-
byetta 2.0
frankenduf
Thursday, November 12, 2009 at 04:23 PMi admit to being ignorant of the biochemistry here, but the little satanic cynic on my shoulder is whispering in my ear- what if, in the main, slow release of a drug is generically controlled via molecular packaging (liposomal, or some other surface reactant which slows release)- so for many drugs, you could take them in their direct form and direct release, or you could take them in their packaged form, which slows release down (@ a factor of 7?)- because, if this were true, this would explain the re-release of drugs in slow release form (which i presume leads to re-patenting, which i know is worth $100 mills. for big label drugs)- the cynical release, then, would be optimally timed for re-patenting: i.e. waiting for initial sales spike to plateau, then releasing slow release version to reinvigorate sales- i had wondered if this was the case with EPO- which made bazillions as a one-a-day, then was switched to aranesp, which is once weekly- in other words, why aren't many drugs initially released as slow release, other than the cynical reasoning above?
-
All this is nice, but....
sbukosky
Friday, November 13, 2009 at 10:41 AMI'm doing well on my Levimir, Byetta and pills. I don't mind the three shots a day but anything to reduce the COST of treatment is welcomed, provided equal or better results are obtained. However, all this seems to be targeted at maintaining type two diabetics rather than curing them. By that I am asking, wouldn't the research be better spent on treating obesity? Is this a case of "follow the money"? I want to be cured, not treated for the remainder of my life.
- Font size
- Email This
- Bookmark
- Thank you for your input
- Save
- RSS
- Report Abuse









