Please stick with this post to the end.
I hope that you find my letter meets the needs of a
protest on behalf of everyone in the thyroid community.
As I am British it is difficult for me to understand the
rules that govern the production of your medication and
the reasoning behind them. However, because of the
freedom of information in America I know more than I do
of the British system, if it is there though I will find it
eventually even in Britain!!
Ted (a friend) quite rightly pointed out that without these rules we
would not enjoy the benefits of Asprin. It feels wrong though
that one law unjustly robs many people of quality years of
life, years that can never be given back, because it gave a
drug an untouchable status. In this case the FDA may have
covered themselves by saying, 'apparently in the belief that it
was not a new drug' I would like someone to explain to me
what this means? Has someone committed a crime by
making fruedulant claims about the drug all those years ago?
It has left me wondering how many other drugs used by people
with chronic illnesses have undergone many changes of
manufacture and potency?
I personally hope that in future a lot more of our questions are
going to be answered, and any forth coming information acted
upon. I would also hope that the teaching of thyroid care would
improve in future to take into account the insults and unjustified
ideas that much of the old materials obviously have in them.
I have to say I was astounded by what I read in the notice, and
admire the person/persons who's decision it was to make
this public. I do hope that now it will be followed up with studies
to discover the true, and obviously, many side effects of using T4,
and the effectiveness of it compared to natural T4/T3 drugs.
The letter follows underneath, if it says what you want to say
yourselves but you can't find the words, you can copy it out
and post it to where ever you think it would be most effective.
If you think it's a load of rot, and does not address the issue
as you would like, PLEASE say so, so that someone else
can write another one. I will not be offended as I more than
anyone here want to see this issue resolved because I care
about how others feel.
Sorry for any spelling mistakes I am getting better honest :o)
To Whom it may concern,
I am writing this letter on behalf of the whole community of people
who have thyroid disease. The notice from the Department of
Health and Human Services was welcomed by our community, it
includes information which many of us have long suspected.
To truly understand the implications of thyroid disease and the
suffering it can cause an individual and their families, you would
need to suffer from it, or live with a sufferer.
There is nothing on this Earth more precious in life than the
quality of the life it's self. One only has to speak to the many
disabled and chronically sick people to confirm this. Take away
the quality of life and many people will actually take away their
own life. Thyroid medication is one of the few areas of medicine
that has claimed miracles, and indeed it is one of the areas where
miracles can be justifiably claimed at times. It is also one of the areas
of medicine that can help to make a doctors career rewarding.
I therefore challenge the makers of synthetic thyroid replacement
that the proposal to standardise the potency of this drug by the
year 2000 is unacceptable. Already the use of these drugs have
caused many people psychological and physical distress as
they have tried 'in vain' to discuss their problems with their doctors.
Why and how these drugs came into being and the questionable
morals behind the marketing of them I am sure will long be discussed.
Maybe the inconsistencies in the regulations governing drugs developed
before 1962 will be looked into now that the notice concerned has been
published? The regulations as they stand allowing drugs to have a
'grandfather status' is unacceptable and has now been proved to be
a danger to the public.
For the meantime, however, and out of a matter of compassion
for those people who will continue to be humiliated if the deadline
remains at the year 2000. I hope that every endeavour will be made
to bring the potency of these drugs in line and consistent in batches
'well before' that date. This would hopefully be followed with a public
statement saying as such, as soon as possible.
I also feel that out of a matter of human decency that a public apology
to the many millions of sufferers who use these drugs would be
appropriate at this time. It also has to be born in mind that the inconsistency
of these drugs 'may' have cost lives, particularly in the elderly, who may
not be able to tolerate the potency changes.