Acetaminophen

recently the FDA has placed severe restrictions on the pain killer known as acetaminophen. the FDA states that the drug overdose and interactions with other medications were too high of a risk and caused 425 deaths per year. however, 425 deaths (though sad) is not many. not as much as aspirin, ibuprofen, or even non-drug related deaths such as heart disease and cancer.
so why place the "ban" on acetaminophen? because ibuprofen has just came out with an injectable dose as of this year known as Caldolor.
here are a few side effects of and cautions about ibuprofen:
gastrointestinal ulceration/bleeding, nausea, diarrhea, unexplained rash, salt and fluid retention, myocardial infarction and hypertension (i think i would rather have the headache then the side effects included in getting rid of it)
according to wikipedia "Ibuprofen should not be used regularly in individuals with Inflammatory bowel disease due to its ability to cause gastric bleeding and form ulceration in the gastric lining. Pain relievers such as paracetemol/acetaminophen or drugs containing Codeine (which slows down bowel activity) are safer methods than ibuprofen for pain relief in IBD. Ibuprofen is also known to cause worsening of IBD during times of a flare-up, thus should be avoided completely.
so why the restrictions on acetaminophen and not ibuprofen?
Now aspirin:
gastric bleeding, Reyes syndrome, hives, tinnitus, prolonged bleeding or failure for blood to clot properly after surgery or injury. and though it is not stated, i know for a fact that asthmatics should not take aspirin or use medications that quote on the bottle "aspirin sensitive patients, do not use". i took ibuprofen once for a headache and ended up in the emergency room with a full fledged asthma attack (which was the first flare-up in over 10 years)
so are those of us who cannot take the alternative suppose to just live with pain? are we too small of a number to not count? or is it just another pharmaceutical company paying off the government?

Too Many Cancer "Cures"

I know that curing cancer or at least helping to fight it is very important, not only for the victims but for researchers as well. However, we need to draw the line somewhere when pharmaceutical companies use it as a competition. I usually read about anything that has to do with cancer in Google and Yahoo! news, but today will be the last time that I take them at all seriously without proof.
Apparently, 2 companies have made statements today about their drugs being a cure for cancer. #1 says it is the best and #2 says it is better than company #1. So who do we believe? Answer: None of the above.
At the bottom of each article was also a statement given by the companies telling how much they plan to make off of the drug and how much there stocks have risen. Is money really the important part of research or is it healing. I would opt for the latter, but then again, I am not a scientist or a money hungry mongrel, and I do in fact have cancer. Are they trying to cure cancer or just their bank accounts?

Note: I refuse to list the names of the companies I am writing about due to the fact that I do not agree with their ethics and will not give any additional publicity to them.