- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Chief Baw of FDA says everything should be OTC
Posted on 2/18/26 at 12:02 pm to DavidTheGnome
Posted on 2/18/26 at 12:02 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:Drs do a very poor job of this now. Plug it into an ai tool and let it spit out what should and shouldn’t be taken.
This. Just because a pill is safe on its own doesn’t mean it would be combined with other medications or other factors in general. What’s safe for one is unsafe for another. And we don’t need a country of people becoming their own doctors prescribing whatever the internet tells them
0
Posted on 2/18/26 at 1:38 pm to WaydownSouth
quote:
This would affect MDs more than pharmacists.
They would both be affected. If you make them available OTC there's no pharmacist or necessarily, pharmacy, involved. You just go buy them wherever. As has been noted the pharmacist is the last gatekeeper and checkpoint to make sure there are no issues or potential drug-drug interactions, misunderstood dosing, etc.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 1:42 pm to Everyday Is Saturday
quote:
All that advertising for big pharma should be incentivized for R&D (ie, solving problems) and not creating demand (ie, pharma bonuses / price increases).
You understand that the revenue from a companies approved and patent protected drugs is what funds R&D, and that the more they sell of their approved and patented drugs the more they'll have available for R&D, yes?
Posted on 2/18/26 at 1:44 pm to tonydtigr
quote:
How else is big pharma going to pay off the networks to not investigate their questionable practices?
Are you the same moron who tried to peddle this ridiculous BS about a month ago?
Posted on 2/18/26 at 1:45 pm to Bigdawgb
quote:
Imagine taking just 10% of the money currently spent shoving ads (of any kind) down our throats, and instead spending it on public projects.
The level of dumb that comes out whenever there's a Pharma focused thread on this board is epic.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 1:48 pm to bulletprooftiger
quote:
Medications that might not be dangerous by themselves can be dangerous when combined with other medications. Dosing is also important. This could also increase the cost of medications because lay people could seek medication for conditions they do not have.
Trained professionals are necessary to monitor these things.
Don't forget that many conditions can be treated by different classes of drugs and that choice requires a medical opinion, and some drugs require you to titrate or up to start or down to switch, which needs to be monitored by a doctor (most psych meds, for example).
This post was edited on 2/18/26 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 2/18/26 at 2:04 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
re you the same moron who tried to peddle this ridiculous BS about a month ago?
No, but congratulations. Still an impressive attempt at memory from a month ago, for someone who clearly hasn't learned anything new since then.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 3:18 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
The level of dumb that comes out whenever there's a Pharma focused thread on this board is epic.
Could you elaborate?
I'm not sure what's dumb about suggesting corporations spend their money on charity vs. endless ineffective ads but I'm all ears
Posted on 2/18/26 at 3:20 pm to WaydownSouth
Big pharma markets directly to consumer and skips doctors…. So sure… why not!
Posted on 2/18/26 at 3:35 pm to WaydownSouth
quote:
unless a drug is unsafe, addictive
So none of the fun stuff
Posted on 2/18/26 at 5:02 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
What does that do to insurance coverage though? My meds cost $3k to $6k per month (rinvoq).
What you don’t understand is how your drug got that expensive. The drug company has to give the pbm (Caremark, optum, express scripts) 70-80% of your drug cost as a rebate/kick back. Put that on your calculator and ask what do you get in return for that large amount of money. Don’t forget the premium you pay to the pbm. Wait dont forget the spread pricing they get paid for. Wait dont forget that they get paid to deny your claim and make it a prior authorization. Now you know the rest of the story.
What does that do to insurance coverage though? My meds cost $3k to $6k per month (rinvoq).
What you don’t understand is how your drug got that expensive. The drug company has to give the pbm (Caremark, optum, express scripts) 70-80% of your drug cost as a rebate/kick back. Put that on your calculator and ask what do you get in return for that large amount of money. Don’t forget the premium you pay to the pbm. Wait dont forget the spread pricing they get paid for. Wait dont forget that they get paid to deny your claim and make it a prior authorization. Now you know the rest of the story.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 5:13 pm to WaydownSouth
quote:agreed. Only the craziest stuff needs to be behind the counter.
I agree. Do away with PBMs and pharmacy prescription insurance. Everything except narcotics OTC and cash price.
Posted on 2/18/26 at 7:17 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Telemedicine is the answer
If they remove some of the restrictions. I've had an albuterol inhaler for years but telemedicine only allows for 3 prescription refills a year. That's really annoying. They've recently come out with an OTC inhaler but it isn't albuterol and doesn't work as well.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News