A study today has revealed that antidepressants may be able to help restore memory skills and cognitive function that have been effected due to stroke.

Escitalopram (trade names Lexapro, Cipralex), was linked to to improved cognitive functioning in a group of stroke patients that did not suffer from symptoms of depression.

According to the LA Times,

Previous research showed antidepressants were associated with improved cognitive functioning in stroke patients who were given the drug because they were depressed. The new study, published in the Archives of General Psychiatry and funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, assessed the effect of cognitive functioning in 129 stroke patients who were not depressed.

Participants were treated within three months of the stroke in one of three ways: a low dose — 5 to 10 milligrams — of escitalopram, a placebo pill or problem-solving therapy but no medication. (The standard dose of escitalopram, also known by the brand name Lexapro, for treating depression is 20 milligrams.)

After one year, the group on escitalopram had higher scores on tests assessing thinking, learning and memory functions as well as ones testing verbal and visual memory. The group treated with medication also had greater improvements in activities related to daily living.

There is currently only a few treatments that can help lessen the after effects of a stroke. The study is still a ways from finding out if it would be a suitable option. Larger test groups must be done and doctors must also find out what risks would be involved.

Despite the recent attempt of the government to reign in the amount of antipsychotic medication that nursing homes received, recent studies have found that in 2008, antipsychotics still represented 9 percent of all prescriptions in this group.

According to an article on MSN Health,

Anti-psychotics, developed to treat psychiatric conditions such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, are widely used “off label” to control difficult behavior in elderly people with dementia.

Indeed, Dorsey said he suspects that the vast majority of the use documented in his research is “off label.”

In the United States, no anti-psychotics are approved to calm behavior, although one such drug, risperidone (Risperdal), is approved for that indication in Canada. Black box warnings are rare for off-label use.

This class of “atypical anti-psychotics” includes Risperdal, Abilify, Seroquel and Zyprexa.

The problem is that the only medications that have been shown to help sway these behavioral problems are antipsychotics, and even though the side effects may not affect some patients, some patients experience significant problems.

In 2005 the FDA had issued warnings and since there has been a noticeable drop in over prescribing.  The declines were evident within one month of the warning and  by 2008, antipsychotic use among this older population decreased more than 50 percent.

However, it’s not clear if that drop is enough, or if the drugs are still being over prescribed and over used for off label uses, leaving the elderly still at risk to experience unnecessary side affects.

Over all, the study found that “If you enter a nursing home that has a higher proportion of people on antipsychotics, you are also likely to be put on antipsychotics.” So be aware of this if you or a loved one is thinking of staying at a nursing home.

The pharmaceutical industry predicted that if the drug importation proposal succeeded that we would be at risk from unsafe drugs. I think what they meant to say is that the pharmaceutical industry’s profits would be at risk.

The new proposal from Senator Dorgan would have allowed importation of prescription drugs from countries that are verified safe by the FDA. Allowing importation from countries such as Canada, Europe, and Japan, which sell their prescription medications from 35 percent to 55 percent lower do to price controls, would have saved consumers more than $100 billion over the next 10 years.

Even though the bill would put money back into hard working Americans pockets, the bill hit the wall in the Senate, and got shot down with a 51-48 vote. Senators attest that the bill would not be safe, because the drugs would be coming from untested sources.

This couldn’t be farther from the truth. According to the New York Times

Senator Dorgan’s office says the industry’s safety alarms are false ones, because his measure would permit exports only from factories approved by the Food and Drug Administration and would assure high-quality imports by setting up a new registration procedure for pharmacies and wholesalers.

If safety isn’t the real reason why the drug import proposal failed, then what is?

According to the Examiner, its because the government has already found a better deal.

The pharmaceutical industry made a deal with the White House to commit 80 billion dollars over the next 10 years to health care reform. The deal was supposedly contingent upon Congress not asking for more cuts in their profits.

The article in the Examiner also pointed out that pharmaceutical sales in 2006 were $289 billion, over half of the global total.  If the price of our drugs  fell by just 15%, it would save the American consumers over $43 billion annually.  This price cut would also allow those who are currently not taking their medication due to cost, to finally be able to afford the medications they need.

So the real reason the drug import proposal failed isn’t because the government is concerned for our safety, they are concerned with profits.

Don’t wait to save on your prescription medications,  use Freebee’s comparison shopping search engine to save on the drugs you need today.

Earlier this week, the US Food and Drug administration panel voted to not allow Tarceva for lung cancer patients who remain stable after chemotherapy.

Tarceva is already used as the second round of defense to fight against lung cancer in patients who’s symptoms continue to worsen after the first round of chemotherapy.

According to the FDA, those who used Tarceva earlier did see less progression of the disease than those who got a placebo in the study, however the benefits were too small to consider it for earlier use.

Wyndham Wilson of the National Cancer Institute commented, “We all agree that if the overall survival benefit was larger … we would be more impressed.”

Both Tarceva and docetaxel, have shown to improve survival of lung cancer patients by about three months if started after the cancer has advanced.

Today a federal judge in Manhattan ruled to dismiss a lawsuit against Merck & Co involving their drug Fosamax, alleging that the osteoporosis drug causes jaw damage.

According to Rueters,

U.S. District Judge John Keenan on Monday found that Bessie Flemings, 74, a Mississippi resident whose primary dentist labeled her oral hygiene as “poor,” failed to show that her use of Fosamax caused the death of jawbone tissue, a condition known as osteonecrosis of the jaw, or ONJ.

Keenan said Flemings’ case was the second of three “bellwether” trials in nationwide litigation over Fosamax, which has spawned close to 900 lawsuits. The judge is handling many of the cases.

Fosamax is part of family of osteoporosis drugs that include Procter & Gamble Co’s Actonel and Roche’s Boniva.

The good news for Fosamax users is that in all cases thus far it has not been found at fault. In the event that you do experience any side affects, visit your doctor and follow his or her directions.

Today the FDA announced a new program aimed at reducing the amount of needless injury do to miss use of prescription medication.

Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, the agency’s commissioner said,

Too many people suffer unnecessary injuries from avoidable medication misuse, errors and other problems. The FDA is launching the Safe Use Initiative to develop targeted solutions for reducing these injuries.

The new initiative will also aim to remedy the dosage problems with over the counter medications and their deliver devices, such as droppers, spoons or cups found packaged with drugs like liquid Tylenol and Benadryl.

According to CNN, over 4 million cases of miss use a year result in a trip to the emergency room or the doctor, with over 100,000 having to ultimately be hospitalized. The FDA said that over half could have been prevented.

Hopefully these new guide lines will help, but I have my doubts. Many of the problems with dosing aren’t with the instructions or the delivery device, but are human error. It is good that they are simplifying the instructions as much as possible, but I fear we won’t see much of a downturn in overdosing.

What do you think?

Antipsychotic medications are more prevalent now than ever since there introduction in the 1950’s. These medications are used to reduce the symptoms of schizophrenia and give those who suffer from the illness back their lives. The only problem is that like with all drugs, antipsychotic’s can be very costly.

The most popular antipsychotic’s are risperidone (Risperdal), aripiprazole (Abilify), quetiapine (Seroquel), and olanzapine (Zyprexa). Paying for these medications out of pockets can cost anywhere from $300 to $500 dollars for 90 pills. Luckily, you can get them here for much cheaper.

Risperdal 1mg 100 pills for $46.00
Abilify 5mg 100 pills for $64.00
Seroquel 25mg 100 pills for $54.00
Zyprexa 5mg 100 pills for $61.56

Although Freebee Foreign Pharmacies prices on all antipsychotic drugs are drastically cheaper than anywhere online, the cheapest popular brand is Seroquel. Remember, cheapest is not  necessarily the best, as each different type of medication affects patients differently. Your doctor will be able to work and figure out which medication is right for you.

No matter which medication you use, there is absolutely no reason why you should be paying the outrageous, inflated prices out of pocket for from your local pharmacy. Join Freebee Foreign Pharmacy today.

Unfortunately, many of those affected by Type 2 Diabetes are without prescription drug coverage and have to pay for there medication out of pocket. So, today I would like to take a look at the average cost of both the brand and generic versions of Metformin online, and compare those prices to the ones in Freebee Foreign Pharmacies database.

Metformin is the most commonly prescribed prescription medication for Type 2 diabetes. Metformin is taken orally, and is only used to treat non-insulin dependent diabetes. It works by lowering blood sugar when it is too high, and by helping restore the way the body uses food to make energy. Glucophage and Glumetza are two of the more popular brand name versions of Metformin.

In order to compare the prices of Metformin, Glucophage, and Glumetza, we must find out what the going rate for each drug is. To do this, I Googled each different brand of Metformin, as well as the generic version, and averaged the price from the first 5 pharmacy results in Google for that brand, then compared the averaged price to the prices in Freebee’s drug database.

Since different pharmacies offer their medication in different amounts, I broke all costs down into price per pill, and used the most commonly prescribed dosage of 850 mg for Metformin and Glucophage, and 500 mg for Glumetza.

As expected, the generic version, Metformin came in with the lowest price per pill average at $.58. Glucophage came in second at $.83 cents per pill, and Glumetza last at $1.13 per pill. Remember, these results were the average of the first 5 pharmacies that came up when searching on google for each brand, which means that safety, quality, and fast delivery are not guaranteed.

Now lets see how freebee’s pharmacies stack up against the competition. The average price of the top 5 pharmacies in our database for Metformin was $.45 cents per pill ($.13 cheaper per pill). As I moved on to the brand versions, the saving just got larger. I found that Glucophage was $.13 per pill ($.70 cheaper per pill) and Glumetza was $.57 per pill ($.56 cheaper per pill)

In conclusion, using Freebee’s comparison shopping search engine you can get the more expensive brand version of Metformin (Glucophage) for $.45 per pill cheaper than the average online pharmacy price for the generic version. When filling a prescription of 300 pills, that is a savings of $300.00! Not to mention that all the pharmacies in our database have been personally checked for both safety and quality, and are licensed in their home countries and verified by independent U.S. authorities.

Why take the risk of getting swindled or hurt from a rogue pharmacy when you can fill your prescription from a safe verified pharmacy for much Cheaper?

Ah, the corner pharmacy. It’s been there for years, it’s just a short drive down the road, and the pharmacists are always so friendly, aren’t they?

I hate to break it to you, but behind those smiling faces at the counter, your corner pharmacy is hiding something from you. Specifically, its prices.

Jacob Milbradt, a pharmacist who blogs, has been writing about the fact that pharmacies often make big — even outrageous — profits on generic medications. The reasons for this include (1) that most people don’t comparison shop among their neighborhood pharmacies; and (2) that people assume that if a pharmacy is inexpensive for one drug, it’s probably relatively inexpensive across the board.

Take Wal-Mart, for example. With all the attention Wal-Mart has received for its $4 generics program, many consumers just assume that Wal-Mart is always going to give them a low price on their prescriptions.

But when Jacob did some comparison shopping for the generic form of Risperdal, he found extreme variations in pricing — and look who was overcharging the most for 90 1mg tablets:

Wal-Mart: $403.54
Rite Aid: $368.99
Albertsons: $337.00
CVS: $305.00
Safeway: $173.06
Sams: $126.68
Costco: $116.44

Notes Jacob:

Sams is charging about 30% of Wal-Mart’s price. Sams [owned by Wal-Mart] and Wal-Mart are obviously paying the same amount for this medication . . . yet Wal-Mart is charging an additional $275 compared to Sams.

The pharmacist, who has done this kind of price comparison for many drugs on his blog, generally finding the same wide price variations, laments that buyers must think twice before trusting their corner pharmacy:

People TRUST their pharmacist and pharmacy not to rip them off. Yet that’s exactly what happens every day throughout the nation. When it comes to managing your prescription costs, you have to realize that nearly every other entity only has their own interests in mind. Everyone’s looking out for #1 . . . and you’re left to foot the bill.

So always comparison shop when purchasing prescription drugs. You can save even more money by including Canadian pharmacies in your search.

Last week, the FDA approved the new antipsychotic drug Saphris for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in adults. Saphris is one of a class of brand-name drugs called “atypical antipsychotics” that includes Risperdal, Abilify, Seroquel and Zyprexa.

These “atypical antipsychotics” are distinguished from older, “typical antipsychotics” that include perphenazine, loxapine, haloperidol, thiothixene, and fluphenazine. All of these drugs have long been available as low-cost generics.

And last year, the first generic atypical antipsychotic — a generic version of Risperdal (risperidone) — hit the market, too. The price for risperidone has dropped dramatically in the past year … although your corner pharmacy isn’t necessarily passing along those savings.

For example, a pharmacist blogger did some research and found that while brand-name Risperdal goes for around $500 for 90 1mg tablets, pharmacies he called quoted him anywhere from $126.68 to $410 for the generic equivalent. He noted that many pharmacies cited the higher brand-name price first, so any generic price would sound good by comparison.

So is your best bet a brand-name antipsychotic, generic risperidone, or one of the older antipsychotic drugs?

Well, let’s compare the newest drug to hit the market — Saphris — with risperidone. According to reports:

In clinical trials with schizophrenia patients, Saphris was effective and well tolerated. Although Saphris demonstrated lower efficacy on positive symptoms than [risperidone] … Schering-Plough’s drug presented fewer adverse events than other atypical antipsychotics and some improvements on negative and cognitive symptoms compared to [risperidone]. However, Saphris’s twice-daily dosing regimen may be perceived to be inconvenient in the light of several other once daily options.

So it looks like a trade-off. The FDA, in announcing its approval of the drug, would only say that Saphris worked better than a placebo. We’ll have to see over time if Saphris proves to be worth paying brand-name prices.

My guess is that in most cases — or at least an increasing number of cases — doctors and psychiatrists are prescribing Risperdal first, and then the pharmacy is filling it as a generic, either as required by the insurance provider or at the customer’s request. While doctors like to have a variety of medications to choose from since all patients react differently, the brand-name antipsychotics face a declining market.

As for the older, “typical” antipsychotics, recent research indicates that they in many cases are similar in effectiveness to the newer drugs.

Bottom line: When you talk with your doctor or psychiatrist about antipsychotic medications, be sure to understand why he recommends a specific drug. Some doctors like to start their patients out on a typical antipsychotic first and move on to an atypical antipsychotic only if the initial treatments fail. But most today go straight to the atypicals. If you are concerned about cost, share this with your doctor so he can take this into account in making a recommendation.