Replies to post #77085 on Biotech Values

[srsmgja]

<<It was predicated on saving money, pure and simple>>


Makes no difference. The reason is not important. If I have given full informed consent, and prescribed the exact same chemcal entity as approved by the FDA, there is no basis for malpractice, IMO.

Let's assume I prescribed Lumigan and instructed the patient to use it exactly as the Latisse instuctions state. I clearly gave informed consent and described the benefits, risks, and alternatives, if any.

Let's also assume the patient had a severe reaction to medicine and experienced harm


Now look at the elements of malpractice - ALL three must be present for there to be malpractice


1. Was there a deviation of care within that medical community? - Questionable. Prescribing the EXACT same chemical entity (just a different name) and used in the exact same manner as within the FDA label for that same chemical entity, with clear informed consent might still be considered a deviation from accepted care.


2. Was the patient harmed? - Yes

3. Was the deviation of accepted care within the community the cause of the patient's harm? - Clearly no. If the patient had a severe reaction to Lumigan, they clearly would have had the EXACT same reaction to Latisse as it is the EXACT same chemical entity, and was applied in the EXACT same manner as stated within the label.