What should be done to combat misinformation about health products?

The increasing role of digital technology, social media, the wide range of channels and the volume of information, the role of medicine as a societal subject, public information that is insufficient and poorly suited to situations of uncertainty are all observations which led to the theme of this round table. After discussing the definition of disinformation, which is not limited to fake news, and talking about contributors who misinform, whether intentionally or not, the participants of this round table made nine recommendations (R) to combat disinformation about health products: create a collaborative platform, information/training on health products, a platform with five major characteristics, namely accessibility, flexibility, objectivity, transparency and independence, as well as media suited to the different targets (R1); promote basic knowledge on health products: education/training to restore the particularly poor image of medication, and teach the public how to use basic concepts appropriately (R2); improve communication to the public based on the observation that information is the main weapon against misinformation and entails, in particular, coordinating communication from the different institutions to make public information more audible, making institutional messages clearer, ensuring they are more factual and prioritising them (R3); know how to communicate using the correct codes and tools (R4), because, to be understood, the substance and the form are inseparable; develop research on communication in the field of health products (R5); acquire tools to identify and regulate as soon as possible (R6); keep check of content by developing critical thinking (R7); define quality criteria for information sources (R8); identify, assess and reference initiatives for the public that could be placed on the platform (R9).

Assessment of the health risks related to the presence of drug residues in water for human consumption: application to carbamazepine.

Pharmaceutical residues have been detected at low (usually ng/L) concentrations in drinking water sources. The detection of drugs in water intended for human consumption (WIHC) has raised questions of safety. In the absence of regulatory or other official guidance, water utilities are faced with a problem of which pharmaceutical residues should be monitored and the toxicological limits that should be required. In this essay, we define an approach for the assessment of health risks related to chemicals found in drinking water. We use the examples of carbamazepine and its main metabolite 10,11-epoxycarbamazepine to demonstrate our approach, which involves application of the following algorithm: (1) when there is human or animal toxicity data, a toxicity reference value (TRV) can be calculated; (2) when this is not applicable, an attempt should be made to derive the TRV using known information about the minimum therapeutic dose (MTD); and (3) when no applicable data is available, at all, a threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) should be estimated. In the case of carbamazepine, where relevant toxicological data exists, we derived a TRV, based on the known minimum therapeutic dose (MTD). For carbamazepine's metabolite 10,11-epoxycarbamazepine, there is no toxicological data, so we applied the TTC approach. Using this approach, and combining our estimates with what is known about these chemicals' margin of exposure (MOE), suggests that there is likely to be no appreciable risk to human health exposure to carbamazepine or its major metabolite, even given the inevitable uncertainties in exposure scenarios.

[Pharmacologic criteria for medical substitution in opiate dependence]. / Critères pharmacologiques d'un médicament pour la substitution de la pharmacodépendance aux opiacés.

Our goal was to establish new pharmacological criteria for a drug to be used in the treatment of opioid dependence. We propose the following six pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic criteria: (i) the same pharmacodynamic properties as the drug being substituted; (ii) a long duration of action (minimum 24 hours, not requiring several daily doses) in order to prevent fluctuations in effect and especially withdrawal symptoms; (iii) few euphoric effects together with a minimal reinforcing effect for the drug itself and other drugs; (iv) oral or sublingual administration without any special affinity for other routes, especially the intravenous; (v) a New Drug Application (NDA) in this indication, after submission of a dossier including both clinical randomised comparative trials and security data; and (vi) compatibility with a socially satisfying quality of life. These criteria were applied to methadone, buprenorphine and other drugs that were proposed in the treatment of opioid dependence (such as morphine or codeine).