hear the jokeâand youâre the only one who didnât laugh. So hearing loss can make natural lasix for humans you feel left out or socially unskilled. If you enjoy being around people, your social anxiety is mild. For example, Dr.

Blazer notes that some people go to religious services, but natural lasix for humans come in late and leave early so they donât have to chit-chat. Their problems might be solved by hearing aids. If you have extreme social anxiety, simply sitting with people would make you anxious. People diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) may be flooded with worry and struggle with a gamut of physical symptoms for days before natural lasix for humans a date or job interview. Communication tools can help If your problem is primarily the struggles of socializing with hearing loss, you can learn to love social gatherings again.

You can take someone to a quieter room and have a great conversationâonce youâve got your hearing aids. Also, learn the key communication tools for people with natural lasix for humans hearing impairments. Even with hearing aids, living with hearing loss requires an attitude adjustment. For example, you may need to accept that you canât hear the people at the other end of a long table. (As a person with hearing loss, Iâve learned not to be embarrassed when other natural lasix for humans people are laughing at a joke I didnât catch.

I just say, âI didnât hear that.â) Could anxiety disorders hurt your hearing?. Possibly. In a study of more than 10,500 adults in Taiwan, researchers found a greater risk of natural lasix for humans sudden hearing loss among those with an anxiety disorder. In the 12-year French study mentioned above, volunteers diagnosed with GAD but not hearing loss at the beginning of the research were more likely to develop hearing loss than those without GAD. Interestingly, those with GAD were not more likely to experience a decline in their vision.

More study would natural lasix for humans explain why hearing in particular might be affected by anxiety. Anxiety is 'highly treatable' What can you do?. Most people with anxiety problems are never treated, the ADAA points out, although these disorders are âhighly treatable.â âAnxiety is very common but the healthcare profession doesnât pay attention to it,â psychiatrist Dan Blazer told Healthy Hearing. Dr. Blazer, professor emeritus of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University Medical Center, chaired the National Academies Committee on Accessible and Affordable Hearing Health Care for Adults.

ÂWe just throw up our hands.â So donât wait for an annual checkupâyouâll need to reach out to your doctor or seek a psychiatrist or psychologist. Treatment for anxiety may include medicationâLexapro and Paxil are first-line choicesâand talk-therapy such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), in which you learn how to tame repetitive and negative thoughts. For the physical symptoms, tools like exercise and meditation can help. If you have tinnitus, you also may be grappling with anticipatory anxiety. Hearing aids and other devices And of course, if hearing loss is triggering anxiety, hearing aids could dramatically improve your life.

While they will not restore your hearing to normal, they can help you deal with some of the worrying aspects of hearing loss, such as communication snafus. There are also phone apps and other devices you can use to manage specific fears. For example, if you need to set an alarm very loud but wake up panicked by the shriek in the dark, consider a clock that produces a light like the sunrise, or a bed shaker alarm. There are many other assistive listening devices that can make hearing loss less anxiety-inducing. But just the thought of hearing aids makes me anxious When youâre anxious in general or about hearing, you may be anxious about your hearing aids as well.

Although itâs common to stall and be anxious when you first face your hearing problem, people tend to adjust to hearing aids over weeks or months, retired audiologist Richard Carmen and psychiatrist Dr. Shelley Uram write. Men are especially likely to take pride in being healthy, so they resist admitting what seems like a weakness. Some patients seem to adjust, largely to please other people, but months later, simply stop wearing their aids. ÂBecause their anxiety was never confronted or because their anxiety is too overwhelming, their coping mechanisms are unable to rise to the occasion of dealing with the hearing loss or hearing aids,â Carmen and Uram note.

When these people give up on their hearing aids, they end up feeling isolated. Too many dig in their heels and get angry at family and friends who complain that they canât hear. Dr. Blazer describes a patient, a prominent man who felt uncomfortable attending his Lionâs Club because he couldnât keep up with the conversation. ÂWhen he came to see me, five minutes in, heâd say, âI probably should put on my hearing aid,ââ Dr.

Blazer told Healthy Hearing. Donât be that person. Instead, be open with your hearing care team so together you can make sure your hearing aids are rewarding enough to wear through the day.

What if I what is the cost of lasix don't hear something important?. What if I misunderstand someone and embarrass myself?. What if my hearing aid batteries run out?. What if what is the cost of lasix I get passed up for a promotion because of my hearing loss?.

What if my tinnitus gets worse?. And so on. Physical signs of anxiety Anxiety can trigger what is the cost of lasix physical symptoms. Nausea, dizziness, muscle aches, insomnia and trouble concentrating, among others.

You may feel a sense of dread or doom, as if you're standing on the edge of windy cliff. If these thoughts and physical sensations are becoming persistent, intrusive and affecting your what is the cost of lasix quality of life, it may be time to seek professional help. This may require treating both your hearing loss and your anxiety. How this plays out day-to-day varies by your unique circumstances, however.

Why are you what is the cost of lasix anxious?. Mental health professionals generally categorize anxiety into five buckets. Obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. If you have a car accident and banged your head, you might experience rapid hearing loss and possibly other what is the cost of lasix symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Your symptoms and treatment plan might look very different from someone who has slowly been losing her hearing and is constantly looking for signs that she's developing dementia (when it's really just hearing loss). Complicating the picture is that people with hearing loss may have a related condition that causes tinnitus and dizziness, which can be unsettling and anxiety inducing, as well. Related. Why anxiety often accompanies balance disorders, and what to do about it What the research shows Struggling in everyday situations that arenât difficult for other people is stressful.

Anxiety is one response to stress. In a 12-year study of nearly 4,000 French people age 65 and up, participants diagnosed with hearing loss at the beginning had a greater chance of developing anxiety symptoms over time. Interestingly, people with vision loss werenât more likely to become anxious. Itâs often observed that people accept wearing glasses more easily than hearing aidsâpossibly because of the anxiety associated with hearing loss.

In general, evidence of a tie is stronger when it corresponds with severity. In a study of more than 1,700 adults aged 76 to 85 who were not living in an institution, those with mild hearing loss had a 32 percent higher risk of reporting anxiety. If you had a moderate or higher loss, your chance of anxiety rose by 59 percent. Hearing loss severity and tinnitus increase risk The tie to severity also showed up in research among adults of all ages.

In an overview of 25 studies that evaluated more than 17,000 adults in all, the team found a higher risk of anxiety if your hearing loss was more severe or if you had tinnitus. None of this means that youâre doomed to be anxious because of your hearing loss. Within the overview, in five studies that looked at symptoms among the hearing impaired at one point in time, between 15 percent and 31 percent of the participants had clinically significant anxiety symptoms. In other words, most didnât.

Those numbers are higher than weâd likeâbut anxiety is common. About 18 percent of American adults qualify as having an anxiety disorder in any year, the Anxiety and Depression Association of America (ADAA) reports. Do I have social anxiety or am I just frustrated by not hearing?. Age-related hearing loss, called presbycusis, typically sneaks up on you over time.

You may not even notice that youâre giving up on noisy social occasions because of your hearing loss. Instead, you accept that you âjust donât like parties.â Loneliness can creep up on you as well, and contribute to medical problems and yes, anxiety. People with social anxiety are afraid of any situation in which they might be negatively judged, from conversations with superiors on the job to dates, small-talk and parties. Hearing loss does create situations that can irritate other people.

When you canât hear well, you may miss clues that let you know when someone is about to talk or hasnât yet finished, and end up interrupting. You might pretend to hear, or guess, or think you heard someoneâand reply inappropriately. You didnât hear the jokeâand youâre the only one who didnât laugh. So hearing loss can make you feel left out or socially unskilled.

If you enjoy being around people, your social anxiety is mild. For example, Dr. Blazer notes that some people go to religious services, but come in late and leave early so they donât have to chit-chat. Their problems might be solved by hearing aids.

If you have extreme social anxiety, simply sitting with people would make you anxious. People diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) may be flooded with worry and struggle with a gamut of physical symptoms for days before a date or job interview. Communication tools can help If your problem is primarily the struggles of socializing with hearing loss, you can learn to love social gatherings again. You can take someone to a quieter room and have a great conversationâonce youâve got your hearing aids.

Also, learn the key communication tools for people with hearing impairments. Even with hearing aids, living with hearing loss requires an attitude adjustment. For example, you may need to accept that you canât hear the people at the other end of a long table. (As a person with hearing loss, Iâve learned not to be embarrassed when other people are laughing at a joke I didnât catch.

I just say, âI didnât hear that.â) Could anxiety disorders hurt your hearing?. Possibly. In a study of more than 10,500 adults in Taiwan, researchers found a greater risk of sudden hearing loss among those with an anxiety disorder. In the 12-year French study mentioned above, volunteers diagnosed with GAD but not hearing loss at the beginning of the research were more likely to develop hearing loss than those without GAD.

Interestingly, those with GAD were not more likely to experience a decline in their vision. More study would explain why hearing in particular might be affected by anxiety. Anxiety is 'highly treatable' What can you do?. Most people with anxiety problems are never treated, the ADAA points out, although these disorders are âhighly treatable.â âAnxiety is very common but the healthcare profession doesnât pay attention to it,â psychiatrist Dan Blazer told Healthy Hearing.

Dr. Blazer, professor emeritus of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University Medical Center, chaired the National Academies Committee on Accessible and Affordable Hearing Health Care for Adults. ÂWe just throw up our hands.â So donât wait for an annual checkupâyouâll need to reach out to your doctor or seek a psychiatrist or psychologist. Treatment for anxiety may include medicationâLexapro and Paxil are first-line choicesâand talk-therapy such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), in which you learn how to tame repetitive and negative thoughts.

For the physical symptoms, tools like exercise and meditation can help. If you have tinnitus, you also may be grappling with anticipatory anxiety. Hearing aids and other devices And of course, if hearing loss is triggering anxiety, hearing aids could dramatically improve your life. While they will not restore your hearing to normal, they can help you deal with some of the worrying aspects of hearing loss, such as communication snafus.

There are also phone apps and other devices you can use to manage specific fears. For example, if you need to set an alarm very loud but wake up panicked by the shriek in the dark, consider a clock that produces a light like the sunrise, or a bed shaker alarm. There are many other assistive listening devices that can make hearing loss less anxiety-inducing. But just the thought of hearing aids makes me anxious When youâre anxious in general or about hearing, you may be anxious about your hearing aids as well.

ÂBecause their anxiety was never confronted or because their anxiety is too overwhelming, their coping mechanisms are unable to rise to the occasion of dealing with the hearing loss or hearing aids,â Carmen and Uram note. When these people give up on their hearing aids, they end up feeling isolated. Too many dig in their heels and get angry at family and friends who complain that they canât hear. Dr.

Blazer describes a patient, a prominent man who felt uncomfortable attending his Lionâs Club because he couldnât keep up with the conversation. ÂWhen he came to see me, five minutes in, heâd say, âI probably should put on my hearing aid,ââ Dr. Blazer told Healthy Hearing. Donât be that person.

Can too much lasix cause renal failure

Facebook and other social media companies have accurate information can too much lasix cause renal failure about the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of millions of individuals. What these companies know is often more than what userâs therapists know.If therapists and other health care professionals must guard what they know about a patientâs mental health as protected health information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Facebook and other social media companies should, too.Under HIPAA, protected health information includes information that is ârecorded in any form or mediumâ that ârelates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual.â Applying this law to Facebook would ensure that the userâs health information the company possesses is protected with the highest privacy standards and is disclosed and used only with the userâs permission and only when it is considered to be in the benefit for the userâs health.advertisement If Facebook needs to use a userâs information for targeting ads or any other purpose, HIPAA would require explicit permission from the can too much lasix cause renal failure user, a process in which they would be made aware of the potential health risks of participating on Facebookâs platform.Social media companies infer a lot from what, when, and how long a user âengagesâ on the platform. They use this information to build a model of a userâs personality, including their attitudes, choices, and aspirations that can be used to serve highly targeted ads to the user.

For Facebook, more eyeballs on the ads leads to more revenue.advertisement Many researchers, including me, have spent time trying to understand can too much lasix cause renal failure how social media relates to mental health. This work has aimed to answer two main questions:How does social media use affect mental health?. How can social media be used to predict mental can too much lasix cause renal failure health status?.

Frances Haugenâs testimony before Congress and the documents leaked about Facebookâs internal research on teen mental health covered only the first question. The hearing confirmed that can too much lasix cause renal failure Facebook âknowsâ about the harmful effects of Instagram on teenage girlsâ mental health but has decided to remain silent. Facebookâs response to the report on how Instagram affects teen mental health claims that its platform has done more good than harm, and that the company continues to maximize the good and minimize the harm.Whether the use of social media directly causes worse mental health remains somewhat murky.Studies, including Facebookâs internal research, show only a correlation between social media use and poorer mental health.

Some studies have gone so far as to show that the can too much lasix cause renal failure correlation continues over time. Correlation, of course, does not equal causality. It is possible that participants in these studies were already predisposed to certain mental health conditions and can too much lasix cause renal failure their use of social media reflected that.

Or that factors outside of social media use are predominantly causing their mental health to decline. To conclusively say if social media use in whole or part causes worse mental health would require researchers to look at all the information Facebook and Instagram, which Facebook owns, have on users and analyze it in relation to their mental health â information can too much lasix cause renal failure that is inaccessible to researchers. This is not unique to Facebook and Instagram.

Platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, which are more popular among teens than Instagram, are even more restrictive.If lawmakers are able to implement Haugenâs recommendation for more transparency and independent research, they might be able to pressure these companies can too much lasix cause renal failure to allow broader access to the data they have amassed, which would help researchers more definitively understand how social media affects mental health.The second main research question, about whether social media can be used to predict mental health status, has essentially been answered in the affirmative. Facebook has the data that can be used can too much lasix cause renal failure to diagnose an individualâs mental health status and its artificial intelligence knows more about a userâs mental health state before the user does.Studies have repeatedly confirmed that usersâ mental health state is accurately reflected on social media. Things like stress and mood variability can be measured by looking at a userâs media content, captions, and usage patterns.

Furthermore, it is possible to predict the mental can too much lasix cause renal failure health state of participants using just their social media archives. These predictions can often be as accurate as diagnoses given by therapists.The rich online behavior data present on platforms like Facebook can be used to predict anorexia, depression, schizophrenia, anxiety and more. For example, the presence of distorted thoughts, often used by therapists can too much lasix cause renal failure to diagnose depression, can be algorithmically detected by analyzing the language in a userâs posts.

Some of these predictions are accurate up to 3 months before a clinical diagnosis.Perhaps unintentionally, Facebook and others have collected highly sensitive health information about billions of people that can be easily used to determine mental health status the same way a therapist would, but better and faster. There arenât currently any incentives for these companies to use this information for good, or to can too much lasix cause renal failure help researchers in doing so.While Facebook does provide resources to support mental health, like connections to online communities and educational materials, that is far from enough. But if Facebook agreed to comply with HIPAA, that would open doors for transparent research as well as make the company more responsible and liable for its usersâ health.

This would help create new can too much lasix cause renal failure technologies that can use mental health information collected from users to make health care products that can warn users of potential upcoming health challenges and navigate them to the appropriate resources. Mental health providers would be able to use this information to point people to the right treatment and monitor their progress.The U.S. Is in the midst of its worst mental health crisis in history, with can too much lasix cause renal failure 4 in 10 Americans needing mental health support.

The average time before someone gets treatment is 11 years. In such a crisis, it makes sense to leverage the research findings to use the power and scale of social media to develop tools for the early detection of mental health disorders to help millions of people get the timely support they need.In addition to updating privacy laws to catch up with social media, lawmakers should can too much lasix cause renal failure strongly consider applying highly protective laws like HIPAA to social media companies. This would truly maximize the good these companies say they do and create the right incentives for them to turn the tide on the mental health crisis.Param Kulkarni is practitioner and researcher with Cornell Tech, founder of GetAwareHealth.com, and leads the machine learning team at Ginger.io..

Facebook and other social media companies have accurate information about the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of millions of individuals what is the cost of lasix. What these companies know is often more than what userâs therapists know.If therapists and other health care professionals must guard what they know about a patientâs mental health as protected health information under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Facebook and other social media companies should, too.Under HIPAA, protected health information includes information that is ârecorded in any form or mediumâ that ârelates to the past, present, or future physical or what is the cost of lasix mental health or condition of an individual.â Applying this law to Facebook would ensure that the userâs health information the company possesses is protected with the highest privacy standards and is disclosed and used only with the userâs permission and only when it is considered to be in the benefit for the userâs health.advertisement If Facebook needs to use a userâs information for targeting ads or any other purpose, HIPAA would require explicit permission from the user, a process in which they would be made aware of the potential health risks of participating on Facebookâs platform.Social media companies infer a lot from what, when, and how long a user âengagesâ on the platform. They use this information to build a model of a userâs personality, including their attitudes, choices, and aspirations that can be used to serve highly targeted ads to the user. For Facebook, more eyeballs on the ads leads to more revenue.advertisement Many researchers, including me, have what is the cost of lasix spent time trying to understand how social media relates to mental health. This work has aimed to answer two main questions:How does social media use affect mental health?.

How can social what is the cost of lasix media be used to predict mental health status?. Frances Haugenâs testimony before Congress and the documents leaked about Facebookâs internal research on teen mental health covered only the first question. The hearing confirmed that Facebook âknowsâ about the harmful effects of Instagram on teenage girlsâ mental health but what is the cost of lasix has decided to remain silent. Facebookâs response to the report on how Instagram affects teen mental health claims that its platform has done more good than harm, and that the company continues to maximize the good and minimize the harm.Whether the use of social media directly causes worse mental health remains somewhat murky.Studies, including Facebookâs internal research, show only a correlation between social media use and poorer mental health. Some studies have gone so far as to show that the correlation continues over what is the cost of lasix time.

Correlation, of course, does not equal causality. It is possible that participants in these studies were already predisposed to certain mental health conditions and their use of social media what is the cost of lasix reflected that. Or that factors outside of social media use are predominantly causing their mental health to decline. To conclusively say if social media what is the cost of lasix use in whole or part causes worse mental health would require researchers to look at all the information Facebook and Instagram, which Facebook owns, have on users and analyze it in relation to their mental health â information that is inaccessible to researchers. This is not unique to Facebook and Instagram.

Platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, which are more popular among teens than Instagram, are even more restrictive.If lawmakers are able to implement Haugenâs what is the cost of lasix recommendation for more transparency and independent research, they might be able to pressure these companies to allow broader access to the data they have amassed, which would help researchers more definitively understand how social media affects mental health.The second main research question, about whether social media can be used to predict mental health status, has essentially been answered in the affirmative. Facebook has the what is the cost of lasix data that can be used to diagnose an individualâs mental health status and its artificial intelligence knows more about a userâs mental health state before the user does.Studies have repeatedly confirmed that usersâ mental health state is accurately reflected on social media. Things like stress and mood variability can be measured by looking at a userâs media content, captions, and usage patterns. Furthermore, it is possible to predict the mental health state of participants using just what is the cost of lasix their social media archives. These predictions can often be as accurate as diagnoses given by therapists.The rich online behavior data present on platforms like Facebook can be used to predict anorexia, depression, schizophrenia, anxiety and more.

For example, the what is the cost of lasix presence of distorted thoughts, often used by therapists to diagnose depression, can be algorithmically detected by analyzing the language in a userâs posts. Some of these predictions are accurate up to 3 months before a clinical diagnosis.Perhaps unintentionally, Facebook and others have collected highly sensitive health information about billions of people that can be easily used to determine mental health status the same way a therapist would, but better and faster. There arenât currently any incentives for these companies to use this information for good, or to help what is the cost of lasix researchers in doing so.While Facebook does provide resources to support mental health, like connections to online communities and educational materials, that is far from enough. But if Facebook agreed to comply with HIPAA, that would open doors for transparent research as well as make the company more responsible and liable for its usersâ health. This would help create new technologies that can use mental health information collected from users to what is the cost of lasix make health care products that can warn users of potential upcoming health challenges and navigate them to the appropriate resources.

Mental health providers would be able to use this information to point people to the right treatment and monitor their progress.The U.S. Is in the midst of its worst mental health crisis in history, with 4 what is the cost of lasix in 10 Americans needing mental health support. The average time before someone gets treatment is 11 years. In such a crisis, it makes sense to leverage the research findings to use the power and scale of social media to develop tools for the early detection of mental health disorders to help millions of people get the timely what is the cost of lasix support they need.In addition to updating privacy laws to catch up with social media, lawmakers should strongly consider applying highly protective laws like HIPAA to social media companies. This would truly maximize the good these companies say they do and create the right incentives for them to turn the tide on the mental health crisis.Param Kulkarni is practitioner and researcher with Cornell Tech, founder of GetAwareHealth.com, and leads the machine learning team at Ginger.io..

Does lasix have sulfa

A fourth wave of the opioid epidemic is coming, a national expert on drug use and policy said during a virtual panel discussion this week hosted by the Berkshire County, Massachusetts, does lasix have sulfa District Attorneyâs Office and the Berkshire Opioid Addiction Prevention Collaborative.Dr. Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of family and community medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine, said the next wave in the countryâs opioid health emergency will focus on stimulants like methamphetamine and cocaine, and drug combinations where stimulants are used in conjunction with opioids.âThe use of methamphetamines is back and itâs back big time,â said Ciccarone, whose most recent research has focused on heroin use.Previously, officials had said there were three waves of the opioid epidemic â the first being does lasix have sulfa prescription pills, the second being heroin, and the third being synthetic drugs, like fentanyl.Now, Ciccarone said, what federal law enforcement and medical experts are seeing is an increase in the use of stimulants, especially methamphetamines.The increase in deaths due to stimulants may be attributed to a number of causes. The increase in supply, both imported and domestically produced, as well as the increase of the drugsâ potency.âMethâs purity and potency has gone up to historical levels,â he said. ÂAs of 2018, weâve reached unseen heights of 97 percent potency and 97 percent does lasix have sulfa purity.

In a prohibitionist world, we should not be seeing such high quality. This is almost pharmaceutical quality.âAdditionally, law enforcement and public health experts like Ciccarone are seeing an increase in the does lasix have sulfa co-use of stimulants with opioids, he said. Speedballs, cocaine mixed with heroin, and goofballs, methamphetamines used with heroin or fentanyl, are becoming more common from the Midwest into Appalachia and up through New England, he said.Federal law enforcement officials are recommending local communities prepare for the oncoming rise in illegal drugs coming into their communities.âSome people will use them both at the same time, but some may use them in some combination regularly,â he said. ÂThey may use meth in the morning to go to work, and use heroin does lasix have sulfa at night to come down.âThe co-use, he said, was an organic response to the fentanyl overdose epidemic.âSome of the things that we heard â¦ is that meth is popularly construed as helping to decrease heroin and fentanyl use.

Helping with heroin withdraw symptoms and helping with heroin overdoses,â he said. ÂWe debated this for many years that people were does lasix have sulfa using stimulants to reverse overdoses â weâre hearing it again.ââSupply is up, purity is up, price is down,â he said. ÂWe know from economics that when drug patterns go in that direction, use is going up.âCiccarone said that there should not be deaths because of stimulants, but that heroin/fentanyl is the deadly element in the equation.His recommendations to communities were not to panic, but to lower the stigma surrounding drug use in order to affect change. Additionally, he said, policies should focus on does lasix have sulfa reduction.

supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction. But not focus on only one single drug.Additionally, he said that by addressing issues within communities and by healing communities socially, economically and spiritually, communities can does lasix have sulfa begin to reduce demand.âWeâve got to fix the cracks in our society, because drugs fall into the cracks,â he said.Shutterstock U.S. Rep. Annie Kuster (D-NH) recently held two virtual roundtables addressing how hypertension medications has affected New Hampshireâs does lasix have sulfa healthcare industry.âThe health and economic crisis caused by hypertension medications has created significant challenges for Granite State healthcare, mental health, and substance use treatment providers â at the same time, we are seeing increases in substance abuse and mental illness across New Hampshire,â Kuster said.

ÂFrom the transition does lasix have sulfa to telehealth care and cancellations of elective procedures to a lack of personal protective equipment and increasing health needs of our communities â providers have overcome a multitude of obstacles due to hypertension medications in recent months. I was glad to hear from these hard-working Granite Staters, whose insights will continue to guide my work in Congress as we respond to this lasix. Iâm committed to ensuring that does lasix have sulfa communities across New Hampshire can safely access the care and treatment they deserve.âThe first roundtable addressed substance-use disorder (SUD) and mental health.The second virtual roundtable was an opportunity for health care providers to speak about their workplace challenges during the lasix. Kuster is the founder and co-chairwoman of the Bipartisan Opioid Task Force, which held a virtual discussion in June on the opioid crisis and the lasix.Shutterstock Opioid prescription rates for outpatient knee surgery vary nationwide, according to a study recently published in BMJ Open.

ÂWe found massive levels of does lasix have sulfa variation in the proportion of patients who are prescribed opioids between states, even after adjusting for nuances of the procedure and differences in patient characteristics,â said Dr. M. Kit Delgado, the studyâs senior author and an assistant professor of Emergency Medicine and does lasix have sulfa Epidemiology in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. ÂWeâve also seen that the average number of pills prescribed was extremely high for outpatient procedures of this type, particularly for patients who had not been taking opioids prior to surgery.âResearchers examined insurance claims for nearly 100,000 patients who had arthroscopic knee surgery between 2015 and 2019 and had not used any opioid prescriptions in the six months before the surgery.Within three days of a procedure, 72 percent of patients filled an opioid prescription.

High prescription rates were found in the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain regions does lasix have sulfa. The coasts had lower rates.Nationwide, the average prescription strength was equivalent to 250 milligrams of morphine over five days. This is the threshold for increased risk of does lasix have sulfa opioid overdose death, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Shutterstock U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia awarded nearly $20 million to four states significantly impacted by the opioid crisis, the Department of Labor announced Thursday.

The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, the Maryland Department of Labor, the Ohio Department of does lasix have sulfa Job and Family Services, and the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development were awarded the money as part of the DOLâs âSupport to Communities. Fostering Opioid Recovery through Workforce Developmentâ created after the passage of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act of 2018. The money will be does lasix have sulfa used to retrain workers in areas with high rates of substance use disorders. At a press conference in Piketon, Ohio, Scalia said the DOL had awarded Ohioâs Department of Job and Family Services $5 million does lasix have sulfa to help communities in southern Ohio combat the opioid crisis in that area.

ÂTodayâs funding represents this Administrationâs continued commitment to serving those most in need,â said Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training John Pallasch. ÂThe U.S does lasix have sulfa. Department of Labor is taking a strong stand to support individuals and communities impacted by the crisis.âGrantees will use the funds to collaborate with community partners, such as employers, local workforce development boards, treatment and recovery centers, law enforcement officials, faith-based community organizations, and others, to address the economic effects of substance misuse, opioid use, addiction, and overdose.Shutterstock CVS Health has completed the installation of time-delayed safe technology at all 446 Massachusetts locations as part of its initiatives aimed at reducing the misuse and diversion of prescription medications in Massachusetts, the company announced Thursday. The safes are intended to prevent robberies of controlled substance medications, such does lasix have sulfa as oxycodone and hydrocodone, by electronically delaying the time it takes for pharmacy employees to open the safe where those drugs are stored.The company also announced that it had added 50 new medication disposal units in select stores throughout Massachusetts.

Those units join 106 secure disposal units previously installed at CVS locations across the state and another 43 units previously donated to Massachusetts law enforcement agencies. The company does lasix have sulfa plans to install another six units in stores by the yearâs end. ÂWhile our nation and our company focus on hypertension medications treatment, testing, and other measures to prevent community transmission of the lasix, the misuse of prescription drugs remains an ongoing challenge in Massachusetts and elsewhere that warrants our continued attention,â said John Hering, Region Director for CVS Health. ÂThese steps to reduce the theft and diversion of opioid medications bring added security to our stores and more disposal options for our communities.âIn 2015, does lasix have sulfa CVS implemented time-delayed safe technology in CVS pharmacies across Indianapolis in response to the high volume of pharmacy robberies in that city.

CVS stores that do not offer medication disposal units offer all customers filling opioid prescriptions for the first time with DisposeRX packets that effectively and efficiently breakdown unused drugs into a biodegradable gel for safe disposal in the trash at home..

A fourth wave of the opioid epidemic is coming, a national expert on drug use and policy said during what is the cost of lasix a virtual panel discussion this week hosted by the Berkshire County, Massachusetts, District Attorneyâs Office and the Berkshire Opioid Addiction Prevention Collaborative.Dr. Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of family and community medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine, said the next wave in the countryâs opioid health emergency will focus on stimulants like methamphetamine and cocaine, and drug combinations where stimulants are used in conjunction with opioids.âThe use of methamphetamines is back and itâs back big time,â said Ciccarone, whose most recent research has focused on heroin use.Previously, officials had said there were three waves of the opioid epidemic â the first being prescription pills, the second being heroin, and the third being synthetic drugs, like fentanyl.Now, Ciccarone said, what federal law enforcement and medical experts are seeing is an increase in the use of stimulants, especially methamphetamines.The increase in deaths due to stimulants may be what is the cost of lasix attributed to a number of causes. The increase in supply, both imported and domestically produced, as well as the increase of the drugsâ potency.âMethâs purity and potency has gone up to historical levels,â he said. ÂAs of what is the cost of lasix 2018, weâve reached unseen heights of 97 percent potency and 97 percent purity. In a prohibitionist world, we should not be seeing such high quality.

This is almost pharmaceutical quality.âAdditionally, law enforcement and what is the cost of lasix public health experts like Ciccarone are seeing an increase in the co-use of stimulants with opioids, he said. Speedballs, cocaine mixed with heroin, and goofballs, methamphetamines used with heroin or fentanyl, are becoming more common from the Midwest into Appalachia and up through New England, he said.Federal law enforcement officials are recommending local communities prepare for the oncoming rise in illegal drugs coming into their communities.âSome people will use them both at the same time, but some may use them in some combination regularly,â he said. ÂThey may use meth in the morning to go to work, and use heroin at night to come down.âThe co-use, he said, was an organic response to the fentanyl overdose epidemic.âSome of what is the cost of lasix the things that we heard â¦ is that meth is popularly construed as helping to decrease heroin and fentanyl use. Helping with heroin withdraw symptoms and helping with heroin overdoses,â he said. ÂWe debated this for many years that what is the cost of lasix people were using stimulants to reverse overdoses â weâre hearing it again.ââSupply is up, purity is up, price is down,â he said.

ÂWe know from economics that when drug patterns go in that direction, use is going up.âCiccarone said that there should not be deaths because of stimulants, but that heroin/fentanyl is the deadly element in the equation.His recommendations to communities were not to panic, but to lower the stigma surrounding drug use in order to affect change. Additionally, he said, policies should focus on what is the cost of lasix reduction. supply reduction, demand reduction and harm reduction. But not focus on only one single drug.Additionally, he said that by addressing issues within communities and by healing communities socially, economically what is the cost of lasix and spiritually, communities can begin to reduce demand.âWeâve got to fix the cracks in our society, because drugs fall into the cracks,â he said.Shutterstock U.S. Rep.

Annie Kuster (D-NH) recently held two virtual roundtables addressing how hypertension medications has affected New Hampshireâs what is the cost of lasix healthcare industry.âThe health and economic crisis caused by hypertension medications has created significant challenges for Granite State healthcare, mental health, and substance use treatment providers â at the same time, we are seeing increases in substance abuse and mental illness across New Hampshire,â Kuster said. ÂFrom the transition to telehealth care and cancellations of elective procedures to a lack of what is the cost of lasix personal protective equipment and increasing health needs of our communities â providers have overcome a multitude of obstacles due to hypertension medications in recent months. I was glad to hear from these hard-working Granite Staters, whose insights will continue to guide my work in Congress as we respond to this lasix. Iâm committed to ensuring that communities across New Hampshire can safely access the care and treatment they deserve.âThe what is the cost of lasix first roundtable addressed substance-use disorder (SUD) and mental health.The second virtual roundtable was an opportunity for health care providers to speak about their workplace challenges during the lasix. Kuster is the founder and co-chairwoman of the Bipartisan Opioid Task Force, which held a virtual discussion in June on the opioid crisis and the lasix.Shutterstock Opioid prescription rates for outpatient knee surgery vary nationwide, according to a study recently published in BMJ Open.

ÂWe found massive levels of what is the cost of lasix variation in the proportion of patients who are prescribed opioids between states, even after adjusting for nuances of the procedure and differences in patient characteristics,â said Dr. M. Kit Delgado, the studyâs senior author and an assistant professor of Emergency Medicine and Epidemiology what is the cost of lasix in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. ÂWeâve also seen that the average number of pills prescribed was extremely high for outpatient procedures of this type, particularly for patients who had not been taking opioids prior to surgery.âResearchers examined insurance claims for nearly 100,000 patients who had arthroscopic knee surgery between 2015 and 2019 and had not used any opioid prescriptions in the six months before the surgery.Within three days of a procedure, 72 percent of patients filled an opioid prescription. High prescription what is the cost of lasix rates were found in the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain regions.

The coasts had lower rates.Nationwide, the average prescription strength was equivalent to 250 milligrams of morphine over five days. This is the threshold for increased risk of opioid overdose death, according to what is the cost of lasix the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Shutterstock U.S. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia awarded nearly $20 million to four states significantly impacted by the opioid crisis, the Department of Labor announced Thursday. The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, the Maryland Department of Labor, the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, what is the cost of lasix and the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development were awarded the money as part of the DOLâs âSupport to Communities. Fostering Opioid Recovery through Workforce Developmentâ created after the passage of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act of 2018.

The money will be used to retrain what is the cost of lasix workers in areas with high rates of substance use disorders. At a press conference in Piketon, Ohio, Scalia said the DOL had awarded Ohioâs Department of Job and Family Services $5 million to help communities in what is the cost of lasix southern Ohio combat the opioid crisis in that area. ÂTodayâs funding represents this Administrationâs continued commitment to serving those most in need,â said Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training John Pallasch. ÂThe U.S what is the cost of lasix. Department of Labor is taking a strong stand to support individuals and communities impacted by the crisis.âGrantees will use the funds to collaborate with community partners, such as employers, local workforce development boards, treatment and recovery centers, law enforcement officials, faith-based community organizations, and others, to address the economic effects of substance misuse, opioid use, addiction, and overdose.Shutterstock CVS Health has completed the installation of time-delayed safe technology at all 446 Massachusetts locations as part of its initiatives aimed at reducing the misuse and diversion of prescription medications in Massachusetts, the company announced Thursday.

The safes are intended to prevent robberies of controlled substance medications, what is the cost of lasix such as oxycodone and hydrocodone, by electronically delaying the time it takes for pharmacy employees to open the safe where those drugs are stored.The company also announced that it had added 50 new medication disposal units in select stores throughout Massachusetts. Those units join 106 secure disposal units previously installed at CVS locations across the state and another 43 units previously donated to Massachusetts law enforcement agencies. The company plans to install another six units in stores what is the cost of lasix by the yearâs end. ÂWhile our nation and our company focus on hypertension medications treatment, testing, and other measures to prevent community transmission of the lasix, the misuse of prescription drugs remains an ongoing challenge in Massachusetts and elsewhere that warrants our continued attention,â said John Hering, Region Director for CVS Health. ÂThese steps to reduce the theft and diversion of opioid medications bring added security to our stores and more disposal what is the cost of lasix options for our communities.âIn 2015, CVS implemented time-delayed safe technology in CVS pharmacies across Indianapolis in response to the high volume of pharmacy robberies in that city.

The company saw a 70 percent decline in pharmacy robberies in stores where the time-delayed safes were installed. Since then, the company has installed 4,760 time-delayed safes in 15 states and the District of Columbia what is the cost of lasix and has seen a 50 percent decline in pharmacy robberies in those areas. The company said it would add an additional 1,000 in-store medication disposal units to the 2,500 units it currently has in CVS pharmacies nationwide. The units allow what is the cost of lasix customers to drop unused prescriptions into a safe place for their disposal to prevent those drugs from being misused. CVS stores that do not offer medication disposal units offer all customers filling opioid prescriptions for the first time with DisposeRX packets that effectively and efficiently breakdown unused drugs into a biodegradable gel for safe disposal in the trash at home..

Lasix and pregnancy

My interest was in that broader question of corruption and abuse lasix and pregnancy in research settings, and not specific my sources to psychiatry. At that time, I still had a conventional understanding of psychiatric drugs. My understanding was that researchers were making great advances in understanding mental disorders, and that they had found that schizophrenia and depression were due to chemical imbalances in the brain, which psychiatric medications then put back in balance. However, while reporting that series, I stumbled upon studies that didnât make sense to me, for they belied what I knew to be âtrue,â and that was what sent me down this path lasix and pregnancy of reporting on mental health. First, there were two studies by the World Health Organization that found that longer-term outcomes for schizophrenia patients in three âdevelopingâ countries were much better than in the U.S.

And five other âdevelopedâ countries. This didnât really make sense to me, and then I read this lasix and pregnancy. In the developing countries, they used antipsychotic drugs acutely, but not chronically. Only 16 percent of patients in the developing countries were regularly maintained on antipsychotics, whereas in the developed countries this was the standard of care. That didnât fit with my understanding that these drugs were lasix and pregnancy an essential treatment for schizophrenia patients.

Second, a study by Harvard researchers found that schizophrenia outcomes had declined in the previous 20 years, and were now no better than they had been in the first third of the 20th century. That didnât fit with my understanding that psychiatry had made great progress in treating people so diagnosed. Those studies led to my questioning the story that our society told about those we call âmad,â and I got a book lasix and pregnancy contract to dig into that question. That project turned into Mad in America, which told of the history of our societyâs treatment of the seriously mentally ill, from colonial times until todayâa history marked by bad science and societal mistreatment of those so diagnosed. Horgan.

Do you still see yourself as lasix and pregnancy a journalist, or are you primarily an activist?. Whitaker. I donât see myself as an âactivistâ at all. In my own writings, and in the webzine I direct, Mad in America, I think youâll see journalistic practices at work, albeit lasix and pregnancy in the service of an âactivistâ mission. Here is our mission statement.

ÂMad in Americaâs mission is to serve as a catalyst for rethinking psychiatric care in the United States (and abroad). We believe that the current drug-based paradigm of care has failed our society, lasix and pregnancy and that scientific research, as well as the lived experience of those who have been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, calls for profound change.â Thus, our starting point is that âchangeâ is needed, and while that does have an activist element, I think journalismâserving as an informational sourceâis fundamental to that effort. As an organization, we are not asserting that we have the answers for what that change should be, which would be the case if we were striving to be activists. Instead, we strive to be a forum for promoting an informed societal discussion about this subject. Hereâs what lasix and pregnancy we do.

We publish daily summaries of scientific research with findings that are rarely covered in the mainstream media. Youâll find, in the archives of our research reports, a steady parade of findings that counter the conventional narrative. For instance, there are reports of how the effort to find genes for mental disorders has proven rather fruitless, or of how social inequalities trigger mental distress, or of poor long-term outcomes with lasix and pregnancy our current paradigm of care. And so forthâwe simply want these scientific findings to become known.â¨We regularly feature interviews with researchers and activists, and podcasts that explore these issues. We launched MIA Reports as a showcase for our print journalism.

We have published in-depth articles on promising new initiatives in Europe lasix and pregnancy. Investigative pieces on such topics as compulsory outpatient treatment. Coverage of ânewsâ related to mental health policy in the United States. And occasional reports on how the lasix and pregnancy mainstream media is covering mental health issues. Â¨We also publish blogs by professionals, academics, people with lived experience, and others with a particular interest in this subject.

These blogs and personal stories are meant to help inform societyâs ârethinkingâ of psychiatric care. All of these efforts, I think, fit within the framework of âjournalism.â However, lasix and pregnancy I do understand that I am going beyond the boundaries of usual âscience journalismâ when I publish critiques of the âevidence baseâ related to psychiatric drugs. I did this in my books Mad in America and Anatomy of an Epidemic, as well as a book I co-wrote, Psychiatry Under the Influence. I have continued to do this with MIA Reports. The usual practice in âscience journalismâ is to look to the âexpertsâ lasix and pregnancy in the field and report on what they tell about their findings and practices.

However, while reporting and writing Mad in America, I came to understand that when âexpertsâ in psychiatry spoke to journalists they regularly hewed to a story that they were expected to tell, which was a story of how their field was making great progress in understanding the biology of disorders and of drug treatments thatâas I was told over and over when I co-wrote the series for the Boston Globeâfixed chemical imbalances in the brain. But their own science, I discovered, regularly belied the story they were telling to the media. Thatâs why I turned to focusing on the story lasix and pregnancy that could be dug out from a critical look at their own scientific literature. So what I do in these critiquesâsuch as suicide in the Prozac era and the impact of antipsychotics on mortalityâis review the relevant research and put those findings together into a coherent report. I also look at research cited in support of mainstream beliefs and see if the data, in those articles, actually supports the conclusions presented in the abstract.

None of this is really that difficult, and yet I know it is unusual for a lasix and pregnancy journalist to challenge conventional âmedical wisdomâ in this way. Horgan. Anatomy of an Epidemic argues that medications for mental illness, although they give many people short-term reliefs, cause net harm. Is that lasix and pregnancy a fair summary?. Whitaker.

Yes, although my thinking has evolved somewhat since I wrote that book. I am more convinced than ever that psychiatric medications, over the long term, lasix and pregnancy cause net harm. I wish that werenât the case, but the evidence just keeps mounting that these drugs, on the whole, worsen long-term outcomes. However, my thinking has evolved in this way. I am not lasix and pregnancy so sure any more that the medications provide a short-term benefit for patient populations as a whole.

When you look at the short-term studies of antidepressants and antipsychotics, the evidence of efficacy in reducing symptoms compared to placebo is really pretty marginal, and fails to rise to the level of a âclinically meaningfulâ benefit. Furthermore, the problem with all of this research is that there is no real placebo group in the studies. The placebo lasix and pregnancy group is composed of patients who have been withdrawn from their psychiatric medications and then randomized to placebo. Thus, the placebo group is a drug-withdrawal group, and we know that withdrawal from psychiatric drugs can stir myriad negative effects. A medication-naÃ¯ve placebo group would likely have much better outcomes, and if that were so, how would that placebo response compare to the drug response?.

In short, research on the short-term effects lasix and pregnancy of psychiatric drugs is a scientific mess. In fact, a 2017 paper that was designed to defend the long-term use of antipsychotics nevertheless acknowledged, in an off-hand way, that âno placebo-controlled trials have been reported in first-episode psychosis patients.â Antipsychotics were introduced 65 years ago, and we still donât have good evidence that they work over the short term in first episode patients. Which is rather startling, when you think of it. Horgan. Have any of your criticsâE.

Fuller Torrey, for exampleâmade you rethink your thesis?. Whitaker. When the first edition of Anatomy of an Epidemic was published (2010), I knew there would be critics, and I thought, this will be great. This is just what is needed, a societal discussion about the long-term effects of psychiatric medications. I have to confess that I have been disappointed in the criticism.

They mostly have been ad hominem attacksâI cherry-picked the data, or I misunderstood findings, or I am just biased, but the critics donât then say what data I missed, or point to findings that tell of medications that improve long-term outcomes. I honestly think I could do a much better job of critiquing my own work. You mention E. Fuller Torreyâs criticism, in which he states that I both misrepresented and misunderstood some of the research I cited. I took this seriously, and answered it at great length.

Now if your own âthesisâ is indeed flawed, then a critic should be able to point out its flaws while accurately detailing what you wrote. If that is the case, then you have good reason to rethink your beliefs. But if a critique doesnât meet that standard, but rather relies on misrepresenting what you wrote, then you have reason to conclude that the critic lacks the evidence to make an honest case. And that is how I see Torreyâs critique. For example, Torrey said that I misunderstood Martin Harrowâs research on long-term outcomes for schizophrenia patients.

Harrow reported that the recovery rate was eight times higher for those who got off antipsychotic medication compared to those who stayed on the drugs. However, in his 2007 paper, Harrow stated that the better outcomes for those who got off medication was because they had a better prognosis and not because of negative drug effects. If you read Anatomy of an Epidemic, youâll see that I present his explanation. Yet, in my interview with Harrow, I noted that his own data showed that those who were diagnosed with milder psychotic disorders who stayed on antipsychotics fared worse over the long term than schizophrenia patients who stopped taking the medication. This was a comparison that showed the less ill maintained on antipsychotics doing worse than the more severely ill who got off these medications.

And I presented that comparison in Anatomy of an Epidemic. By doing that, I was going out on a limb. I was saying that maybe Harrowâs data led to a different conclusion than he had drawn, which was that the antipsychotic medication, over the long-term, had a negative effect. After Anatomy was published, Harrow and his colleague Thomas Jobe went back to their data and investigated this very possibility. They have subsequently written several papers exploring this theme, citing me in one or two instances for raising the issue, and they found reason to conclude that it might be so.

They wrote. ÂHow unique among medical treatments is it that the apparent efficacy of antipsychotics could diminish over time or become harmful?. There are many examples for other medications of similar long-term effects, with this often occurring as the body readjusts, biologically, to the medications.â Thus, in this instance, I did the following. I accurately reported the results of Harrowâs study and his interpretation of his results, and I accurately presented data from his research that told of a possible different interpretation. The authors then revisited their own data to take up this inquiry.

And yet Torreyâs critique is that I misrepresented Harrowâs research. This same criticism, by the way, is still being flung at me. Here is a recent article in Vice which, once again, quotes people saying I misrepresent and misunderstand research, with Harrow cited as an example. I do want to emphasize that critiques of âmy thesisâ regarding the long-term effects of psychiatric drugs are important and to be welcomed. See two papers in particular that take this on (here and here), and my response in general to such criticisms, and to the second one.

Horgan. When I criticize psychiatric drugs, people sometimes tell me that meds saved their lives. You must get this reaction a lot. How do you respond?. Whitaker.

I do hear that, and when I do, I reply, âGreat!. I am so glad to know that the medications have worked for you!. Â But of course I also hear from many people who say that the drugs ruined their lives. I do think that the individualâs experience of psychiatric medication, whether good or bad, should be honored as worthy and âvalid.â They are witnesses to their own lives, and we should incorporate those voices into our societal thinking about the merits of psychiatric drugs. However, for the longest time, weâve heard mostly about the âgoodâ outcomes in the mainstream media, while those with âbadâ outcomes were resigned to telling their stories on internet forums.

What Mad in America has sought to do, in its efforts to serve as a forum for rethinking psychiatry, is provide an outlet for this latter group, so their voices can be heard too. The personal accounts, of course, do not change the bottom-line âevidenceâ that shows up in outcome studies of larger groups of patients. Unfortunately, that tells of medications that, on the whole, do more harm than good. As a case in point, in regard to this âsaving livesâ theme, this benefit does not show up in public health data. The âstandard mortality rateâ for those with serious mental disorders, compared to the general public, has notably increased in the last 40 years.

Horgan. Do you see any promising trends in psychiatry?. Whitaker. Yes, definitely. You have the spread of Hearing Voices networks, which are composed of people who hear voices and offer support for learning to live with voices as opposed to squashing them, which is what the drugs are supposed to do.

These networks are up and running in the U.S., and in many countries worldwide. You have Open Dialogue approaches, which were pioneered in northern Finland and proved successful there, being adopted in the United States and many European countries (and beyond.) This practice puts much less emphasis on treatment with antipsychotics, and much greater emphasis on helping people re-integrate into family and community. You have many alternative programs springing up, even at the governmental level. Norway, for instance, ordered its hospital districts to offer âmedication freeâ treatment for those who want it, and there is now a private hospital in Norway that is devoted to helping chronic patients taper down from their psychiatric medications. In Israel, you have Soteria houses that have sprung up (sometimes they are called stabilizing houses), where use of antipsychotics is optional, and the environmentâa supportive residential environmentâis seen as the principal âtherapy.â You have the U.N.

Special Rapporteur for Health, Dainius PÅ«ras, calling for a ârevolutionâ in mental health, one that would supplant todayâs biological paradigm of care with a paradigm that paid more attention to social justice factorsâpoverty, inequality, etc.âas a source of mental distress. All of those initiatives tell of an effort to find a new way. But perhaps most important, in terms of âpositive trends,â the narrative that was told to us starting in the 1980s has collapsed, which is what presents the opportunity for a new paradigm to take hold. More and more research tells of how the conventional narrative, in all its particulars, has failed to pan out. The diagnoses in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) have not been validated as discrete illnesses.

The genetics of mental disorders remain in doubt. MRI scans have not proven to be useful. Long-term outcomes are poor. And the notion that psychiatric drugs fix chemical imbalances has been abandoned. Ronald Pies, the former editor in chief of Psychiatric Times, has even sought to distance psychiatry, as an institution, from ever having made such a claim.

Horgan. Do brain implants or other electrostimulation devices show any therapeutic potential?. Whitaker. I donât have a ready answer for this. We have published two articles about the spinning of results from a trial of deep-brain stimulation, and the suffering of some patients so treated over the long-term.

Those articles tell of why it may be difficult to answer that question. There are financial influences that push for published results that tell of a therapeutic success, even if the data doesnât support that finding, and we have a research environment that fails to study long-term outcomes. The history of somatic treatments for mental disorders also provides a reason for caution. Itâs a history of one somatic treatment after another being initially hailed as curative, or extremely helpful, and then failing the test of time. The inventor of frontal lobotomy, Egas Moniz, was awarded a Nobel Prize for inventing that surgery, which today we understand as a mutilation.

Itâs important to remain open to the possibility that somatic treatments may be helpful, at least for some patients. But there is plenty of reason to be wary of initial claims of success. Horgan. Should psychedelic drugs be taken seriously as treatments?. Whitaker.

I think caution applies here too. Surely there are many risks with psychedelic drugs, and if you were to do a study of first-episode psychosis today, you would find a high percentage of the patients had been using mind-altering drugs before their psychotic breakâantidepressants, marijuana, LSD and so forth. At the same time, weâve published reviews of papers that have reported positive results with use of psychedelics. What are the benefits versus the risks?. Can possible benefits be realized while risks are minimized?.

It is a question worth exploring, but carefully so. Horgan. What about meditation?. Whitaker. I know that many people find meditation helpful.

I also know other people find it difficultâand even threateningâto sit with the silence of their minds. Mad in America has published reviews of research about meditation, we have had a few bloggers write about it, and in our resource section on ânon-drug therapies,â we have summarized research findings regarding its use for depression. We concluded that the research on this is not as robust as one would like. However, I think your question leads to this broader thought. People struggling with their minds and emotions may come up with many different approaches they find helpful.

Exercise, diet, meditation, yoga and so forth all represent efforts to change oneâs environment, and ultimately, I think that can be very helpful. But the individual has to find his or her way to whatever environmental change that works best for them. Horgan. Do you see any progress toward understanding the causes of mental illness?. Whitaker.

Yes, and that progress might be summed up in this way. Researchers are returning to investigations of how we are impacted by what has âhappened to us.â The Adverse Childhood Experiences study provides compelling evidence of how traumas in childhoodâdivorce, poverty, abuse, bullying and so forthâexact a long-term toll on physical and mental health. Interview any group of women diagnosed with a serious mental disorder, and youâll regularly find accounts of sexual abuse. Racism exacts a toll. So too poverty, oppressive working conditions, and so forth.

You can go on and on, but all of this is a reminder that we humans are designed to respond to our environment, and it is quite clear that mental distress, in large part, arises from difficult environments and threatening experiences, past and present. And with a focus on life experiences as a source of âmental illness,â a related question is now being asked. What do we all need to be mentally well?. Shelter, good food, meaning in life, someone to love and so forthâif you look at it from this perspective, you can see why, when those supporting elements begin to disappear, psychiatric difficulties appear. I am not discounting that there may be biological factors that cause âmental illness.â While biological markers that tell of a particular disorder have not been discovered, we are biological creatures, and we do know, for instance, that there are physical illnesses and toxins that can produce psychotic episodes.

However, the progress that is being made at the moment is a moving away from the robotic âitâs all about brain chemistryâ toward a rediscovery of the importance of our social lives and our experiences. Horgan. Do we still have anything to learn from Sigmund Freud?. Whitaker. I certainly think so.

Freud is a reminder that so much of our mind is hidden from us and that what spills into our consciousness comes from a blend of the many parts of our mind, our emotional centers and our more primal instincts. You can still see merit in Freudâs descriptions of the id, ego and superego as a conceptualization of different parts of the brain. I read Freud when I was in college, and it was a formative experience for me. Horgan. I fear that American-style capitalism doesnât produce good health care, including mental-health care.

What do you think?. Whitaker. Itâs clear that it doesnât. First, we have for-profit health-care that is set up to treat âdisease.â With mental-health care, that means there is a profit to be made from seeing people as âdiseasedâ and treating them for that âillness.â Take a pill!. In other words, American-style capitalism, which works to create markets for products, provides an incentive to create mental patients, and it has done this to great success over the past 35 years.

Second, without a profit to be made, you donât have as much investment in psychosocial care that can help a person remake his or her life. There is a societal expense, but little corporate profit, in psychosocial care, and American-style capitalism doesnât lend itself to that equation. Third, with our American-style capitalism (think neoliberalism), it is the individual that is seen as âillâ and needs to be fixed. Society gets a free pass. This too is a barrier to good âmental healthâ care, for it prevents us from thinking about what changes we might make to our society that would be more nurturing for us all.

With our American-style capitalism, we now have a grossly unequal society, with more and more wealth going to the select few, and more and more people struggling to pay their bills. That is a prescription for psychiatric distress. Good âmental health careâ starts with creating a society that is more equal and just. Horgan. How might the hypertension medications lasix affect care of the mentally ill?.

Whitaker. That is something Mad in America has reported on. The lasix, of course, can be particularly threatening to people in mental hospitals, or in group homes. The threat is more than just the exposure to the lasix that may come in such settings. People who are struggling in this way often feel terribly isolated, alone, and fearful of being with others.

hypertension medications measures, with calls for social distancing, can exacerbate that. I think this puts hospital staff and those who run residential homes into an extraordinarily difficult positionâhow can they help ease the isolation of patients even as they are being expected to enforce a type of social distancing?. Horgan. If the next president named you mental health czar, what would be at the top of your To Do list?. Whitaker.

Well, I am pretty sure thatâs not going to happen, and if it did, I would quickly confess to my being utterly unqualified for the job. But from my perch at Mad in America, here is what I would like to see happen in our society. As you can see from my answers above, I think the fundamental problem is that our society has organized itself around a false narrative, which was sold to us as a narrative of science. In the early 1980s, we began to hear that psychiatric disorders were discrete brain illnesses, which were caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that a new generation of psychiatric drugs fixed those imbalances, like insulin for diabetes. That is a story of an amazing medical breakthrough.

Researchers had discovered the very chemicals in our brain that cause madness, depression, anxiety or ADHD, and they had developed drugs that could put brain chemistry back into a normal state. Given the complexity of the human brain, if this were true, it would arguably be the greatest achievement in medical history. And we understood it to be true. We came to believe that there was a sharp line between the ânormalâ brain and the âabnormalâ brain, and that it was medically helpful to screen for these illnesses, and that psychiatric drugs were very safe and effective, and often needed to be taken for life. But what can be seen clearly today is that this narrative was a marketing story, not a scientific one.

It was a story that psychiatry, as an institution, promoted for guild purposes, and it was a story that pharmaceutical companies promoted for commercial reasons. Science actually tells a very different story. The biology of psychiatric disorders remains unknown. The disorders in the DSM have not been validated as discrete illnesses. The drugs do not fix chemical imbalances but rather perturb normal neurotransmitter functions.

And even their short term efficacy is marginal at best. As could be expected, organizing our thinking around a false narrative has been a societal disaster. A sharp rise in the burden of mental illness in our society. Poor long-term functional outcomes for those who are continuously medicated. The pathologizing of childhood.

And so on. What we need now is a new narrative to organize ourselves around, one steeped in history, literature, philosophy, and good science. I think step one is ditching the DSM. That book presents the most impoverished âphilosophy of beingâ imaginable. Anyone who is too emotional, or struggles with his or her mind, or just doesnât like being in a boring environment (think ADHD) is a candidate for a diagnosis.

We need a narrative that, if truth be told, can be found in literature. Novels, Shakespeare, the Bibleâthey all tell of how we humans struggle with our minds, our emotions and our behaviors. That is the norm. It is the human condition. And yet the characters we see in literature, if they were viewed through the DSM lens, would regularly qualify for a diagnosis.

At the same time, literature tells of how humans can be so resilient, and that we change as we age and move through different environments. We need that to be part of a new narrative too. Our current disease-model narrative tells of how people are likely going to be chronically ill. Their brains are defective, and so the therapeutic goal is to manage the symptoms of the âdisease.â We need a narrative that replaces that pessimism with hope. If we embraced that literary understanding of what it is to be human, then a âmental healthâ policy could be forged that would begin with this question.

How do we create environments that are more nurturing for us all?. How do we create schools that build on a childâs curiosity?. How do we bring nature back into our lives?. How do we create a society that helps provide people with meaning, a sense of community, and a sense of civic duty?. How do we create a society that promotes good physical health, and provides access to shelter and medical care?.

Furthermore, with this conception in mind, individual therapy would help people change their environments. You could encourage walks in nature. Recommend volunteer work. Provide settings where people could go and recuperate, and so forth. Most important, in contrast to a âdisease-basedâ paradigm of care, a âwellness-basedâ paradigm would help people feel hopeful, and help them find a way to create a different future for themselves.

This is an approach, by the way, that can be helpful to people who have suffered a psychotic episode. Soteria homes and Open Dialogue are âtherapiesâ that strive to help psychotic patients in this manner. Within this âwellnessâ paradigm of care, there would still be a place for use of medications that help people feel differently, at least for a time. Sedatives, tranquilizers, and so forth. And you would still want to fund science that seeks to better understand the many pathways to debilitating mood states and to âpsychosisââtrauma, poor physical health, physical disease, lack of sleep, setbacks in life, isolation, loneliness, and yes, whatever biological vulnerabilities that may be present.

At the same time, you would want to fund science that seeks to better understand the pillars of âwellness.â Horgan. Whatâs your utopia?. Whitaker. My âutopiaâ would be a world like the one I just described, based on a new narrative about mental illness, rooted in an understanding of how emotional we humans are, of how we struggle with our minds, and of how we are built to be responsive to our environments. And that really is the mission of Mad in America.

We want it to be a forum for creating a new societal narrative for âmental health.â Further Reading. Can Psychiatry Heal Itself?. Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?. Meta-Post. Posts on Mental Illness Meta-Post.

Posts on Brain Implants Meta-Post. Posts on Psychedelics Meta-Post. Posts on Buddhism and Meditation See also âThe Meaning of Madness,â a chapter in my free online book Mind-Body Problems.1970 Sweet Suburbia âMassive movement from central cities to their suburbs, a population boom in the West and Southwest, and a lower rate of population growth in the 1960's than in the 1950's are the findings that stand out in the preliminary results of the 1970 Census as issued by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The movement to the suburbs was pervasive.

Its extent is indicated by the fact that 13 of the 25 largest cities lost population, whereas 24 of the 25 largest metropolitan areas gained. Washington, D.C., was characteristic. The population of the city changed little between 1960 and 1970, but the metropolitan area grew by 800,000, or more than 38 percent.â 1920 Air Cargo âThe proposed machine, known as the âPelican Four-Ton Lorry,' is a colossal cantilever monoplane designed for two 460-horse-power Napier engines. Its cruising speed is 72 miles per hour. Its total weight is to be 24,100 pounds.

The useful load is four tons, with sufficient fuel for the London-Paris journey. Most interesting of all, however, is the novel system of quick loading and unloading which has been planned. This permits handling of shipments with the utmost speed, and is based on a similar practice in the motor truck field. Idle airplanes mean a large idle capital, hence the designers plan to keep the airplane in the air for the greater part of the time.â Don't Try This Anywhere âDr. Charles Baskerville points out that while the data thus far obtained on chlorine and influenza do not warrant drawing conclusions, such facts as have been established would indicate to the medical man the advisability of trying experimentally dilute chlorinated air as a prophylactic in such epidemics as so-called influenza.

Dr. Baskerville determined to what extent workers in plants where small amounts of chlorine were to be found in the atmosphere were affected seriously by influenza. Many of those from whom information was requested expressed the opinion that chlorine workers are noticeably free from colds and other pneumatic diseases.â 1870 The Rise of Telegraphy âThe rapid progress of the telegraph during the last twenty-five years has changed the whole social and commercial systems of the world. Its advantages and capabilities were so evident that immediately on its introduction, and demonstration of its true character, the most active efforts were made to secure them for every community which desired to keep pace with the advances of modern times. The Morse or signal system seemed for a time to be the perfection of achievement, until Professor Royal E.

House astonished the world with his letter printing telegraph. Now, almost every considerable expanse of water is traversed, or soon will be, by the slender cords which bind continents and islands together and practically bring the human race into one great family.â The Transport of Goods 1887. Cargo ship launched as Golconda had room for 6,000 tons of cargo, loaded and unloaded by crane and cargo nets, and 108 passengers. Credit. Scientific American Supplement, Vol.

XXIII, No. 574. January 1, 1887 Oxcarts, railroad cars and freight ships can be loaded and unloaded one item at a time, but it is more efficient to handle cargo packed into âintermodal shipping containersâ that are a standardized size and shape. Our October 1968 issue noted that a âbreak-bulkâ freighter took three days to unload, a container ship less than one (including loading new cargo). Air transport became a link in this complex system, but the concept in the 1920 illustration shown is a little ahead of its time.

These days air cargo (and luggage) makes abundant use of âunit load devices,â cargo bins shaped to fit the fuselage of specific aircraft models.The items below are highlights from the free newsletter, âSmart, useful, science stuff about hypertension medications.â To receive newsletter issues daily in your inbox, sign-up here. Are you in need of a âdose of optimismâ about the lasix, at least in the U.S.?. Check out this 10/12/20 story at The New York Times by by Donald McNeil Jr., who has covered infectious diseases and epidemics for many years. McNeil notes the 215,000 people in the U.S. Dead so far from the novel hypertension, as well as the estimates that the figure could go as high as 400,000 before this era draws to a close.

But here is some of the good news that he tallies. 1) mask-wearing by the public is âwidely acceptedâ. 2) the development of treatments to protect against hypertension and of treatments for hypertension medications are proceeding at record speed. 3) âexperts are saying, with genuine confidence, that the lasix in the United States will be over far sooner than they expected, possibly by the middle of next yearâ. And 4) fewer infected people die today than did earlier this year, even at nursing homes.

About 10 percent of people in the U.S. Have been infected with the lasix so far, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the story states. Âlasixs donât end abruptly. They decelerate gradually,â McNeil writes.

A 10/14/20 story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times puts into context three late-stage (Phase 3 safety and effectiveness) hypertension medications experiments that have been paused in recent weeks due to illness among some study participants. Pauses in treatment studies â in this case Johnson &. Johnsonâs treatment candidate and AstraZenecaâs treatment candidate â are ânot unusual,â the story states, partly because the safety threshold is extremely high for a product that, if approved, could be given to millions or billions of people. But pauses are rare in treatment studies â in this case Eli Lillyâs monoclonal antibody cocktail drug. Once a drug or treatment experiment (trial) is paused, a safety board determines whether the ill participant was given the new product or a placebo.

If it was the placebo, the study can resume. If not, the board looks deeper into the case to determine whether or not the illness is related to the drug or treatment. If a clear connection is discovered, âthe trial may have to stop,â Zimmer writes. Dr. Eric Topol at Scripps Research is quoted in the piece as saying he is âstill fairly optimisticâ about monoclonal antibody treatments for hypertension medications.

The safety-related pauses of all three experiments are âan example of how things are supposed to work,â says Dr. Anna Durbin of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the story. The top of a story at The Washington Post features an instructive interactive that sketches âScienceville,â a fictional place where âpoliticians and public health officials use every tool at their disposal to contain the hypertension.â It basically shows how genetic analysis and tracing of viral strains found in a frequently and widely tested population could help officials control outbreaks of hypertension. Then the 10/13/20 text story below, by Brady Dennis, Chris Mooney, Sarah Kaplan, and Harry Stevens, focuses on the details of such a âgenomic epidemiologyâ approach and describes some real-life efforts under way, primarily in the UK, to implement the approach. The U.S.

Has not been able to effectively use the approach, in part because genetic sequencing of viral strains âhas largely been left up to states and individual researchers, rather than being part of a coordinated and well-funded national program,â the story states. The rise in hypertension s in the U.S. Is now driven by âsmall gatherings in peopleâs homes,â according to officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, reports Carolyn Crist for WebMD (10/14/20). People should continue to wear face masks and to practice social distancing âsince most people have still not been exposed to the hypertension worldwide," the researchers suggest, Crist writes.

A newly developed test can detect hypertension in 5 minutes, reports Robert F. Service at Science (10/8/20). The test relies on CRISPR gene-editing technology, for which Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry earlier this month. Doudna heads up the work that led to this new 5-minute CRISPR test for the hypertension. By comparison, it can take a day or more to get back standard hypertension test results, the story states.

Donald G. McNeil Jr. At The New York Times has written a guide to distinguishing common cold, flu, and hypertension medications symptoms (10/3/20). A major difference between having a cold and having the flu is that "Flu makes you feel as if you were hit by a truck,â McNeil quotes experts as saying. The symptom that best distinguishes hypertension medications from flu is loss of your sense of smell â strong smells donât register, he writes.

But many flu and hypertension medications symptoms overlap, the story states. The most common symptoms for hypertension medications are a high fever, chills, dry cough and fatigue. For flu, itâs a fever, headaches, body aches, sore throat, runny nose, stuffed sinuses, coughing and sneezing, the story states. Dr. Anthony Fauciâs three daughters do not plan to visit him for Thanksgiving to avoid potentially transmitting the new hypertension to their parents, reports Ralph Ellis at WebMD.

The story includes holiday traveling and visiting tips from a pulmonary critical care doctor at the University of Washington Medical Center who âbelieves traveling for the holidays is risky.â The tips include ensuring you have no hypertension medications-like symptoms two weeks before traveling, getting tested before traveling, quarantining in a hotel for at least 48 hours before visiting with loved ones, traveling by car, and cutting down on âclose contact and talking without a maskâ (10/9/20). Adele Chapin has written a guide for reducing kidsâ risk of catching and spreading hypertension at the playground. The 10/8/20 piece in The Washington Post makes the usual recommendations for mask-wearing, hand-washing, hand-sanitizer, disinfecting wipes, and distancing. It quotes a Childrenâs National Hospital pediatrician advises against gloves, because âpeople wearing them often touch their faces, which defeats the purpose.â The piece also recommends visiting playgrounds at less busy times and choosing playgrounds with more than one play structure, which makes it easier for kids to distance from one another. A story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times beautifully describes and illustrates some of the amazing imaging work that scientists have done to study the structure of hypertension and how it infects our cells and multiplies (10/9/20).

For starters, check out a mesmerizing video about a quarter of the way down-page that simulates spike proteins (complex molecules) doing a âmolecular danceâ on the lasix membrane. The video (just one of several in this stunning piece) is part of research by a computational biophysicist at the Max Planck Institute of Biophysics and colleagues. The spikes appear to shimmy, which âincreases the odds of encountering the protein on the surface of our cells it uses to attach,â the researchers suspect, Zimmer writes. You might enjoy, âA letter of recommendation in the age of Zoom,â by Matt Cheung, for McSweeneyâs (10/14/20).Editorâs Note (10/16/20). This story is being republished in light of the interim results of a large international clinical trial of remdesivir by the World Health Organization.

The trial found that the drug, which is widely used to treat hypertension medications patients, failed to prevent deaths. An experimental drugâand one of the worldâs best hopes against hypertension medicationsâcould shorten the time to recovery from hypertension , according to the largest and most rigorous clinical trial of the compound. The experimental drug, called remdesivir, interferes with replication of some lasixes, including the hypertension lasix responsible for the current lasix. On 29 April, Anthony Fauci, director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), announced that a clinical trial of more than a thousand people showed that people taking remdesivir recovered in 11 days on average, compared to 15 days for those on a placebo. ÂAlthough a 31% improvement doesnât seem like a knockout 100%, it is a very important proof of concept,â Fauci said.

ÂWhat it has proven is that a drug can block this lasix.â Deaths were also lower in trial participants who received the drug, he said, but that trend was not statistically significant. The shortened recovery time, however, was significant, and was enough of a benefit that investigators decided to stop the trial early for ethical reasons, he said, to ensure that those participants who were receiving placebo could now access the drug. Fauci added that remdesivir would become a standard treatment for hypertension medications. The news comes after weeks of data leaks and on a day of mixed results from clinical trials of the drug. In a trial run by the drugâs maker, Gilead Sciences of Foster City, California, more than half of 400 participants with severe hypertension medications recovered from their illness within two weeks of receiving treatment.

But the study lacked a placebo controlled arm, making the results difficult to interpret. Another smaller trial run in China found no benefits from remdesivir when compared with a placebo. But the trial was stopped early due to the difficulty in enroling participants as the outbreak subsided in China. Nevertheless, onlookers are hopeful that the large NIAID trial provides the first glimmer of hope in a race to find a drug that works against the hypertension, which has infected more than 3 million people worldwide. ÂThere is a lot of focus on remdesivir because itâs potentially the best shot we have,â says virologist Stephen Griffin at the University of Leeds in the UK.

Small trials The fast-flowing, conflicting information on remdesivir has left people reeling over the past weeks. In the rush to find therapies to combat hypertension medications, small, clinical trials without control groups have been common. ÂIâm just very annoyed by all of these non-controlled studies,â says Geoffrey Porges, an analyst for the investment bank SVB Leerink in New York City. ÂItâs reassuring that 50â60% of patients are discharged from the hospital, but this is a disease that mostly gets better anyway.â With so much uncertainty, the remdesivir-watchers were waiting anxiously for final results from the NIAID trial, which were not expected until the end of May. In lieu of a treatment, which could still be more than a year away, effective therapies are critical to reducing deaths and limiting economic damage from the lasix.

Yet, despite the flood of small clinical trials, no therapy has been convincingly shown to boost survival in people with hypertension medications. The NIAID results put a new sheen on remdesivir. ÂIt may not be the wonder drug that everyoneâs looking for, but if you can stop some patients from becoming critically ill, thatâs good enough,â says Griffin. Fauci said the finding reminded him of the discovery in the 1980s that the drug AZT helped to combat HIV . The first randomized, controlled clinical only showed a modest improvement, he said, but researchers continued to build on that success, eventually developing highly effective therapies.

For now, he said, remdesivir would become a standard treatment for hypertension medications. Remdesivir works by gumming up an enzyme that some lasixes, including hypertension, use to replicate. In February, researchers showed that the drug reduces viral in human cells grown in a laboratory. Gilead began to ramp up production of remdesivir well before the NIAID results. By the end of March, the company had produced enough to treat 30,000 patients.

By streamlining its manufacturing process and finding new sources of raw materials, Gilead announced that it hoped to produce enough remdesivir to treat more than a million people by the end of the year. That calculation was based on the assumption that people would take the drug for 10 days, but the results announced from Gileadâs trial today suggest that a 5-day course of treatment could work just as well. If so, that would effectively double the number of people who could be treated, says Porges. Many drugs needed In the long term, clinicians will likely want a bevy of anti-viral drugsâwith different ways of disabling the lasixâin their arsenal, says Timothy Sheahan, a virologist at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, who has teamed up with Gilead researchers to study remdesivir. ÂThere is always the potential for antiviral resistance,â he says.

ÂAnd to hedge against that potential, itâs good to have not only a first-line, but also a second-, third-, fourth-, fifth-line antiviral.â Researchers are furiously testing a wide range of therapies, but early results, while not yet definitive, have not been encouraging. The malaria drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, both of which also have anti-inflammatory effects, drew so much attention from physicians and the public that some countries have depleted their supplies of the drugs. Yet studies in humans have failed to show a consistent benefit, and some have highlighted the risks posed by side effects of the drugs on the heart. Early interest in a mix of two HIV drugs called lopinavir and ritonavir flagged when a clinical trial in nearly 200 people did not find any benefit of the mix for those with severe hypertension medications. Another promising therapeutic hypothesisâthat inhibiting the action of an immune system regulator called IL-6 could reduce the severe inflammation seen in some people with severe hypertension medicationsâhas met with mixed results thus far.

Still, a host of other therapies are being tested in people, and many researchers are hunting for new drugs at the bench. Sheahan and his colleagues have found a compound that is active against hypertension and other hypertensiones, including a remdesivir-resistant variant of a hypertension, when tested in laboratory-grown human cells. But much more testing would need to be done before the compound could be tried in people. ÂWhat weâre doing now will hopefully have an impact on the current lasix,â he says. ÂBut maybe more importantly, it could position us to better respond more quickly in the future.â This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on April 29 2020.

Read more about the hypertension outbreak here.During a press conference in early September, President Donald Trump was asked when he thought a treatment for hypertension medications might become available. His prediction was upbeat. ÂWeâre going to have a treatment very soon,â Trump said. ÂMaybe even before a very special dayâyou know what day Iâm talking about.â Trump was referring, of course, to the presidential election on November 3. But the odds of a treatment materializing for public use before then appear slim.

New drugs and treatments ordinarily go through a lengthy review process prior to regulatory approval. treatments for hypertension medications, however, are widely expected to be released under emergency use authorization (EUA) protocols, which allow for the sale of unapproved medical products during national health crises. On October 6 the White House agreed to new EUA guidelines that call on hypertension medications treatment developers to monitor their phase III clinical trial subjects for at least two months for side effects and severe disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which administers EUAs, will host a widely anticipated meeting on October 22 to address standards for efficacy, safety and manufacturing of hypertension medications treatments.

But the FDAâs recommended two-month observation period puts a preelection treatment approval out of reach. EUAs could, however, make the first successful hypertension medications treatments available to frontline workers by the start of 2021, although distribution in the general U.S. Population will take longer, starting with elderly and other high-risk groups and then younger, healthier people who may not have access to them until late in the year, according to Paul Offit, a pediatrician and director of the treatment Education Center at Childrenâs Hospital of Philadelphia. The FDA has already granted hundreds of hypertension medications-related EUAs for products such as diagnostic tests, medical devices and therapiesâincluding for convalescent plasma and hydroxychloroquine (the latter was later revoked). ÂAll the hypertension medications treatment developers are going for an EUA first,â says Eric Topol, a cardiologist and head of the Scripps Research Translational Institute in La Jolla, Calif., who has directed numerous multinational clinical trials (although none for treatments).

ÂIt makes no sense to wait for formal licensure.â Defining Success Obtaining an EUA hinges on how independent reviewers judge a treatmentâs performance during periodic readouts of phase III clinical trial data. The trials are each enrolling tens of thousands of people and are also double-blindedâmeaning that neither the subjects nor the experimenters know which participants got a treatment versus a placebo. They were designed to continue until the number of symptomatic s reaches 150 in the vaccinated and control groups combined.

In the developing http://ilovepte.com/bwg_gallery/pte-sweet-16s/ countries, they used antipsychotic drugs acutely, what is the cost of lasix but not chronically. Only 16 percent of patients in the developing countries were regularly maintained on antipsychotics, whereas in the developed countries this was the standard of care. That didnât fit with my understanding that these drugs were an essential treatment for schizophrenia patients. Second, a study by Harvard researchers found that what is the cost of lasix schizophrenia outcomes had declined in the previous 20 years, and were now no better than they had been in the first third of the 20th century. That didnât fit with my understanding that psychiatry had made great progress in treating people so diagnosed.

Those studies led to my questioning the story that our society told about those we call âmad,â and I got a book contract to dig into that question. That project turned into Mad in America, which told of the history of our societyâs treatment of the seriously mentally ill, from colonial times until todayâa history marked by what is the cost of lasix bad science and societal mistreatment of those so diagnosed. Horgan. Do you still see yourself as a journalist, or are you primarily an activist?. Whitaker what is the cost of lasix.

I donât see myself as an âactivistâ at all. In my own writings, and in the webzine I direct, Mad in America, I think youâll see journalistic practices at work, albeit in the service of an âactivistâ mission. Here is our mission what is the cost of lasix statement. ÂMad in Americaâs mission is to serve as a catalyst for rethinking psychiatric care in the United States (and abroad). We believe that the current drug-based paradigm of care has failed our society, and that scientific research, as well as the lived experience of those who have been diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, calls for profound change.â Thus, our starting point is that âchangeâ is needed, and while that does have an activist element, I think journalismâserving as an informational sourceâis fundamental to that effort.

As an organization, we are not asserting that we have the answers for what that change should be, which what is the cost of lasix would be the case if we were striving to be activists. Instead, we strive to be a forum for promoting an informed societal discussion about this subject. Hereâs what we do. We publish daily summaries of scientific research with findings that are rarely covered in the mainstream media what is the cost of lasix. Youâll find, in the archives of our research reports, a steady parade of findings that counter the conventional narrative.

For instance, there are reports of how the effort to find genes for mental disorders has proven rather fruitless, or of how social inequalities trigger mental distress, or of poor long-term outcomes with our current paradigm of care. And so forthâwe simply want these scientific findings to become known.â¨We regularly feature interviews with researchers and activists, and podcasts that explore these issues what is the cost of lasix. We launched MIA Reports as a showcase for our print journalism. We have published in-depth articles on promising new initiatives in Europe. Investigative pieces what is the cost of lasix on such topics as compulsory outpatient treatment.

Coverage of ânewsâ related to mental health policy in the United States. And occasional reports on how the mainstream media is covering mental health issues. Â¨We also publish blogs by professionals, academics, people with lived experience, and others with a particular what is the cost of lasix interest in this subject. These blogs and personal stories are meant to help inform societyâs ârethinkingâ of psychiatric care. All of these efforts, I think, fit within the framework of âjournalism.â However, I do understand that I am going beyond the boundaries of usual âscience journalismâ when I publish critiques of the âevidence baseâ related to psychiatric drugs.

I did this in my books what is the cost of lasix Mad in America and Anatomy of an Epidemic, as well as a book I co-wrote, Psychiatry Under the Influence. I have continued to do this with MIA Reports. The usual practice in âscience journalismâ is to look to the âexpertsâ in the field and report on what they tell about their findings and practices. However, while reporting and writing Mad in America, I came to understand that when âexpertsâ in psychiatry spoke to journalists they regularly hewed to a story what is the cost of lasix that they were expected to tell, which was a story of how their field was making great progress in understanding the biology of disorders and of drug treatments thatâas I was told over and over when I co-wrote the series for the Boston Globeâfixed chemical imbalances in the brain. But their own science, I discovered, regularly belied the story they were telling to the media.

Thatâs why I turned to focusing on the story that could be dug out from a critical look at their own scientific literature. So what what is the cost of lasix I do in these critiquesâsuch as suicide in the Prozac era and the impact of antipsychotics on mortalityâis review the relevant research and put those findings together into a coherent report. I also look at research cited in support of mainstream beliefs and see if the data, in those articles, actually supports the conclusions presented in the abstract. None of this is really that difficult, and yet I know it is unusual for a journalist to challenge conventional âmedical wisdomâ in this way. Horgan.

Anatomy of an Epidemic argues that medications for mental illness, although they give many people short-term reliefs, cause net harm. Is that a fair summary?. Whitaker. Yes, although my thinking has evolved somewhat since I wrote that book. I am more convinced than ever that psychiatric medications, over the long term, cause net harm.

I wish that werenât the case, but the evidence just keeps mounting that these drugs, on the whole, worsen long-term outcomes. However, my thinking has evolved in this way. I am not so sure any more that the medications provide a short-term benefit for patient populations as a whole. When you look at the short-term studies of antidepressants and antipsychotics, the evidence of efficacy in reducing symptoms compared to placebo is really pretty marginal, and fails to rise to the level of a âclinically meaningfulâ benefit. Furthermore, the problem with all of this research is that there is no real placebo group in the studies.

The placebo group is composed of patients who have been withdrawn from their psychiatric medications and then randomized to placebo. Thus, the placebo group is a drug-withdrawal group, and we know that withdrawal from psychiatric drugs can stir myriad negative effects. A medication-naÃ¯ve placebo group would likely have much better outcomes, and if that were so, how would that placebo response compare to the drug response?. In short, research on the short-term effects of psychiatric drugs is a scientific mess. In fact, a 2017 paper that was designed to defend the long-term use of antipsychotics nevertheless acknowledged, in an off-hand way, that âno placebo-controlled trials have been reported in first-episode psychosis patients.â Antipsychotics were introduced 65 years ago, and we still donât have good evidence that they work over the short term in first episode patients.

Which is rather startling, when you think of it. Horgan. Have any of your criticsâE. Fuller Torrey, for exampleâmade you rethink your thesis?. Whitaker.

When the first edition of Anatomy of an Epidemic was published (2010), I knew there would be critics, and I thought, this will be great. This is just what is needed, a societal discussion about the long-term effects of psychiatric medications. I have to confess that I have been disappointed in the criticism. They mostly have been ad hominem attacksâI cherry-picked the data, or I misunderstood findings, or I am just biased, but the critics donât then say what data I missed, or point to findings that tell of medications that improve long-term outcomes. I honestly think I could do a much better job of critiquing my own work.

You mention E. Fuller Torreyâs criticism, in which he states that I both misrepresented and misunderstood some of the research I cited. I took this seriously, and answered it at great length. Now if your own âthesisâ is indeed flawed, then a critic should be able to point out its flaws while accurately detailing what you wrote. If that is the case, then you have good reason to rethink your beliefs.

But if a critique doesnât meet that standard, but rather relies on misrepresenting what you wrote, then you have reason to conclude that the critic lacks the evidence to make an honest case. And that is how I see Torreyâs critique. For example, Torrey said that I misunderstood Martin Harrowâs research on long-term outcomes for schizophrenia patients. Harrow reported that the recovery rate was eight times higher for those who got off antipsychotic medication compared to those who stayed on the drugs. However, in his 2007 paper, Harrow stated that the better outcomes for those who got off medication was because they had a better prognosis and not because of negative drug effects.

If you read Anatomy of an Epidemic, youâll see that I present his explanation. Yet, in my interview with Harrow, I noted that his own data showed that those who were diagnosed with milder psychotic disorders who stayed on antipsychotics fared worse over the long term than schizophrenia patients who stopped taking the medication. This was a comparison that showed the less ill maintained on antipsychotics doing worse than the more severely ill who got off these medications. And I presented that comparison in Anatomy of an Epidemic. By doing that, I was going out on a limb.

I was saying that maybe Harrowâs data led to a different conclusion than he had drawn, which was that the antipsychotic medication, over the long-term, had a negative effect. After Anatomy was published, Harrow and his colleague Thomas Jobe went back to their data and investigated this very possibility. They have subsequently written several papers exploring this theme, citing me in one or two instances for raising the issue, and they found reason to conclude that it might be so. They wrote. ÂHow unique among medical treatments is it that the apparent efficacy of antipsychotics could diminish over time or become harmful?.

There are many examples for other medications of similar long-term effects, with this often occurring as the body readjusts, biologically, to the medications.â Thus, in this instance, I did the following. I accurately reported the results of Harrowâs study and his interpretation of his results, and I accurately presented data from his research that told of a possible different interpretation. The authors then revisited their own data to take up this inquiry. And yet Torreyâs critique is that I misrepresented Harrowâs research. This same criticism, by the way, is still being flung at me.

Here is a recent article in Vice which, once again, quotes people saying I misrepresent and misunderstand research, with Harrow cited as an example. I do want to emphasize that critiques of âmy thesisâ regarding the long-term effects of psychiatric drugs are important and to be welcomed. See two papers in particular that take this on (here and here), and my response in general to such criticisms, and to the second one. Horgan. When I criticize psychiatric drugs, people sometimes tell me that meds saved their lives.

You must get this reaction a lot. How do you respond?. Whitaker. I do hear that, and when I do, I reply, âGreat!. I am so glad to know that the medications have worked for you!.

Â But of course I also hear from many people who say that the drugs ruined their lives. I do think that the individualâs experience of psychiatric medication, whether good or bad, should be honored as worthy and âvalid.â They are witnesses to their own lives, and we should incorporate those voices into our societal thinking about the merits of psychiatric drugs. However, for the longest time, weâve heard mostly about the âgoodâ outcomes in the mainstream media, while those with âbadâ outcomes were resigned to telling their stories on internet forums. What Mad in America has sought to do, in its efforts to serve as a forum for rethinking psychiatry, is provide an outlet for this latter group, so their voices can be heard too. The personal accounts, of course, do not change the bottom-line âevidenceâ that shows up in outcome studies of larger groups of patients.

Unfortunately, that tells of medications that, on the whole, do more harm than good. As a case in point, in regard to this âsaving livesâ theme, this benefit does not show up in public health data. The âstandard mortality rateâ for those with serious mental disorders, compared to the general public, has notably increased in the last 40 years. Horgan. Do you see any promising trends in psychiatry?.

Whitaker. Yes, definitely. You have the spread of Hearing Voices networks, which are composed of people who hear voices and offer support for learning to live with voices as opposed to squashing them, which is what the drugs are supposed to do. These networks are up and running in the U.S., and in many countries worldwide. You have Open Dialogue approaches, which were pioneered in northern Finland and proved successful there, being adopted in the United States and many European countries (and beyond.) This practice puts much less emphasis on treatment with antipsychotics, and much greater emphasis on helping people re-integrate into family and community.

You have many alternative programs springing up, even at the governmental level. Norway, for instance, ordered its hospital districts to offer âmedication freeâ treatment for those who want it, and there is now a private hospital in Norway that is devoted to helping chronic patients taper down from their psychiatric medications. In Israel, you have Soteria houses that have sprung up (sometimes they are called stabilizing houses), where use of antipsychotics is optional, and the environmentâa supportive residential environmentâis seen as the principal âtherapy.â You have the U.N. Special Rapporteur for Health, Dainius PÅ«ras, calling for a ârevolutionâ in mental health, one that would supplant todayâs biological paradigm of care with a paradigm that paid more attention to social justice factorsâpoverty, inequality, etc.âas a source of mental distress. All of those initiatives tell of an effort to find a new way.

But perhaps most important, in terms of âpositive trends,â the narrative that was told to us starting in the 1980s has collapsed, which is what presents the opportunity for a new paradigm to take hold. More and more research tells of how the conventional narrative, in all its particulars, has failed to pan out. The diagnoses in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) have not been validated as discrete illnesses. The genetics of mental disorders remain in doubt. MRI scans have not proven to be useful.

Long-term outcomes are poor. And the notion that psychiatric drugs fix chemical imbalances has been abandoned. Ronald Pies, the former editor in chief of Psychiatric Times, has even sought to distance psychiatry, as an institution, from ever having made such a claim. Horgan. Do brain implants or other electrostimulation devices show any therapeutic potential?.

Whitaker. I donât have a ready answer for this. We have published two articles about the spinning of results from a trial of deep-brain stimulation, and the suffering of some patients so treated over the long-term. Those articles tell of why it may be difficult to answer that question. There are financial influences that push for published results that tell of a therapeutic success, even if the data doesnât support that finding, and we have a research environment that fails to study long-term outcomes.

The history of somatic treatments for mental disorders also provides a reason for caution. Itâs a history of one somatic treatment after another being initially hailed as curative, or extremely helpful, and then failing the test of time. The inventor of frontal lobotomy, Egas Moniz, was awarded a Nobel Prize for inventing that surgery, which today we understand as a mutilation. Itâs important to remain open to the possibility that somatic treatments may be helpful, at least for some patients. But there is plenty of reason to be wary of initial claims of success.

Horgan. Should psychedelic drugs be taken seriously as treatments?. Whitaker. I think caution applies here too. Surely there are many risks with psychedelic drugs, and if you were to do a study of first-episode psychosis today, you would find a high percentage of the patients had been using mind-altering drugs before their psychotic breakâantidepressants, marijuana, LSD and so forth.

At the same time, weâve published reviews of papers that have reported positive results with use of psychedelics. What are the benefits versus the risks?. Can possible benefits be realized while risks are minimized?. It is a question worth exploring, but carefully so. Horgan.

What about meditation?. Whitaker. I know that many people find meditation helpful. I also know other people find it difficultâand even threateningâto sit with the silence of their minds. Mad in America has published reviews of research about meditation, we have had a few bloggers write about it, and in our resource section on ânon-drug therapies,â we have summarized research findings regarding its use for depression.

We concluded that the research on this is not as robust as one would like. However, I think your question leads to this broader thought. People struggling with their minds and emotions may come up with many different approaches they find helpful. Exercise, diet, meditation, yoga and so forth all represent efforts to change oneâs environment, and ultimately, I think that can be very helpful. But the individual has to find his or her way to whatever environmental change that works best for them.

Horgan. Do you see any progress toward understanding the causes of mental illness?. Whitaker. Yes, and that progress might be summed up in this way. Researchers are returning to investigations of how we are impacted by what has âhappened to us.â The Adverse Childhood Experiences study provides compelling evidence of how traumas in childhoodâdivorce, poverty, abuse, bullying and so forthâexact a long-term toll on physical and mental health.

Interview any group of women diagnosed with a serious mental disorder, and youâll regularly find accounts of sexual abuse. Racism exacts a toll. So too poverty, oppressive working conditions, and so forth. You can go on and on, but all of this is a reminder that we humans are designed to respond to our environment, and it is quite clear that mental distress, in large part, arises from difficult environments and threatening experiences, past and present. And with a focus on life experiences as a source of âmental illness,â a related question is now being asked.

What do we all need to be mentally well?. Shelter, good food, meaning in life, someone to love and so forthâif you look at it from this perspective, you can see why, when those supporting elements begin to disappear, psychiatric difficulties appear. I am not discounting that there may be biological factors that cause âmental illness.â While biological markers that tell of a particular disorder have not been discovered, we are biological creatures, and we do know, for instance, that there are physical illnesses and toxins that can produce psychotic episodes. However, the progress that is being made at the moment is a moving away from the robotic âitâs all about brain chemistryâ toward a rediscovery of the importance of our social lives and our experiences. Horgan.

Do we still have anything to learn from Sigmund Freud?. Whitaker. I certainly think so. Freud is a reminder that so much of our mind is hidden from us and that what spills into our consciousness comes from a blend of the many parts of our mind, our emotional centers and our more primal instincts. You can still see merit in Freudâs descriptions of the id, ego and superego as a conceptualization of different parts of the brain.

I read Freud when I was in college, and it was a formative experience for me. Horgan. I fear that American-style capitalism doesnât produce good health care, including mental-health care. What do you think?. Whitaker.

Itâs clear that it doesnât. First, we have for-profit health-care that is set up to treat âdisease.â With mental-health care, that means there is a profit to be made from seeing people as âdiseasedâ and treating them for that âillness.â Take a pill!. In other words, American-style capitalism, which works to create markets for products, provides an incentive to create mental patients, and it has done this to great success over the past 35 years. Second, without a profit to be made, you donât have as much investment in psychosocial care that can help a person remake his or her life. There is a societal expense, but little corporate profit, in psychosocial care, and American-style capitalism doesnât lend itself to that equation.

Third, with our American-style capitalism (think neoliberalism), it is the individual that is seen as âillâ and needs to be fixed. Society gets a free pass. This too is a barrier to good âmental healthâ care, for it prevents us from thinking about what changes we might make to our society that would be more nurturing for us all. With our American-style capitalism, we now have a grossly unequal society, with more and more wealth going to the select few, and more and more people struggling to pay their bills. That is a prescription for psychiatric distress.

Good âmental health careâ starts with creating a society that is more equal and just. Horgan. How might the hypertension medications lasix affect care of the mentally ill?. Whitaker. That is something Mad in America has reported on.

The lasix, of course, can be particularly threatening to people in mental hospitals, or in group homes. The threat is more than just the exposure to the lasix that may come in such settings. People who are struggling in this way often feel terribly isolated, alone, and fearful of being with others. hypertension medications measures, with calls for social distancing, can exacerbate that. I think this puts hospital staff and those who run residential homes into an extraordinarily difficult positionâhow can they help ease the isolation of patients even as they are being expected to enforce a type of social distancing?.

Horgan. If the next president named you mental health czar, what would be at the top of your To Do list?. Whitaker. Well, I am pretty sure thatâs not going to happen, and if it did, I would quickly confess to my being utterly unqualified for the job. But from my perch at Mad in America, here is what I would like to see happen in our society.

As you can see from my answers above, I think the fundamental problem is that our society has organized itself around a false narrative, which was sold to us as a narrative of science. In the early 1980s, we began to hear that psychiatric disorders were discrete brain illnesses, which were caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, and that a new generation of psychiatric drugs fixed those imbalances, like insulin for diabetes. That is a story of an amazing medical breakthrough. Researchers had discovered the very chemicals in our brain that cause madness, depression, anxiety or ADHD, and they had developed drugs that could put brain chemistry back into a normal state. Given the complexity of the human brain, if this were true, it would arguably be the greatest achievement in medical history.

And we understood it to be true. We came to believe that there was a sharp line between the ânormalâ brain and the âabnormalâ brain, and that it was medically helpful to screen for these illnesses, and that psychiatric drugs were very safe and effective, and often needed to be taken for life. But what can be seen clearly today is that this narrative was a marketing story, not a scientific one. It was a story that psychiatry, as an institution, promoted for guild purposes, and it was a story that pharmaceutical companies promoted for commercial reasons. Science actually tells a very different story.

The biology of psychiatric disorders remains unknown. The disorders in the DSM have not been validated as discrete illnesses. The drugs do not fix chemical imbalances but rather perturb normal neurotransmitter functions. And even their short term efficacy is marginal at best. As could be expected, organizing our thinking around a false narrative has been a societal disaster.

A sharp rise in the burden of mental illness in our society. Poor long-term functional outcomes for those who are continuously medicated. The pathologizing of childhood. And so on. What we need now is a new narrative to organize ourselves around, one steeped in history, literature, philosophy, and good science.

I think step one is ditching the DSM. That book presents the most impoverished âphilosophy of beingâ imaginable. Anyone who is too emotional, or struggles with his or her mind, or just doesnât like being in a boring environment (think ADHD) is a candidate for a diagnosis. We need a narrative that, if truth be told, can be found in literature. Novels, Shakespeare, the Bibleâthey all tell of how we humans struggle with our minds, our emotions and our behaviors.

That is the norm. It is the human condition. And yet the characters we see in literature, if they were viewed through the DSM lens, would regularly qualify for a diagnosis. At the same time, literature tells of how humans can be so resilient, and that we change as we age and move through different environments. We need that to be part of a new narrative too.

Our current disease-model narrative tells of how people are likely going to be chronically ill. Their brains are defective, and so the therapeutic goal is to manage the symptoms of the âdisease.â We need a narrative that replaces that pessimism with hope. If we embraced that literary understanding of what it is to be human, then a âmental healthâ policy could be forged that would begin with this question. How do we create environments that are more nurturing for us all?. How do we create schools that build on a childâs curiosity?.

How do we bring nature back into our lives?. How do we create a society that helps provide people with meaning, a sense of community, and a sense of civic duty?. How do we create a society that promotes good physical health, and provides access to shelter and medical care?. Furthermore, with this conception in mind, individual therapy would help people change their environments. You could encourage walks in nature.

Recommend volunteer work. Provide settings where people could go and recuperate, and so forth. Most important, in contrast to a âdisease-basedâ paradigm of care, a âwellness-basedâ paradigm would help people feel hopeful, and help them find a way to create a different future for themselves. This is an approach, by the way, that can be helpful to people who have suffered a psychotic episode. Soteria homes and Open Dialogue are âtherapiesâ that strive to help psychotic patients in this manner.

Within this âwellnessâ paradigm of care, there would still be a place for use of medications that help people feel differently, at least for a time. Sedatives, tranquilizers, and so forth. And you would still want to fund science that seeks to better understand the many pathways to debilitating mood states and to âpsychosisââtrauma, poor physical health, physical disease, lack of sleep, setbacks in life, isolation, loneliness, and yes, whatever biological vulnerabilities that may be present. At the same time, you would want to fund science that seeks to better understand the pillars of âwellness.â Horgan. Whatâs your utopia?.

Whitaker. My âutopiaâ would be a world like the one I just described, based on a new narrative about mental illness, rooted in an understanding of how emotional we humans are, of how we struggle with our minds, and of how we are built to be responsive to our environments. And that really is the mission of Mad in America. We want it to be a forum for creating a new societal narrative for âmental health.â Further Reading. Can Psychiatry Heal Itself?.

Are Psychiatric Medications Making Us Sicker?. Meta-Post. Posts on Mental Illness Meta-Post. Posts on Brain Implants Meta-Post. Posts on Psychedelics Meta-Post.

Posts on Buddhism and Meditation See also âThe Meaning of Madness,â a chapter in my free online book Mind-Body Problems.1970 Sweet Suburbia âMassive movement from central cities to their suburbs, a population boom in the West and Southwest, and a lower rate of population growth in the 1960's than in the 1950's are the findings that stand out in the preliminary results of the 1970 Census as issued by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The movement to the suburbs was pervasive. Its extent is indicated by the fact that 13 of the 25 largest cities lost population, whereas 24 of the 25 largest metropolitan areas gained. Washington, D.C., was characteristic.

The population of the city changed little between 1960 and 1970, but the metropolitan area grew by 800,000, or more than 38 percent.â 1920 Air Cargo âThe proposed machine, known as the âPelican Four-Ton Lorry,' is a colossal cantilever monoplane designed for two 460-horse-power Napier engines. Its cruising speed is 72 miles per hour. Its total weight is to be 24,100 pounds. The useful load is four tons, with sufficient fuel for the London-Paris journey. Most interesting of all, however, is the novel system of quick loading and unloading which has been planned.

This permits handling of shipments with the utmost speed, and is based on a similar practice in the motor truck field. Idle airplanes mean a large idle capital, hence the designers plan to keep the airplane in the air for the greater part of the time.â Don't Try This Anywhere âDr. Charles Baskerville points out that while the data thus far obtained on chlorine and influenza do not warrant drawing conclusions, such facts as have been established would indicate to the medical man the advisability of trying experimentally dilute chlorinated air as a prophylactic in such epidemics as so-called influenza. Dr. Baskerville determined to what extent workers in plants where small amounts of chlorine were to be found in the atmosphere were affected seriously by influenza.

Many of those from whom information was requested expressed the opinion that chlorine workers are noticeably free from colds and other pneumatic diseases.â 1870 The Rise of Telegraphy âThe rapid progress of the telegraph during the last twenty-five years has changed the whole social and commercial systems of the world. Its advantages and capabilities were so evident that immediately on its introduction, and demonstration of its true character, the most active efforts were made to secure them for every community which desired to keep pace with the advances of modern times. The Morse or signal system seemed for a time to be the perfection of achievement, until Professor Royal E. House astonished the world with his letter printing telegraph. Now, almost every considerable expanse of water is traversed, or soon will be, by the slender cords which bind continents and islands together and practically bring the human race into one great family.â The Transport of Goods 1887.

Cargo ship launched as Golconda had room for 6,000 tons of cargo, loaded and unloaded by crane and cargo nets, and 108 passengers. Credit. Scientific American Supplement, Vol. XXIII, No. 574.

January 1, 1887 Oxcarts, railroad cars and freight ships can be loaded and unloaded one item at a time, but it is more efficient to handle cargo packed into âintermodal shipping containersâ that are a standardized size and shape. Our October 1968 issue noted that a âbreak-bulkâ freighter took three days to unload, a container ship less than one (including loading new cargo). Air transport became a link in this complex system, but the concept in the 1920 illustration shown is a little ahead of its time. These days air cargo (and luggage) makes abundant use of âunit load devices,â cargo bins shaped to fit the fuselage of specific aircraft models.The items below are highlights from the free newsletter, âSmart, useful, science stuff about hypertension medications.â To receive newsletter issues daily in your inbox, sign-up here. Are you in need of a âdose of optimismâ about the lasix, at least in the U.S.?.

Check out this 10/12/20 story at The New York Times by by Donald McNeil Jr., who has covered infectious diseases and epidemics for many years. McNeil notes the 215,000 people in the U.S. Dead so far from the novel hypertension, as well as the estimates that the figure could go as high as 400,000 before this era draws to a close. But here is some of the good news that he tallies. 1) mask-wearing by the public is âwidely acceptedâ.

2) the development of treatments to protect against hypertension and of treatments for hypertension medications are proceeding at record speed. 3) âexperts are saying, with genuine confidence, that the lasix in the United States will be over far sooner than they expected, possibly by the middle of next yearâ. And 4) fewer infected people die today than did earlier this year, even at nursing homes. About 10 percent of people in the U.S. Have been infected with the lasix so far, according to the U.S.

Centers for Disease Control, the story states. Âlasixs donât end abruptly. They decelerate gradually,â McNeil writes. A 10/14/20 story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times puts into context three late-stage (Phase 3 safety and effectiveness) hypertension medications experiments that have been paused in recent weeks due to illness among some study participants. Pauses in treatment studies â in this case Johnson &.

Johnsonâs treatment candidate and AstraZenecaâs treatment candidate â are ânot unusual,â the story states, partly because the safety threshold is extremely high for a product that, if approved, could be given to millions or billions of people. But pauses are rare in treatment studies â in this case Eli Lillyâs monoclonal antibody cocktail drug. Once a drug or treatment experiment (trial) is paused, a safety board determines whether the ill participant was given the new product or a placebo. If it was the placebo, the study can resume. If not, the board looks deeper into the case to determine whether or not the illness is related to the drug or treatment.

If a clear connection is discovered, âthe trial may have to stop,â Zimmer writes. Dr. Eric Topol at Scripps Research is quoted in the piece as saying he is âstill fairly optimisticâ about monoclonal antibody treatments for hypertension medications. The safety-related pauses of all three experiments are âan example of how things are supposed to work,â says Dr. Anna Durbin of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the story.

The top of a story at The Washington Post features an instructive interactive that sketches âScienceville,â a fictional place where âpoliticians and public health officials use every tool at their disposal to contain the hypertension.â It basically shows how genetic analysis and tracing of viral strains found in a frequently and widely tested population could help officials control outbreaks of hypertension. Then the 10/13/20 text story below, by Brady Dennis, Chris Mooney, Sarah Kaplan, and Harry Stevens, focuses on the details of such a âgenomic epidemiologyâ approach and describes some real-life efforts under way, primarily in the UK, to implement the approach. The U.S. Has not been able to effectively use the approach, in part because genetic sequencing of viral strains âhas largely been left up to states and individual researchers, rather than being part of a coordinated and well-funded national program,â the story states. The rise in hypertension s in the U.S.

Is now driven by âsmall gatherings in peopleâs homes,â according to officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, reports Carolyn Crist for WebMD (10/14/20). People should continue to wear face masks and to practice social distancing âsince most people have still not been exposed to the hypertension worldwide," the researchers suggest, Crist writes. A newly developed test can detect hypertension in 5 minutes, reports Robert F. Service at Science (10/8/20).

The test relies on CRISPR gene-editing technology, for which Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry earlier this month. Doudna heads up the work that led to this new 5-minute CRISPR test for the hypertension. By comparison, it can take a day or more to get back standard hypertension test results, the story states. Donald G. McNeil Jr.

At The New York Times has written a guide to distinguishing common cold, flu, and hypertension medications symptoms (10/3/20). A major difference between having a cold and having the flu is that "Flu makes you feel as if you were hit by a truck,â McNeil quotes experts as saying. The symptom that best distinguishes hypertension medications from flu is loss of your sense of smell â strong smells donât register, he writes. But many flu and hypertension medications symptoms overlap, the story states. The most common symptoms for hypertension medications are a high fever, chills, dry cough and fatigue.

For flu, itâs a fever, headaches, body aches, sore throat, runny nose, stuffed sinuses, coughing and sneezing, the story states. Dr. Anthony Fauciâs three daughters do not plan to visit him for Thanksgiving to avoid potentially transmitting the new hypertension to their parents, reports Ralph Ellis at WebMD. The story includes holiday traveling and visiting tips from a pulmonary critical care doctor at the University of Washington Medical Center who âbelieves traveling for the holidays is risky.â The tips include ensuring you have no hypertension medications-like symptoms two weeks before traveling, getting tested before traveling, quarantining in a hotel for at least 48 hours before visiting with loved ones, traveling by car, and cutting down on âclose contact and talking without a maskâ (10/9/20). Adele Chapin has written a guide for reducing kidsâ risk of catching and spreading hypertension at the playground.

The 10/8/20 piece in The Washington Post makes the usual recommendations for mask-wearing, hand-washing, hand-sanitizer, disinfecting wipes, and distancing. It quotes a Childrenâs National Hospital pediatrician advises against gloves, because âpeople wearing them often touch their faces, which defeats the purpose.â The piece also recommends visiting playgrounds at less busy times and choosing playgrounds with more than one play structure, which makes it easier for kids to distance from one another. A story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times beautifully describes and illustrates some of the amazing imaging work that scientists have done to study the structure of hypertension and how it infects our cells and multiplies (10/9/20). For starters, check out a mesmerizing video about a quarter of the way down-page that simulates spike proteins (complex molecules) doing a âmolecular danceâ on the lasix membrane. The video (just one of several in this stunning piece) is part of research by a computational biophysicist at the Max Planck Institute of Biophysics and colleagues.

The spikes appear to shimmy, which âincreases the odds of encountering the protein on the surface of our cells it uses to attach,â the researchers suspect, Zimmer writes. You might enjoy, âA letter of recommendation in the age of Zoom,â by Matt Cheung, for McSweeneyâs (10/14/20).Editorâs Note (10/16/20). This story is being republished in light of the interim results of a large international clinical trial of remdesivir by the World Health Organization. The trial found that the drug, which is widely used to treat hypertension medications patients, failed to prevent deaths. An experimental drugâand one of the worldâs best hopes against hypertension medicationsâcould shorten the time to recovery from hypertension , according to the largest and most rigorous clinical trial of the compound.

The experimental drug, called remdesivir, interferes with replication of some lasixes, including the hypertension lasix responsible for the current lasix. On 29 April, Anthony Fauci, director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), announced that a clinical trial of more than a thousand people showed that people taking remdesivir recovered in 11 days on average, compared to 15 days for those on a placebo. ÂAlthough a 31% improvement doesnât seem like a knockout 100%, it is a very important proof of concept,â Fauci said. ÂWhat it has proven is that a drug can block this lasix.â Deaths were also lower in trial participants who received the drug, he said, but that trend was not statistically significant. The shortened recovery time, however, was significant, and was enough of a benefit that investigators decided to stop the trial early for ethical reasons, he said, to ensure that those participants who were receiving placebo could now access the drug.

Fauci added that remdesivir would become a standard treatment for hypertension medications. The news comes after weeks of data leaks and on a day of mixed results from clinical trials of the drug. In a trial run by the drugâs maker, Gilead Sciences of Foster City, California, more than half of 400 participants with severe hypertension medications recovered from their illness within two weeks of receiving treatment. But the study lacked a placebo controlled arm, making the results difficult to interpret. Another smaller trial run in China found no benefits from remdesivir when compared with a placebo.

But the trial was stopped early due to the difficulty in enroling participants as the outbreak subsided in China. Nevertheless, onlookers are hopeful that the large NIAID trial provides the first glimmer of hope in a race to find a drug that works against the hypertension, which has infected more than 3 million people worldwide. ÂThere is a lot of focus on remdesivir because itâs potentially the best shot we have,â says virologist Stephen Griffin at the University of Leeds in the UK. Small trials The fast-flowing, conflicting information on remdesivir has left people reeling over the past weeks. In the rush to find therapies to combat hypertension medications, small, clinical trials without control groups have been common.

ÂIâm just very annoyed by all of these non-controlled studies,â says Geoffrey Porges, an analyst for the investment bank SVB Leerink in New York City. ÂItâs reassuring that 50â60% of patients are discharged from the hospital, but this is a disease that mostly gets better anyway.â With so much uncertainty, the remdesivir-watchers were waiting anxiously for final results from the NIAID trial, which were not expected until the end of May. In lieu of a treatment, which could still be more than a year away, effective therapies are critical to reducing deaths and limiting economic damage from the lasix. Yet, despite the flood of small clinical trials, no therapy has been convincingly shown to boost survival in people with hypertension medications. The NIAID results put a new sheen on remdesivir.

ÂIt may not be the wonder drug that everyoneâs looking for, but if you can stop some patients from becoming critically ill, thatâs good enough,â says Griffin. Fauci said the finding reminded him of the discovery in the 1980s that the drug AZT helped to combat HIV . The first randomized, controlled clinical only showed a modest improvement, he said, but researchers continued to build on that success, eventually developing highly effective therapies. For now, he said, remdesivir would become a standard treatment for hypertension medications. Remdesivir works by gumming up an enzyme that some lasixes, including hypertension, use to replicate.

In February, researchers showed that the drug reduces viral in human cells grown in a laboratory. Gilead began to ramp up production of remdesivir well before the NIAID results. By the end of March, the company had produced enough to treat 30,000 patients. By streamlining its manufacturing process and finding new sources of raw materials, Gilead announced that it hoped to produce enough remdesivir to treat more than a million people by the end of the year. That calculation was based on the assumption that people would take the drug for 10 days, but the results announced from Gileadâs trial today suggest that a 5-day course of treatment could work just as well.

If so, that would effectively double the number of people who could be treated, says Porges. Many drugs needed In the long term, clinicians will likely want a bevy of anti-viral drugsâwith different ways of disabling the lasixâin their arsenal, says Timothy Sheahan, a virologist at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, who has teamed up with Gilead researchers to study remdesivir. ÂThere is always the potential for antiviral resistance,â he says. ÂAnd to hedge against that potential, itâs good to have not only a first-line, but also a second-, third-, fourth-, fifth-line antiviral.â Researchers are furiously testing a wide range of therapies, but early results, while not yet definitive, have not been encouraging. The malaria drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, both of which also have anti-inflammatory effects, drew so much attention from physicians and the public that some countries have depleted their supplies of the drugs.

Yet studies in humans have failed to show a consistent benefit, and some have highlighted the risks posed by side effects of the drugs on the heart. Early interest in a mix of two HIV drugs called lopinavir and ritonavir flagged when a clinical trial in nearly 200 people did not find any benefit of the mix for those with severe hypertension medications. Another promising therapeutic hypothesisâthat inhibiting the action of an immune system regulator called IL-6 could reduce the severe inflammation seen in some people with severe hypertension medicationsâhas met with mixed results thus far. Still, a host of other therapies are being tested in people, and many researchers are hunting for new drugs at the bench. Sheahan and his colleagues have found a compound that is active against hypertension and other hypertensiones, including a remdesivir-resistant variant of a hypertension, when tested in laboratory-grown human cells.

But much more testing would need to be done before the compound could be tried in people. ÂWhat weâre doing now will hopefully have an impact on the current lasix,â he says. ÂBut maybe more importantly, it could position us to better respond more quickly in the future.â This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on April 29 2020. Read more about the hypertension outbreak here.During a press conference in early September, President Donald Trump was asked when he thought a treatment for hypertension medications might become available. His prediction was upbeat.

ÂWeâre going to have a treatment very soon,â Trump said. ÂMaybe even before a very special dayâyou know what day Iâm talking about.â Trump was referring, of course, to the presidential election on November 3. But the odds of a treatment materializing for public use before then appear slim. New drugs and treatments ordinarily go through a lengthy review process prior to regulatory approval. treatments for hypertension medications, however, are widely expected to be released under emergency use authorization (EUA) protocols, which allow for the sale of unapproved medical products during national health crises.

On October 6 the White House agreed to new EUA guidelines that call on hypertension medications treatment developers to monitor their phase III clinical trial subjects for at least two months for side effects and severe disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which administers EUAs, will host a widely anticipated meeting on October 22 to address standards for efficacy, safety and manufacturing of hypertension medications treatments. But the FDAâs recommended two-month observation period puts a preelection treatment approval out of reach. EUAs could, however, make the first successful hypertension medications treatments available to frontline workers by the start of 2021, although distribution in the general U.S.

Population will take longer, starting with elderly and other high-risk groups and then younger, healthier people who may not have access to them until late in the year, according to Paul Offit, a pediatrician and director of the treatment Education Center at Childrenâs Hospital of Philadelphia. The FDA has already granted hundreds of hypertension medications-related EUAs for products such as diagnostic tests, medical devices and therapiesâincluding for convalescent plasma and hydroxychloroquine (the latter was later revoked). ÂAll the hypertension medications treatment developers are going for an EUA first,â says Eric Topol, a cardiologist and head of the Scripps Research Translational Institute in La Jolla, Calif., who has directed numerous multinational clinical trials (although none for treatments). ÂIt makes no sense to wait for formal licensure.â Defining Success Obtaining an EUA hinges on how independent reviewers judge a treatmentâs performance during periodic readouts of phase III clinical trial data. The trials are each enrolling tens of thousands of people and are also double-blindedâmeaning that neither the subjects nor the experimenters know which participants got a treatment versus a placebo.

They were designed to continue until the number of symptomatic s reaches 150 in the vaccinated and control groups combined. If a treatment halves the risk of symptomatic s among the vaccinated group, it will meet the FDAâs minimum bar for approval. Reviewers examining the interim data readouts will be looking for better protection than that. Pfizer, which began a phase III trial for its treatment on July 27, plans to conduct its first readout when the number of symptomatic cases reaches 32. The company expects that could happen this month, making it first in line for a potential EUA.

Statistical thresholds are set such that if hypertension medications case numbers in the vaccinated group are, at that point, at least five times lower than they are among vaccinated subjects, then reviewers can declare overwhelming efficacy. In that event, the company will âconsult with regulatory authorities about next steps,â which could include an EUA, says a Pfizer spokesperson. In an October 16 open letter, Pfizer chairman and CEO Albert Bourla wrote that if the efficacy data are positive, the company will apply for an EUA in the U.S.