\
Originally Posted by mgus
This smacks of conspiration theories, that the advocated way of treating depression etc is ruled by what companies can sell. I’m not in research myself, but I am close to some who are, and rest assured that there are lot’s of people in the world that have a very critical way at looking at things. If medicine companies could make a medicine that took away scurvy, so that one wouldn’t have to eat vitamin C in order to be well - do you really think doctors would recommend the anti-scurvy medicine only, and totally ignore the alternative of eating well? That’s just silly.
Hi MGUS,
I would have to disagree that my statement was silly. I think that it is an accurate statement about how the world of medicine works. As to their being a conspiracy, no. I do not see a conspiracy, I see groups of drug companies looking for new areas to market products. Or to say it another way, business as usual.
Drug companies are for profit businesses with high overhead. They have a number of challenges that they have to overcome in the operation of their businesses. They have very high costs for the development of a drug. These costs must be capitalized and then amortized over the expected life of the drug, which is usually calculated as a time period that they can control pricing through their patent. When their patent expires, other drug companies can sell their product as a generic and profits drop. In order to recoup their investments, they need to have the protection that a patent will give them.
In looking for a market for their products, it is much better to sell a drug that has high demand, versus one that has low demand. This is why we are in a state of crisis with the lack of new antibiotics to replace those that are no longer effective. Antibiotics are only used when someone is ill. So, with limited sales, the costs necessary to amortize the investment to make the drug are very, very high. This is why you see some medicines prices in the thousands of dollars per dose.
In the Serotonin market, you have a number of SSRI’s and SSNRI’s already made and they are quite profitable. What is nice for the drug companies, is that they all work on one Serotonin receptor. And as there are 30 more receptors (according to the latest state of the art) there is much ground for new invention.
Irritable Bowel Syndrome is, and will be a classic case of just this That serotonin insufficiency is the cause of IBS has been known for some time. The first drug that worked on the Serotonin pathway for IBS came out in 2000. It was then taken off the market due to its side effects, but was later allowed back on for use by women only. It is not in wide use due to the side effects. So, with that drug being approved the relationship between Serotonin and IBS has been shown to any and all drug companies. As was the fact that the particular drug did not work well.
To define the market for IBS drugs, I will use the figures given by a non profit group that seeks to help those with IBS. Their web site is here: Homepage - About IBS
They claim that 15% of the population suffers to one degree or another from IBS. In the US alone, that would be 45,000,000 people. That seems like a great potential market for a drug company. And it should stir up a lot of interest in drug companies to do just that. If worldwide rates are the same as in the US, then an IBS drug has a huge potential for sales.
Well, to verify that, I will refer the readers to this web site: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ This site is run by the US Department of Health. Drug companies that want to run trials must register those trials, and this is where the trials are listed. If you type in "irritable bowel syndrome" in the selector, you will find 32 trials ongoing today, with most of them recruiting. There are more that are no longer recruiting. If you spend some time there going through the trials as to what they are seeking, you will find Serotonin connections in the largest percentage.
These companies are sophisticated in their knowledge of neurotransmitters. They all know how serotonin is created, that the rate limiting function is the process of hyroxylation, and they know that decarboxylation is a non saturated enzyme reaction. That means that they all know that a patient who bypasses the rate limiting function by taking 5 HTP will create more Serotonin. And yes, they all know that 5 HTP is sold over the counter.
The question that the reader of his has to ask, is why would so many drug companies want to risk so much money when they have an over the counter item available for sale that costs little now, that is better?
Certainly my last statement that 5 HTP is better than an unknown product can be construed as being a bit flippant. So, to defend that, I will support that by first going back to the chemistry that I have already discussed (and which is easily verified on line) the Serotonin can ONLY be made with 5 HTP. If the drug company is going to have more synaptic levels of serotonin, then they must work on means to keep the persons existing levels of Serotonin from leaving the synapse as easily as it would normally. This is where reuptake inhibition, or perhaps MAO suppression would come in. Certainly Diffusion cannot be controlled, and neruoglia activity is irrelevant because the Serotonin is already out of the synaptic cleft before neuroglia begin their job. Perhaps the scientists have developed some new way to keep Serotonin in the synapse longer. Secondly, 5 HTP is the fastest growing over the counter medicine in the US today. Its use is with people who have depression, and do not like taking SSRI’s. A trip down any of the the big supplement vendors that carry large numbers of products will find 5 HTP, and usually it is easily visible to the buyer.
Regarding why the drug companies feel secure enough that they can find a market with physicians, the answer is in how business is done.
The US is a litigious country. Physicians can be targets for malpractice suits, and the physician that looses a malpractice suit will find that his liability insurance will go sky high. So, a physician must practice "defensive medicine" to survive. In a suit for malpractice, the usual legal claim is for negligence. To defeat a claim for negligence, the physician must show that the symptoms that the patient gave him, and what ever supporting documentation he has (such as blood tests) show that his diagnosis was justifiable. Then he must show that his treatment protocol was also justifiable. The physician does not have to prove that he helped the patient, only that his standard of care was more or less, what other physicians would do. To say it another way, the physician has to have something to "hang his hat on."
When it comes to prescription medicine, the FDA approval is that thing that he can hang his hat on. Now, he is not saying that the medication is appropriate for a diagnosed condition, the government is. So, in Kitten’s case, she was diagnosed with panic attacks (and it seems that she agrees) and she got Paxil, which is FDA approved for use with panic attacks. 5 HTP is a "dietary supplement" which means that it cannot make any health claims.
The fact that 5 HTP may be better, that the chemistry about how Serotonin is made is fact, can be irrelevant to the physician because 5 HTP has not gone through any clinical trials. Without clinical trials, it cannot be FDA approved. Without FDA approval, the physician has lost the defense that is his security blanket. The reason that no one will put 5 HTP through a clinical trial is that since it cannot be patented, and the barriers to entry are next to zero for this product, there is no way to recoup the investment in the trials.
(The term "barrier to entry" is a business term. Basically, 5 HTP is dried, chopped up plant stem from the Griffonia Simplicifolia plant. The plant stem just happens to be 20% 5 HTP. So anyone who can grow, and dry the plant can be in the 5 HTP business. To say it another way, if any gardener can do this, there would few "barriers" to prevent that gardener from getting in the business)
So, is this a conspiracy Mogus? Is the advocated way of treating depression based upon what companies can sell? No, it is more along the line of what the companies can get approved by the FDA (or other national agencies for other countries). To find a doctor that will prescribe 5 HTP would be rare due to his need to practice defensive medicine, EVEN if he believed 5 HTP to be the superior product. A good number of my physician friends, when they come across a situation where 5 HTP is warranted, will handle it by saying " I hear 5 HTP works well in those situations" and if the patient asks, they will be told where it can be purchased. They do not prescribe it though for the reasons cited above.
Changing gears, the battle between 5 HTP, and SSRI’s as well as the yet to be produced drugs for IBS, will be very interesting. 5 HTP sales are increasing dramatically, yet few doctors prescribe them. The question then becomes, what is making these people buy a non FDA approved product? The reason is simple, it works, and it works fast. The reason for the speed is simple. If one’s problem is that a message is not making it to the brain because it stops on one side of a receptor, putting more neurotransmitter into that receptor will get the message through.
The next question is how do non medically trained people find out about 5 HTP. Well, there is tons of documentation on it, and there are a number of books by reputable physicians on it. Even if a physician feels that he does not want to prescribe a non FDA approved method of treatment, he is free to write books on it and let the reader make up his own mind. Couple that with the investment necessary to "give it a try" which is very, very low, the risk reward ratio is very attractive. If the person has a serotonin insufficiency problem, he will be able to get that fixed in a couple of days. If he doesn’t have a Serotonin insufficiency problem, nothing will happen in those two days and he is only out the cost of one bottle of pills and whatever it cost him to obtain the knowledge of 5 HTP.
Best regards,
Stage