Needing an honest answer

[EbonyBorn2Succeed]

As nurses why do you guys think that medications only treat the symptoms of a disease instead of curing the disease? Is it because no one has come up any cures yet? () Or do you guys think it's a conspiracy?

I for one think it's a conspiracy and that's what I'm writing a paper on. Just wanted to know how you all felt. Thanks.

Side note: OMG just noticed I put "and" instead of "an" in my title. Disregard Please!

[Conqueror+, BSN, RN]

So you are saying that anyone who has wealth or power is akin to a cockroach? Regardless of what they do with it?

Yes, it's the love of money, not the mere possessing of if, that corrupts. And you don't have to be wealthy to love money. If you know the store clerk gave you too much change and you keep it, you have done a corrupt thing. It's just that you've done it on a smaller scale, and it won't likely end up in the paper.

Conversely, many wealthy folks give generously of their funds, endowing foundations and supporting all kinds of charities and good causes. I'm sure a few do it to polish their image, but a lot of them do it behind the scenes for the good of the recipients and because such things matter to them.

The wealthy and the rest of us are pretty much the same under the skin. The main difference is the proportions and the attention the actions receive.

The wealthy and powerful do many things that we never even know about so the supersized check that they give on CNN doesn't fool me. And I said the LOVE of money so why emphasize my own statement to me? I would think someone without money would be MORE likely to lust after it because they don't have it, and would be more likely to do anything to get it. Theres a reason Matt 19:24 says what it does and I believe it to to be 100% truth. Of course anyone can be corrupt in word, thought, or deed but the part of this topic I addressed is regarding money and the lengths that people will go to for wealth. To clarify I'm talking millions and/or billions of dollars, not change from the store. Not sure what the same under the skin means but it's my heart that I focus on and it isn't the same as everyone elses. And wrong is wrong so 10 cents or 10 billion is the same and I don't care what the news says about it.

[rn/writer, RN]

The wealthy and powerful do many things that we never even know about so the supersized check that they give on CNN doesn't fool me. And I said the LOVE of money so why emphasize my own statement to me? I would think someone without money would be MORE likely to lust after it because they don't have it, and would be more likely to do anything to get it. Theres a reason Matt 19:24 says what it does and I believe it to to be 100% truth. Of course anyone can be corrupt in word, thought, or deed but the part of this topic I addressed is regarding money and the lengths that people will go to for wealth. To clarify I'm talking millions and/or billions of dollars, not change from the store. Not sure what the same under the skin means but it's my heart that I focus on and it isn't the same as everyone elses. And wrong is wrong so 10 cents or 10 billion is the same and I don't care what the news says about it.

I emphasized your statement because you seem to equate having money with loving (lusting after) it. While the two may well occur simultaneously, their intertwining is not a given. People at any economic level can make an idol of wealth and devote their lives to the pursuit of money at any cost. And people at any economic level can be generous, concerned for others, and willing to share of their possessions, however much or little they may have.

This means there are poor folks who lust after money, as well as poor folks who will share their last meal. And there are rich folks who think nothing of climbing over the backs of their employees and customers to grub every last dime, and there are other rich folks who pour millions into teaching kids and assisting Third World villages in obtaining fresh water and helping older folks find jobs.

Having material wealth is not synonymous with being evil. Nor is being strapped for funds a guarantee of virtue.

To tie this to the original topic, yes, there are big pharma folks who have shady practices and criminal hearts, but the proof of that is in their illicit actions, not just the fact that they have made money.

[Conqueror+, BSN, RN]

Well, since you seem to keep repeating what I am saying in a different way we can agree to agree or disagree or whatever the case may be. I stand by everything I posted because I know it to be the truth. To the OP, I hope your paper turns out well. I wouldn't mind reading it. :)

[rn/writer, RN]

I just think of the wealthy and powerful like cockroaches. For every one that you see there are at least 9 bigger, nastier ones that you can't see.

Your first post suggests that you think just the act of having wealth and power is bad and makes one equal to a cockroach. I don't agree with that. There are plenty of rich cockroaches, to be sure, but not every rich person is a cockroach and not every cockroach is rich.

I don't believe that it is intrinsically evil to have wealth and power. It's the way they are thought about and used that determines their value.

If we agree on the last statement, then we're copacetic. If not, then yes, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Remco's Reflections]

This certainly is an interesting and far ranging discussion. I was wondering though if the OP would like to post the essay question so we could possibly pool our collective wisdom and provide some useful suggestions as to the direction the assignment might take? After all, pretty much all of us have experience of interpreting essay questions and writing assignments to meet, or exceed, the required standard.

It seems we are mostly agreed that the chosen subject merits discussion, regardless of which side of the divide of belief we are on. There is real potential for this assignment to become a very insightful ethical debate worthy of posting in full on allnurses.com provided the OP can find scholarly reference materials to support both sides of the argument. I haven't looked because I'm quite busy enough with my own assignments, but I'm sure this can't be the first time that the ethics of the ethical pharmaceutical industry have been questioned.

Remco

[Remco's Reflections]

Wouldn't you know it! I just got an opinion piece in my email that relates to this very subject. It is certainly not a peer-reviewed-scholarly article published in a reputable journal but you may be able to use this article to find some of the reputable research you will need.

Here's the link; American Drugs are Price Fixed to Keep Them Expensive

Remco

[Maryla_RN]

Conspiracy - I don't think so. Self-serving doctors and pharmaceutical companies - probably. I think the kind of things you are interested in exploring are doctors who recommend the unnecessary/expensive tests and treatments in order to line their pockets or who prescribe medications that mask symptoms rather than encourage lifestyle changes that could potentially cure. No doctor will make any money if he cures all of his patients. It is known that adhering to a plant-based diet will reverse heart disease. See the writings of Dr C Esselstyn or this website : Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease But if all their patients started exercising and eating healthy, then patients would actually get better and would not need angioplasties or heart surgeries and the Dr's income would be affected. Another article worth reading is on colonoscopies. See : McDougall Newsletter: August 2010 - Colon Cancer Sorry about the italics. I couldn't un-italicize the text...

[canoehead, BSN, RN]

So you are saying a US doctor will omit advice about diet and stress reduction in diseases that are exacerbated by stress or improper diet because he only wants to use prescription drugs? I think you should change doctors if that was the case because you happened to get a very poor sampling of US doctors. Your impressions are not accurate. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most physicians here go to lifestyle advice before prescribing drugs. A small fraction of people actually take that advice, though.

The payment is much more favorable towards meds as opposed to the time counselling/follow up takes. Research on effective combinations and long term outcomes is funded and published for meds. So yes, I would say most docs go with meds after a token mention of lifestyle changes.

[jetfuel]

It's probably also worth mentioning that the healthcare industry has painted itself (and society) into what I call a "corner of stupidity" with "cancer."

How many types of cancer are there? If someone actually discovered a cure for say, prostate cancer, that would hardly benefit someone suffering from basal cell carcinoma or multiple myeloma. Granted, understanding how a particular cancer works enough to develop an actual cure might help in the research of other cancers... But the point is that you can't say "cancer is cancer is cancer." Each one is a different disease with different causes.

So I guess big, bad Pharmatronix is keeping even MORE cures from us!

[i'm joking about "Pharmatronix"...which I assume is not actually the name of a real company!]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shana tova!

[nursel56]

The payment is much more favorable towards meds as opposed to the time counselling/follow up takes. Research on effective combinations and long term outcomes is funded and published for meds. So yes, I would say most docs go with meds after a token mention of lifestyle changes.

What do you mean by "the payment is much more favorable towards meds"? The person I was responding to said that she had ulcerative colitis, and mentioned she preferred treatment in Germany because they send people to spas and teach stress management techniques to compare and contrast to the American system, where I am assuming she believes, doctors take out the prescription pad first and only- which is not true. It's the patients- they'd rather take a pill than stop eating their Philly Cheese-steak with double curly fries. Maybe they write for meds too soon because they are battle-scarred by so many patients who believe if they don't leave with a prescription their visit was a complete waste of time.

It's too broad a topic really anyway, because some specialists are expected to pull out the prescription pad right away. Nowadays if you go to a psychiatrist vs a psychologist, it's because he or she is an MD who can prescribe. Do they even have couches anymore? It sounds to me as though there is an underlying assumption that doctors in the US would want their patients to be on a boatload of prescriptions even if the patient would be willing to lose weight, stop smoking reduce stress and exercise more. It is actually demoralizing to many doctors(at least through hearsay) to see their patients of many years start to decline from years of abusing their bodies - even the best drugs don't prevent all residual damage from causing sickness and death.

In theory, doctors shouldn't profit from the sales of drugs they prescribe so "if the payment is more favorable" it's against the law I'm pretty sure. The pharm detail people are not allowed to hand out freebies anymore because the FDA is worried the doc could be swayed by a scratch pad or a pen! :)

[jetfuel]

Do you have feelings of inadequacy?

Do you suffer from shyness?

Do you sometimes wish you were more assertive?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, ask your doctor or

pharmacist about Sauvignon Blanc

:

:

:yeah:DISCLAIMER: I do not advocate the misuse of alcohol in any way! Personally I don't drink it at all but that's just my choice. You need to make your own call on it.

Remco

I read this last year, only the "magic medicine" was TEQUILA!

[Conqueror+, BSN, RN]

What do you mean by "the payment is much more favorable towards meds"? The person I was responding to said that she had ulcerative colitis, and mentioned she preferred treatment in Germany because they send people to spas and teach stress management techniques to compare and contrast to the American system, where I am assuming she believes, doctors take out the prescription pad first and only- which is not true. It's the patients- they'd rather take a pill than stop eating their Philly Cheese-steak with double curly fries. Maybe they write for meds too soon because they are battle-scarred by so many patients who believe if they don't leave with a prescription their visit was a complete waste of time.

It's too broad a topic really anyway, because some specialists are expected to pull out the prescription pad right away. Nowadays if you go to a psychiatrist vs a psychologist, it's because he or she is an MD who can prescribe. Do they even have couches anymore? It sounds to me as though there is an underlying assumption that doctors in the US would want their patients to be on a boatload of prescriptions even if the patient would be willing to lose weight, stop smoking reduce stress and exercise more. It is actually demoralizing to many doctors(at least through hearsay) to see their patients of many years start to decline from years of abusing their bodies - even the best drugs don't prevent all residual damage from causing sickness and death.

In theory, doctors shouldn't profit from the sales of drugs they prescribe so "if the payment is more favorable" it's against the law I'm pretty sure. The pharm detail people are not allowed to hand out freebies anymore because the FDA is worried the doc could be swayed by a scratch pad or a pen! :)

True. They can't give away a pen but every day a different rep brings $100 worth of Olive Garden or Chili's in to feed the whole office and chat up the provider's for 45 minutes or so. Yeah.......