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.
I've had MRIs. Cervical spondylosis isn't "subjective". Neither is occipital neuralgia, or the physician at Johns Hopkins wouldn't have offered to burn the nerve out.
I think the issue is that “pain” itself is subjective. Persons A and B may have the same condition, but Person A doesn’t experience nearly as much pain as person B does. What makes things worse is that the medical community seems to treat complaints of pain differently depending on gender and race, even when everything else in the medical record is the same. For example, I watched a documentary a while back on a prima ballerina deciding to retire. They showed some of her spinal imaging and she had scoliosis and severe degeneration throughout the spine. It was amazing she could walk without severe pain, much less dance. I can only assume that over the years, she had trained her brain to adapt to the pain. That said, it would be completely unrealistic to expect the average person to be that active with that sort of condition, not to mention the danger.
That said, doctors are people too. Maybe they experienced X themselves and it wasn’t a big deal, so they think it shouldn’t be a big deal for the patient. That may not be the right way to think about it though.
Interestingly, there are some studies that say long term opioid usage causes MORE pain. And when patients detox from their meds, they find the pain is minimal or actually gone.
Quote:
The United States makes up 4.4% of the world’s population, and consumes over 80% of the world’s opioids. The US consumes approximately 99% percent of the world’s hydrocodone. Hydrocodone was moved from a Schedule III to a Schedule II drug in 2014 because of its high abuse potential.
Are we just in much more pain than anyone else? Or are we just conditioned to medicate ourselves more easily? Keep in mind, plenty of wealthy and middle income countries that could give out inexpensive opioids like candy if they so want.
Whole story is pure CYA because of malpractice lawsuits.
The sentence fragment of "the medication might cause birth defects" is the entire story, not the overturn of Roe/Casey, not hypothetical unborn having more rights than Tara Rule, none of that.
Plain and simple, it is a Cover Yer Arse move made by a physician who knows flat out that if they do prescribe the medication, and she does get pregnant despite all her tearful, sincere promises to the contrary, and the baby is born with birth defects...then that neurologist is sued right into personal and professional ruination because "they knew the horrible side effects and prescribed anyway," and now this poor mother has $27 bazillion gajillion in future child care costs because of this neurologist's malfeasance.
Put yourself in the position of a neurologist. 10 years of college, at least a couple $hundred K in debt, and a job that pays an average of $225k+ in most of the US. Now prescribe a medication with a known side effect that it can cause birth defects. POOF! Your education, your salary, your entire life...DEMOLISHED by the first woman who gives birth to a child with some defect she can blame on you and/or the maker of the drug that she begged and pleaded to have prescribed.
This has not one freaking thing to do with unborn rights or any of that. Nada, zippo, nil. This is a highly paid professional choosing to not risk his entire personal and professional existence on an emotionally and (clearly) psychologically unstable woman demanding a drug that they know has at least one major possible side effect.
She can find another neurologist. There are more than just that one in NY state. Somewhere there has to be that one noble, glorious physician who cares not about their career or livelihood, and only cares about Tara Rule's relief from pain. And when that idiot prescribes the drug, and she goes and gets pregnant, and then delivers her three eyed mutant...well, the knowledge of that noble gesture will keep that physician happy and well fed as they watch their professional and personal life go up in flames as Tara sues them for emotional damages and the future child care costs which her lawyer has figured to be the aforementioned $27 bazillion gajillion.
Are we just in much more pain than anyone else? Or are we just conditioned to medicate ourselves more easily? Keep in mind, plenty of wealthy and middle income countries that could give out inexpensive opioids like candy if they so want.
Most other countries offer complementary treatments that are covered by national health insurance/socialized medicine. Here in the US, you can get a prescription for opioids cheaper than a single PT, chiropractic, acupuncture, or OMT appointment, for example. If they are covered, the copay is still high (I pay $40 for one PT visit and know others that pay $60) and you are limited to a set number each year. In many cases people WANT to try other things, but can’t afford them. In socialized medicine, there is an incentive to keep people from coming back. That doesn’t exist in a for-profit system like we often have here.
Whole story is pure CYA because of malpractice lawsuits.
The sentence fragment of "the medication might cause birth defects" is the entire story, not the overturn of Roe/Casey, not hypothetical unborn having more rights than Tara Rule, none of that.
Plain and simple, it is a Cover Yer Arse move made by a physician who knows flat out that if they do prescribe the medication, and she does get pregnant despite all her tearful, sincere promises to the contrary, and the baby is born with birth defects...then that neurologist is sued right into personal and professional ruination because "they knew the horrible side effects and prescribed anyway," and now this poor mother has $27 bazillion gajillion in future child care costs because of this neurologist's malfeasance.
Put yourself in the position of a neurologist. 10 years of college, at least a couple $hundred K in debt, and a job that pays an average of $225k+ in most of the US. Now prescribe a medication with a known side effect that it can cause birth defects. POOF! Your education, your salary, your entire life...DEMOLISHED by the first woman who gives birth to a child with some defect she can blame on you and/or the maker of the drug that she begged and pleaded to have prescribed.
This has not one freaking thing to do with unborn rights or any of that. Nada, zippo, nil. This is a highly paid professional choosing to not risk his entire personal and professional existence on an emotionally and (clearly) psychologically unstable woman demanding a drug that they know has at least one major possible side effect.
She can find another neurologist. There are more than just that one in NY state. Somewhere there has to be that one noble, glorious physician who cares not about their career or livelihood, and only cares about Tara Rule's relief from pain. And when that idiot prescribes the drug, and she goes and gets pregnant, and then delivers her three eyed mutant...well, the knowledge of that noble gesture will keep that physician happy and well fed as they watch their professional and personal life go up in flames as Tara sues them for emotional damages and the future child care costs which her lawyer has figured to be the aforementioned $27 bazillion gajillion.
Tell us why the doc couldn't ask her to sign a waiver saying she understood the risks. Anyone who goes for surgery signs such a waiver saying they understand the risks. Why would this be different?
Tell us why the doc couldn't ask her to sign a waiver saying she understood the risks. Anyone who goes for surgery signs such a waiver saying they understand the risks. Why would this be different?
Maybe because this was her first visit? From her videos it sounds like this was the first time she saw this doctor.
Which begs the question: if she has so many medical issues that she's had for years, why doesn't she have a primary care team?
Tell us why the doc couldn't ask her to sign a waiver saying she understood the risks. Anyone who goes for surgery signs such a waiver saying they understand the risks. Why would this be different?
Who knows? All I know is even in the "4 D's" of medical liability, courts love to side with plaintiffs who present the most woeful stories. Maybe there is a waiver. Maybe they asked her to sign it, maybe the neurologist in question wasn't going to prescribe it just out of good conscience. First do no harm and all that.
I see it as pure CYA.
And she can find another neurologist. There are more than just that one.
Whole story is pure CYA because of malpractice lawsuits.
The sentence fragment of "the medication might cause birth defects" is the entire story, not the overturn of Roe/Casey, not hypothetical unborn having more rights than Tara Rule, none of that.
Plain and simple, it is a Cover Yer Arse move made by a physician who knows flat out that if they do prescribe the medication, and she does get pregnant despite all her tearful, sincere promises to the contrary, and the baby is born with birth defects...then that neurologist is sued right into personal and professional ruination because "they knew the horrible side effects and prescribed anyway," and now this poor mother has $27 bazillion gajillion in future child care costs because of this neurologist's malfeasance.
Put yourself in the position of a neurologist. 10 years of college, at least a couple $hundred K in debt, and a job that pays an average of $225k+ in most of the US. Now prescribe a medication with a known side effect that it can cause birth defects. POOF! Your education, your salary, your entire life...DEMOLISHED by the first woman who gives birth to a child with some defect she can blame on you and/or the maker of the drug that she begged and pleaded to have prescribed.
This has not one freaking thing to do with unborn rights or any of that. Nada, zippo, nil. This is a highly paid professional choosing to not risk his entire personal and professional existence on an emotionally and (clearly) psychologically unstable woman demanding a drug that they know has at least one major possible side effect.
She can find another neurologist. There are more than just that one in NY state. Somewhere there has to be that one noble, glorious physician who cares not about their career or livelihood, and only cares about Tara Rule's relief from pain. And when that idiot prescribes the drug, and she goes and gets pregnant, and then delivers her three eyed mutant...well, the knowledge of that noble gesture will keep that physician happy and well fed as they watch their professional and personal life go up in flames as Tara sues them for emotional damages and the future child care costs which her lawyer has figured to be the aforementioned $27 bazillion gajillion.
Good post........a couple of points. For a headache or pain management doc. the educational progression is roughly this.
4 years college (it's possible but unusual to win a medical school seat without a degree tho.)
4 years medical school
3 years neurology residency
1, 2, or 3 years headache or pain management fellowship
She never says what the actual name of what he did prescribe was.
If you want to participate in this thread, I'd highly advise you to watch her tik toks on the subject. It's not hard. I'm not going to spoon feed you time stamps when all the info is there for the listening. Take some personal responsibility and draw your own conclusions w/ your own ears.
Her tik tok name is pogsyy.
If she never says what the medicine was (a very important point), what's the use of listening to her tik toks?
My purpose is not so to participate in this thread, as it is to determine whether it's worth participating in. All I've seen so far, is people babbling on and on with little or no information and a lot of namecalling, plus an OP who can't even back up his own assertions but keeps insisting others prove his point for him. So far the thread is 0-for-everything in justification for its existence.
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.
