Name: Health Care: Adrenal Cortical Extract Taken Off Drug Market: Hrd-81-61 (en Inglés)
Price: 496.71 MXN
Availability: InStock
Author: U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office (
ISBN: 9781289000677

Envío gratis

portada Health Care: Adrenal Cortical Extract Taken Off Drug Market: Hrd-81-61 (en Inglés)

Formato

Libro Físico

Editorial

Bibliogov

Autor

U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office (

Idioma

Inglés

N° páginas

Encuadernación

Tapa Blanda

Dimensiones

24.6 x 18.9 x 0.2 cm

Peso

0.10 kg.

ISBN13

9781289000677

Categorías

Política y gobierno

Health Care: Adrenal Cortical Extract Taken Off Drug Market: Hrd-81-61 (en Inglés)

U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office ( (Autor) · Bibliogov · Tapa Blanda

Libro Nuevo

$ 496.71

$ 827.85

Ahorras: $ 331.14

40% descuento

Envío normal

Origen: Estados Unidos (Costos de importación incluídos en el precio)

Se enviará desde nuestra bodega entre el Viernes 26 de Julio y el Lunes 05 de Agosto.

Lo recibirás en cualquier lugar de México entre 1 y 3 días hábiles luego del envío.

Reseña del libro "Health Care: Adrenal Cortical Extract Taken Off Drug Market: Hrd-81-61 (en Inglés)"

Adrenal cortical extract (ACE) products were once recommended in the treatment of Addison's disease and for several other indications including hypoglycemia. In January 1978, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advised drug firms marketing ACE products that the drug represented a substantial risk of undertreatment because of its low potency and the resulting potential hazard to patients. A review of current well-known textbooks on medicine and endocrinology showed a unanimous preference for using synthetic compounds in the treatment of both the chronic and acute phases of Addison's disease. GAO could not find any medical support for using ACE products in the treatment of hypoglycemia. The regulatory actions taken by FDA against ACE were within its legal authority under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and were not unreasonable. The use of alternative procedures would have afforded all interested parties a better opportunity to comment on FDA findings and proposed actions; however, the affected drug firms had an opportunity to challenge FDA findings and did not.