Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're right to a point, PApisces. There is a lot of over-medication and misdiagnoses. However, you can't punish the people who actually do need the help or medicine. It's easy for us to say things like you just did. What about someone who truly suffers from severe restless leg syndrome? Trust me, it's not fun, it's horrible actually. I've seen people in tears over it because they haven't slept properly in weeks. And ADHD, although it is one of the most overly diagnosed conditions in the world, DOES exist. I've seen real ADHD, and the parents are desperate for help. They are usually quite medicated themselves so they aren't suicidal!! So it's fine to believe western medicine isn't as cracked up as people think it is, but just like I have to be empathetic towards those who refuse medicine, you have to empathetic to people who truly suffer and require it.
Western medicine may not be perfect, but I wouldn't want anything else!!! You also have to realize you are talking about two separate things. Western medicine and lobbyist/pharmaceutical companies are not the same thing. Western medicine can be broken down into one mindset, a very important and ingenious one.
Evidence-based medicine.
I don't dispute the valididty of RLS, ADHD or anything else really; What I mean is that not ALL easily distracted people have "ADHD" and not every person whose leg twitches at night has RLS. However, the Pharm companies want us to that everybody has has everything. It's great for their business. Pop a pill, spray an inhaler, take a shot or even lick a tongue-strip; It's never been easier to medicate an entire population.
I can agree with you that perhaps western medicine may be a bit more safe and "evidence" based than non-western medicine, in most cases. However, have you read about the meds that have escaped the FDA process and are currently on-market? How about the numerous "safety" recalls on countless numbers of "tested" medicine's?
I certainly hope that you remain independent of the Pharm companies influence. My doctor routinely says this to me: "well, I had a meeting with a drug rep, and they want me to push "Pill X" on you. However, in my experience, "Pill A" works better and it's been around a whole lot longer and we more fully know the side effects/risks".We could use a few great folks like yourself in Medicine/Pharm.
I don't dispute the valididty of RLS, ADHD or anything else really; What I mean is that not ALL easily distracted people have "ADHD" and not every person whose leg twitches at night has RLS. However, the Pharm companies want us to that everybody has has everything. It's great for their business. Pop a pill, spray an inhaler, take a shot or even lick a tongue-strip; It's never been easier to medicate an entire population.
I can agree with you that perhaps western medicine may be a bit more safe and "evidence" based than non-western medicine, in most cases. However, have you read about the meds that have escaped the FDA process and are currently on-market? How about the numerous "safety" recalls on countless numbers of "tested" medicine's?
I certainly hope that you remain independent of the Pharm companies influence. My doctor routinely says this to me: "well, I had a meeting with a drug rep, and they want me to push "Pill X" on you. However, in my experience, "Pill A" works better and it's been around a whole lot longer and we more fully know the side effects/risks".We could use a few great folks like yourself in Medicine/Pharm.
yep yep yep!
medicine should not be the first solution, which is how it is used today.
I certainly hope that you remain independent of the Pharm companies influence. My doctor routinely says this to me: "well, I had a meeting with a drug rep, and they want me to push "Pill X" on you. However, in my experience, "Pill A" works better and it's been around a whole lot longer and we more fully know the side effects/risks".We could use a few great folks like yourself in Medicine/Pharm.
Hehe. Like I said, Pharmacists are very impartial compared to doctors. Doctors are harassed daily by drug reps and get kick-backs from prescribing certain medicines over others, all of which can be very illegal, by the way. I am not paid by pharmaceutical companies, I am paid by Walgreens (or whomever) as an educator and a healthcare professional. It does not benefit me or profit me to meet some prescription dispensing quota each month, or what have you. I recommend only what I believe to be in the best interest of the patient. I didn't necessarily go into pharmacy because I believe so strongly in western medicine (although I do), it's because we live in a society where everyone takes drugs, more and more, some good, some bad, some needed, some not. I can't judge them or change that, but I can help educate and protect all the millions of people who are taking medicine by their own choice or their physician. See what I'm saying?
Also, let me play devils advocate for a minute, because I took an extremely interesting course on Pharmaceutical sales and companies just for an educational perspective. Pharmaceutical companies are greedy, that is a big fat fact, but they are still a business, after all. If they don't make money, we don't get new medicine, or may not even get old medicine. Believe me, some of those CEO's and pharmaceutical big wigs are filthy rich, FILTHY, and are quite filthy themselves, but it's not all peaches and creme.
They employ some of the most incredible and ingenious minds in all of the world. They engineer and harvest chemicals that cure our illnesses and give us a better quality of life. Are they rewarded in revenues because of it? You bet your sweet ***! And I have personally met with many pharmaceutical reps and employees who truly have a love for helping people and getting their medicine in the hands of people who really need it. Most pharmaceutical companies spend millions every year on prevention education and have requirements of their salesmen to also give community and university seminars on disease prevention and treatment. They aren't ALL bad.
It is also no easy task to develop a drug that the FDA approves. From start to finish, it costs BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars to research, prove efficacy and safety, test, document, purify, harness, and synthesize drug entities. It can take years upon years, even upwards of a decade or more, for a company to start making profit on a new drug and they prey it happens before generic is allowed! It sometimes doesn't! There are a great, great, many more drugs that never see the light of day than not. Pfizer recently got shut down in their clinical phase 3 trials of their new HDL raising drug. It was nearly on its way to market! That cost Pfizer BILLIONS and there was quite a scare about it. Do you know what would happen if Pfizer went under??? I shudder to think, believe me, I do. It is their fierce competition and greed that continues to fuel their ability to innovate and develop newer, safer, and better medicines.
Are they evil and don't help society out of the goodness of their heart? Well yeah, sure, probably. But when I see them bring out new medicines to treat the horrible diseases in the world, I can't help but feel a little thankful for them. I'm not talking little diseases like hypertension or hyperlipidemia, we have all but conquered those. I'm talking about the most horrible and devastating diseases known to man. Try improving someones quality of life who has Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, or Macular Degeneration by means outside of medicine. It really won't happen. How about Cancer, AIDS, MS, Cystic Fibrosis or one of the great plethora of rare genetic disorders like Tay-Sachs disease. Again, won't happen.
Also, is it truly the pharmaceutical lobbyist that are to blame? Or is it the Republicans that see it through, allow it, and have their backs?? Hm??
Just some thoughts :P You know I love you PApisces.
Try improving someones quality of life who has Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, or Macular Degeneration by means outside of medicine. It really won't happen. How about Cancer, AIDS, MS, Cystic Fibrosis or one of the great plethora of rare genetic disorders like Tay-Sachs disease. Again, won't happen.
Actually, many of the best treatments out there are based on homeopathic remedies At least for cancer, that would be the one I know about, and i know many have said the same about parkinson's and alzheimer's
Actually, many of the best treatments out there are based on homeopathic remedies At least for cancer, that would be the one I know about, and i know many have said the same about parkinson's and alzheimer's
Homeopathics for Cancer, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's? I'm not even touching that one. I'd be banned for sure.
Homeopathics for Cancer, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's? I'm not even touching that one. I'd be banned for sure.
I don't know, I would think I would have an open mind to any type of treatment when it concerns diseases which aren't curable. You would be suprised to see what is considered homeopathic.
Heck, Chiropractors are homepathic, but no, they are worthless.
I don't know, I would think I would have an open mind to any type of treatment when it concerns diseases which aren't curable. You would be suprised to see what is considered homeopathic.
I know very much about homeopathics, it still certainly falls under my jurisdiction as a pharmacist. Taking homeopathics in a patient who strongly believes in them can certainly yield the placebo affect and increase positive health outcomes, but to forsake western medicine in favor of them is suicidal. Taking them won't hurt you, so you're right, I wouldn't blame a patient for wanting to try alternative means of medicine if they have been diagnosed with such a crippling illness. As long as they continue their treatments that have been outlined by their physician.
medicine should not be the first solution, which is how it is used today.
I work in a dr's office, and I can tell you this is categorically untrue. The opposite is often true, actually. The patient (in the case of pediatrics, the parent) wants a med for a viral illness. There are very few anti-virals; none for common cold, viral sore throats, etc. Parents are often annoyed to go home empty handed. They want to walk out with a script.
The insurance/health care provider dichotomy can be debated through time and eternity, but most insurance requires trying OTC allergy meds (the original subject of this thread) before they will approve a prescription med. Then the pharmacy send the office a request for "prior authorization" approval. It has to be documeted that the pt tried, say, Claritin before they will approve Zyrtec. Just a little FYI.
I work in a dr's office, and I can tell you this is categorically untrue. The opposite is often true, actually. The patient (in the case of pediatrics, the parent) wants a med for a viral illness. There are very few anti-virals; none for common cold, viral sore throats, etc. Parents are often annoyed to go home empty handed. They want to walk out with a script.
How incredibly right you are, Pittnurse. You said that beautifully.
Also, as a pharmacists and one who has worked with many doctors (you can claim the same thing Pittnurse, correct me if I'm wrong) but physicians and healthcare professionals typically stress lifestyle modifications before pumping you full of medicine, whether you want to believe that or not. I imagine a great majority of physicians would rather see you try to lose weight, eat right, and exercise to lower your blood pressure and cholesterol before putting you on medicine. My mum's doctor had her work on her lifestyle for almost two years before FINALLY succumbing to the fact that she would need cholesterol lowering medicine.
Because in recent times we have become SO knowledgeable on pharmacokinetics, pathophysiology, chemistry, and pharmacy, most doctors are much more reserved now when prescribing medicines. They fear lawsuits, too! OH do they fear them! There has been a paradigm shift in healthcare in recent years that maybe has been subtle and you wouldn't know it unless you were in healthcare. Physicians don't prescribe like they used to. For example, I have exponentially seen a huge decrease in Oxycontin prescriptions since I first started several years ago. It's hard to get them, now. Physicians loathe prescribing antibiotics unless absolutely necessary, too. I've heard of some doctors sending kids away to stay in bed and be sick even though antibiotics could have cleared it up much faster! Bacterial mutation is a huge problem, one physicians have taken to heart in my experience.
I work in a dr's office, and I can tell you this is categorically untrue. The opposite is often true, actually. The patient (in the case of pediatrics, the parent) wants a med for a viral illness. There are very few anti-virals; none for common cold, viral sore throats, etc. Parents are often annoyed to go home empty handed. They want to walk out with a script.
The insurance/health care provider dichotomy can be debated through time and eternity, but most insurance requires trying OTC allergy meds (the original subject of this thread) before they will approve a prescription med. Then the pharmacy send the office a request for "prior authorization" approval. It has to be documeted that the pt tried, say, Claritin before they will approve Zyrtec. Just a little FYI.
Well good for you, you are one of a million.
I won't get into the insurance industry, that is more messed up than the medicinal one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At least for cancer, that would be the one I know about, and i know many have said the same about parkinson's and alzheimer's 
