a good nights sleep

mood: flattening out.
state i'm in: real tired now.
tune: eric benet "love don't love me".


and now for why mainsteam media has pissed me off over the last week.

i watched a story on the adverse effect profile of the drug zolpidem on 'a current affair' the other night. it was a particularly pathetic story, even for them. rather than write another post, i will simply post part of the email i sent to 'a current affair', cc 'mediawatch'. i should mention that this is the first time i have emailed a tv program in complaint, i am not some boring sod who lives to whinge. normally i just get all riled up, swear a bit, and allow someone nearby to bear the burden of my bellyache.

unfortunately, the complaints feedback page of the website of PBL (publishing and broadcasting limited), owner of channel nine, has been down since i tried making a complaint to them. rather convenient, that one of the largest companies, and the largest media conglomerate, in australia, should have their complaints page unavailable.

my email follows:



"...

This brings me to my major point, concerning your presentation of the facts surrounding the medication. Neither of the two major patient recommendations were alluded to in your story. I present them below, in case your reporters were so inept to have not even unearthed what these are:

1. To be used on as required basis (i.e. not every night), and for a period not exceeding 2-4 weeks.
2. No to be used, under any circumstances, while consuming alcohol, in any quantity.

I am aware of the case of first patient presented in your story, and I am also aware of the fact that the woman was under the influence of alcohol at the time that the events mentioned in your story are alleged to have occurred. I don't recall this being mentioned, and if it was reported, it was certainly not emphasised. This I find irresponsible.

Yes, the adverse effects and potential drug interactions of zolpidem are potentially serious, and need to be thoroughly communicated to the patient. In particular, a patient needs to be made acutely aware of the need to avoid the consumption of any alcohol whilst taking zolpidem.

However, presuming you are making attempts to be acting in the public interest rather than just in the competition for ratings, it would be wise if ACA made mention of important facts, the likes of which would be genuinely in the public interest. Many people rely on zolpidem, indeed many people rely on many different medications, and it would be a shame if people's lives would be put at risk by them unduly going off their medication at the advice not of a health professional, but an appallingly constructed and sensationalised story from a pack of half-witted fools masquerading as a current affairs program. Importantly, and something you should have made explicit, the prescription guidelines for zolpidem, like any medication, need to be strictly adhered to.

If, in the future, ACA would like to make announcements to the general public concerning medications, perhaps having a physician outline the guidelines for safe and efficacious use of the medication, and appropriate action to take in the event of adverse effects, as your featured physician so poorly did, might be far more productive. This would be far more beneficial than merely pointing the finger mockingly at something that, in spite of apparent misgivings, the likes of which ought to be (and, in fact, will be) investigated thoroughly by the TGA, gives benefit to many others. Your style of reporting does not give me the impression that ACA holds any interest in the welfare of my society. In fact, quite the opposite, it appears to me that your program and network hold the public interest in contempt, and hence i hold you in contempt.

..."