<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: brand name drugs</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'brand name drugs'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22brand+name+drugs%22&t=%22brand+name+drugs%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 03:35:30 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>EU Trade Deal Could Cost Canada $3B For Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4446032&amp;cid=t_424317_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FqZDR45Q5V5o%2F</link>
            <description>A trade deal being negotiated between Canada and the European Union could cost Canadians another $2.8 billion annually in drug costs - notably, by delaying the availability of lower-cost generics in Canada by about 3.5 years - if certain proposals are cemented, according to a new report commissioned by generic drugmakers.
During the talks, the EU has sought various changes in Canadian laws and regulations governing intellectual property concerning brand-name meds. These include extending the term of patent protection by up to five years if drugs are bogged down in the regulatory approval process; lengthening the period of data exclusivity from eight years to 10 years or more; and strengthening notice of compliance regulations by adding an appeals process.
The upshot is that Canadian payers...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4446032</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 16:24:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4446032</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is The Young Pharmaceutical Rep Right?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4159239&amp;cid=t_424317_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fis-the-young-pharmaceutical-rep-right%2F2010.11.12</link>
            <description>I loved my old status. Perhaps, reveled in it would be a better description. I was a crotchety, generic medicine-only doctor.** Sadly, my status changed today. Dabigatran (brand name Pradaxa) was the culprit.
It was a little nerve racking. I wrote the order, looked at it, thought it out again, talking to myself: &amp;#8220;John, are you sure you don&amp;#8217;t want to do it the old way? [pause to think] No, I am embracing the new.&amp;#8221;  And then, I closed the chart and handed it to the nurse.
&amp;#8220;What&amp;#8217;s that? Pradaxa?&amp;#8221; asked the nurse. &amp;#8220;Stop the Lovenox? You sure?&amp;#8221; My face must have told the story.
Eight days had passed since dabigatran&amp;#8217;s approval. &amp;#8220;That&amp;#8217;s plenty of time to mourn warfarin&amp;#8217;s demise,&amp;#8221; I thought. Enough studies, enough bl...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4159239</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4159239</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Brand-Name Versus Generic Heart Drugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2087096&amp;cid=t_424317_111_f&amp;fid=36048&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FAHeartyLife%2F%7E3%2F-3Cdemw4jKA%2F</link>
            <description>Brand-name drugs do not offer any advantages, over generic counterparts states the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Dr. Aaron Keeselheim of Brigham and Women&amp;#8217;s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston found that contrary to the belief, of some doctors and patients that the costly brand-name drugs are no more effective than the generic drugs. 
There have been 30 studies since 1984 comparing the two types of cardiovascular drugs. The findings of the studies were that there weren&amp;#8217;t any advantages to the brand-name drugs.
In a interview Dr. Kesselheim said, &amp;#8220;if a patient is prescribed a generic drug they should be confident in taking it.&amp;#8221; The doctor also stated &amp;#8220;that doctors should feel confident in prescribing the generic drugs,&amp;#8221;
Pharmaceut...</description>
            <author>A Hearty Life</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2087096</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 04:51:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2087096</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Generics Are As Good Brand-Name Meds: Study</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2011568&amp;cid=t_424317_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F472879134%2F</link>
            <description>Despite concerns expressed by some doctors and patients that generics are inferior products, there is no evidence brand-name meds are clinically superior, according to a meta-analysis of 47 studies of various cardiovascular drugs published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Researchers from Brigham and Women&amp;#8217;s Hospital in Boston looked at studies published from 1984 to August 2008, as well the content of editorials published during that time to gauge expert opinion. Of the 47 articles, 38 (or 81 percent) were randomized controlled trials, according to a JAMA statement. Here&amp;#8217;s what they found&amp;#8230;
Clinical equivalence was noted in 100 percent of RCTs of beta-blockers; 91 percent of RCTs of diuretics; 71 percent of RCTs of calcium-channel blockers; 100 percent ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2011568</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:08:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2011568</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Doctors Get Meals And Money From… Insurers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1924711&amp;cid=t_424317_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F437134300%2F</link>
            <description>All the doctors had to do was show up, enjoy a free dinner at an elegant Rochester, New York, restaurant specializing in steaks and expensive wines, and pocket $100 on the way out the door. No, this wasn&amp;#8217;t a big drugmaker showing largesse. Health insurers invited the docs to hear a pitch about the benefits of prescribing generics instead of pricier brand-name meds, the Associated Press writes.
Meet the flip side of a concern about corporate influence in the doctor&amp;#8217;s office that&amp;#8217;s been criticized - often stridently - when big pharma entices doc to prescribe brand-name drugs. Under pressure, that industry has since reined in its promotional efforts. But insurers are allowed to push docs toward cheaper drugs, frequently by offering a cut from the savings insurers get when do...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1924711</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 16:56:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1924711</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

