← Back to context

Comment by llm_trw

10 hours ago

Every decade or two I hear this about some wonder drug only for them to turn out just as bad as what they were replacing. The opioid epidemic being the latest one.

Do you pay more attention to those and ignore the actual success stories?

The opioids thing is hardly comparable. Everybody clearly knew the risks (for the past 100+ years) and chose to ignore them. This is an almost entirely new type of drugs.

  • Do you pay attention to the people who win at Russian roulette more than those who lose?

    OxyContin was marketed to be the safe alternative to all opioids that came before it, impossible to become addicted to and extremely difficult to overdose from. This was a lie.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6140023/

    • > Do you pay attention to the people who win at Russian roulette more than those who lose?

      Well.. no since you cant really win anything. With pharmaceuticals on the other I hand I think 1 Oxycontin/etc. like “situation” would be a reasonable price to pay for let’s say 4 major successes.

      > This was a lie.

      Sure. But it’s on the same level as saying that filtered cigarettes don’t cause cancer. If a doctor actually believes that he’s just too dumb to be a doctor… (although I assume most safety claims were relative to other opioids and not in absolute terms?)

      Are there any signs that the situation with Semaglutides is that similar? Yes they are new and not well understood drugs (well not really but sort of..) and it’s not inconceivable that their longterm cost might end up outweighing the benefits but I don’t really see any signs of an actual conspiracy yet.