'But the suit argues it's among the least desirable, saying it's used mainly in "third world countries" and "in dogs and cats."'

This sloppy, strangely judgmental sentence betrays the one-sided and specious nature of this article. Do you really champion a lawsuit that uses the terminology "third world countries" as an insult, aligning people with animals? Or are you going for effect, over facts? Fact: phenobarbital may have a "narrow therapeutic index" but is effective at controlling seizures when used properly. Getting a seizure once a day would not be considered good control, and changing the antiepileptic regimen just MIGHT have been based partly on that, not cost.

For a publication that purportedly fosters independent analysis and healthy skepticism, you sure sound like you swallowed the medical board's (and ambulance chasers') kool-aid. I know it's hard when you don't have access to any real facts, but maybe try to avoid trite slander.