tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7579373589295053000.post7298667125166031675..comments2011-02-25T18:01:33.567-06:00SB. Leavitt, MA, PhDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11568656049984688554noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7579373589295053000.post-68310284230985581192010-02-18T14:20:01.631-06:002010-02-18T14:20:01.631-06:00

Re: <i>Even a single case of liver failure or death attributed to a product is cause for alarm and concern. However, does a 0.14% incidence rate, affecting roughly 0.001% of the U.S. population, signal a public health threat of such proportions that it requires an immediate, rigorous, and widespread governmental response that limits access to important analgesics?</i><br />No, it doesn&#39;t! We

Pathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07472975863825391073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7579373589295053000.post-22913300669363164542009-07-14T09:24:31.601-05:002009-07-14T09:24:31.601-05:00

I absuolutely agree that the problem we are faced with is not the drug itself but how people use it. A priest once told me, everything God made is good, it is how we humans use it that makes it bad. We may need more control over the medication, but not banning of it. Education is the key.

Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7579373589295053000.post-76678389836822188232009-07-08T18:07:25.180-05:002009-07-08T18:07:25.180-05:00

Post your comment, let us know what you think. -- SBL

Editornoreply@blogger.com