https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/judge-dismisses-ranitidi...
If they could find a way to ensure the impurity didn’t exist, I would certainly buy ranitidine again. I found it was the most effective antacid for me.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/judge-dismisses-ranitidi...
If they could find a way to ensure the impurity didn’t exist, I would certainly buy ranitidine again. I found it was the most effective antacid for me.
Further, one judge is not an arbiter of whether science is sound or not. In fact, the American legal system is infamous for its persistent reliance on fraudulent forensic techniques even well after there's widespread consensus that they're unreliable if not outright fraudulent.
Polygraphs, writing analysis, fiber analysis, hair analysis, fingerprint analysis, drug-sniffing dogs...all have long been found to be far less reliable than courts treat them to be.
The latter is probably the most egregious example, with the Supreme Court agreeing that such dogs are actually worse than a coin flip in terms of correctly indicating a "hit" on drugs...and then shrugged and said dogs were still a valid legal basis for further, more invasive searching.
1: "Anticholinergic Accumulation: A Slumbering Interaction between Drugs and Food Supplements" https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bcpt.12437
2: Chart of medicines with high ACB scores (higher is worse) - you will recognize some of these, such as allergy and anti-nausea meds: (pdf warning) https://corumpharmacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Anticho...
Everything will kill you, no need to get worked up about the infinitesimal risk.
https://www.bmj.com/content/321/7260/572.1
17% vs 77%