Health Canada warns about acne drug Diane-35


Recommended Posts

Health Canada warns about acne drug Diane-35

Last Updated Thu, 12 May 2005 22:04:47 EDT

CBC News

TORONTO - Diane-35, a drug used to treat severe, stubborn acne, should never be prescribed as a birth control pill, Health Canada says.

The controversial medication also should never be given to women who have a history of blood clots, the department said in an advisory issued Thursday.

These and other warnings are included on updated product information that is now being packaged with the drug.

The department issued the warning after being tipped off that some doctors were prescribing it solely as a contraceptive.

When Health Canada approved Diane-35 for sale in 1998, it said it was only to be used as a last resort for acne that didn't respond to antibiotics.

The department included a rare restriction for doctors, warning that the drug should never be prescribed solely as a contraceptive.

While Diane-35 does prevent pregnancy, a U.S. study also found it increases the risk of blood clots by up to four times more than standard birth control pills.

In a 2003 investigation, the CBC program Disclosure found that more than 800,000 prescriptions for the drug were written for Canadian women in 2002 and the majority were taking it for birth control.

In Thursday's warning, Health Canada asked patients to tell their doctors if they have had blood clots in the legs, lungs, eyes or elsewhere, or a stroke, heart attack or chest pain.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/national/2...ane-050512.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they naming prescription drugs after AOL screen names now?

585913714[/snapback]

I justed visited the website. It is clearly being marketed to women as an all-in-one acne+contraception product. I would assume the name was considered to be "female friendly".

http://www.diane35.com/

Due to the up to 400% increased risk of blood-clots compared with other oral contraceptives, Health Canada does not want it used in this country as a contraceptive product but rather as an last-resort acne product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also another typical example of Canada's perspective on personal freedoms. The United States would probably let the individuals (the doctors and the end-users) decide if the benefits were worth the risks. In Canada, we prefer to have the state be a little more protective of its citizens.

The good of the community versus the rights of the individual type of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends. In a lot of cases, the FDA is hard-core fascist about approving drugs. Not only does it take them forever to approve them, they often deny approval for seemingly trivial reasons. On the other hand, the FDA is kind of in the pocket of drug companies (it's run by people from the drug industry, it's funded by people from the drug industry), and there have been cases where they've just pushed stuff through.

If a drug is obviously harmful it won't be approved, though.

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.