stauffenberg
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2007, 04:14:35 PM » |
|
Many of the worst symptoms of dialysis, such as utter and perpetual exhaustion and hypersomnia, come from the fact that patients are severely anemic. While the normal hemoglobin level for males is 140 to 170, the average renal patient has a hemoglobin target of about 120, which has to make them extremely tired all the time. EPO, which is necessary to provide anything even approaching a normal hemoglobin level for dialysis patients, unfortunately has side-effects and has been known to increase the chances of heart attack, strokes, and clotting. The only alternative to EPO is a transplant, which is getting increasingly difficult to obtain, given that the number of dialysis patients is now rising much faster than the rate of organ donation, or blood transfusions, which are themselves dangerous, since the purity of the blood supply is never 100% certain, and transfusions raise the patient's anti-body level, making a successful transplant more difficult.
So what is a nephrologist, a drug company, or a patient to do with respect to the dilemma posed by this alternative between a dangerous drug and a debilitating medical condition? Assessments of the risk/benefit balance are necessarily subjective, since for some patients, having enough energy to live well now may be worth the increased risk of a heart attack or stroke, while others may prefer a greater security of a longer life, even if that life is made much less valuable by low hemoglobin levels.
In short, I don't think this is a promising case for class-action tort lawyers to make a bundle. Old-fashioned ambulance chasing may be less remunerative, but it is more likely to produce results.
|