>Having said that, it is true that commercial and end user interest in the US
>remains more or less exclusively focussed on billing needs. But there are
>signs that the natives are growing restless, and wanting to develop systems
>that standardise - for example - prescribing habits.
In the US, there are literally hundreds, nay, thousands of what are called
"drug reps" in the field trying to get physicians to prescribe the newest
and most expensive boutique drug. The last thing on earth that the US
pharmaceutical industry wants is anything that even slightly resembles
standardization of prescribing habits. Doctors in the US, whose
fascination with the latest model of cars is obvious and notorious, are
equally fascinated with new drugs, because, like Pavlov's dogs, they have
been conditioned to be.
For example, there is a beta-blocker, nadolol, that was approved for use by
the FDA in 1979, that has superior characteristics to any other
beta-blocker on the market today. Yes, there are "studies" in the
literature, funded by drug companies, that show some p<.05 difference
between one beta blocker and another, the most tired one being
"selectivity" (do "selective" beta blockers worsen asthma? ask a
cardiologist), but nadolol is as good as any of them and costs perhaps 35
cents per pill. A good drug to standardize on, n'est-ce pas? Don' hold
your breath.
My 35 cents.
John
