Insightful article, Dr. Mandrola. It's disconcerting that despite compelling evidence of oseltamivir's lack of efficacy and associated adverse events, it continues to be employed in the treatment of influenza. I think you touched upon an important point about the drivers of such persistent use - optimism, ignorance of history, and to som…
Insightful article, Dr. Mandrola. It's disconcerting that despite compelling evidence of oseltamivir's lack of efficacy and associated adverse events, it continues to be employed in the treatment of influenza. I think you touched upon an important point about the drivers of such persistent use - optimism, ignorance of history, and to some extent, inertia. It's human nature to hope for a silver bullet solution and stick to long-held beliefs, even when faced with contrary evidence. This, however, doesn't excuse the need for us, as medical professionals, to critically appraise the therapies we employ and to update our practice in light of new evidence.
Another point worth considering is the role of the pharmaceutical industry in promoting and maintaining the status quo. After all, millions of doses of oseltamivir were stockpiled based on initial studies and recommendations, pointing to a potentially larger issue of industry influence on clinical guidelines and practices.
Finally, your discussion highlights the crucial importance of transparency and open data in clinical research. These can pave the way for better informed medical practices, potentially saving significant resources while ensuring patient safety. Thank you for initiating this discussion and I look forward to more insightful reads in the future
Insightful article, Dr. Mandrola. It's disconcerting that despite compelling evidence of oseltamivir's lack of efficacy and associated adverse events, it continues to be employed in the treatment of influenza. I think you touched upon an important point about the drivers of such persistent use - optimism, ignorance of history, and to some extent, inertia. It's human nature to hope for a silver bullet solution and stick to long-held beliefs, even when faced with contrary evidence. This, however, doesn't excuse the need for us, as medical professionals, to critically appraise the therapies we employ and to update our practice in light of new evidence.
Another point worth considering is the role of the pharmaceutical industry in promoting and maintaining the status quo. After all, millions of doses of oseltamivir were stockpiled based on initial studies and recommendations, pointing to a potentially larger issue of industry influence on clinical guidelines and practices.
Finally, your discussion highlights the crucial importance of transparency and open data in clinical research. These can pave the way for better informed medical practices, potentially saving significant resources while ensuring patient safety. Thank you for initiating this discussion and I look forward to more insightful reads in the future