In defense of Doctors

[Guest [Bi...]]

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited>>> Don't want my old doctor knowing who I am.

[[va...]]

1)  We can't expect doctors to maintain our health just as we can't expect teachers to raise our kids. 

 

2) We have to have an equal involvement. 

 

3) It certainly isn't fair to group them all together. 

 

4) The informed patient can reduce the odds of such a situation by researching and understanding their conditions and by maintaining a basic level of health.  What other choice do we have?

Hey Chris!

 

I think for the person that is eg: an unhealthy eater so high cholesterol, smokes so a candidate for lung cancer or COPD, this type of thing your point #1 applies. Yes, they can't expect doctors to maintain their health.

 

But this is the easy stuff and these are the reasons "why" people are getting blamed here. Many of us do not fall into this category. Many. Here's the other side.

 

Much of what we've identified goes way way beyond people that are not pro-active in health or unhealthy people that use the medical system to fix them or keep them "kinda" okay so they do not have to make any positive change.

 

1) I don't believe anybody is asking a doctor to maintain their health, we're asking to be told the truth when we see a doctor. They know what is going on out there. It's their job to stay out of information bred from "collusion and conflict of interest" and they're not doing that because legally they don't have to and we pay for it. Much of the information they're are getting is misinformation and falsified data and THEY KNOW IT. That's the system today. THIS misinformation is preventing HEALTHY people from maintaining their health.

 

The misinformation is preventing people from maintaining health, not the people themselves.

 

2) When I ask my doctor medical questions, I considered (past tense) that "equal involvement." I've since learned one part of THEIR "equal involvement" is eg: giving informed consent to the patient and many do not use this. How many people on this board that took Benzos, Fluoroquinolones, or Statin drugs, Avandia, Guardisol, etc. Ask if they were given informed consent?

 

This "equal involvement" is as much a doctor's responsibility in getting all the facts straight for the patient.

 

There are two sides to this coin.

 

Equal involvement for the HEALTHY patient today is getting on the internet to "source the doctor's source of information." Most of us didn't know "sourcing the source" was REQUIRED of us to see a doctor.

 

Equal involvement sounds ideal but the information gathered by patient AND doctor has to be accurate and therein lies a huge problem today.

 

3) I personally am not grouping all doctors together. What I am seeing in their community is a high % practicing the same way with the current medical practice "model" which some of us believe is not set up to keep people safe with our best interest in the FOREFRONT.

 

They're using the smokescreen FDA's approval of product, procedure, med, as a REASON TO NOT ASK QUESTIONS. If they didn't know what was going on in the industry that would be one thing, but they do.

 

A much smaller % are being pro-active in educating the public on the unique design of the industry in health care in order to protect us but there are not enough of them. And we don't have access to many of them not to mention they take a backlash from their peers. This dynamic is all very real today and another rift in the medical community.

 

4) You said, "The informed patient can reduce the odds of such a situation by researching and understanding their conditions and by maintaining a basic level of health." What other choice do we have?

 

Agreed, and again this sounds good in theory. The thing is, to get informed with the right information you have to first know there is a problem with much of the information given out today in order to get ACCURATELY informed.

 

As well, what I have now experienced upon getting educated with how the community truthfully works is negative feedback from providers purely because I'm educated. They liked me when I didn't know what time it was and didn't question anything. Being compliant is what many prefer and I am not talking if you are a psychiatric patient but patient in general when referring to compliant.

 

Lastly, it's a two-way street. If the patient is to stay informed, the provider should too. Same rules apply. And the information many providers are learning from is not informed. It's just marketable.

 

This is not an ideal situation with easy solutions. I wish it was.

 

 

 

 

 

[[va...]]

Hi vancouvergirl,

 

I am very interested in learning more about the current controversy in Texas with respect to mandating Guardasil in middle school age youngsters.

 

Could you point out any good reference material with respect to this issue? 

 

Thanks so much.  KL

Hi Klonders.

 

Here is a link that shows how Govener Rick Perry tried to get "executive order" to get young girls to have to take Gardisil. As I said, it is not mandatory now. But he tried hard.

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/033705_Gardasil_Rick_Perry.html

 

An exerpt:

 

Not long after the vaccine was approved back in 2006, Gardasil's deadly side effects quickly began to emerge. Reports came in about young girls experiencing seizures and developing chronic neurological problems, as well as other conditions, immediately after receiving one or more of the three-part Gardasil vaccination schedule.

 

There are more links on the bottom with the dangers of it.

 

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/033705_Gardasil_Rick_Perry.html#ixzz1dkvDfpaO

 

An exerpt:

 

Based on this information, you can clearly see why Gov. Perry's 2007 executive order, and his continued defense of it, represents a significant threat to public health. If Gov. Perry's executive order would have been preserved and upheld by the Texas state legislature, thousands of additional girls in Texas may have been seriously injured or killed as a result.

 

=========

 

Here is the link on Perry's Merck conflict of interest and it shows the outrage of people in regards to the conflict of interest AND trying to make the drug mandatory.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/rick-perrys-2007-hpv-vaccine-decision-haunts-him-at-debate/

 

Here's a little exerpt:

 

“I’m a mom and I’m a mom of three children and to have them make 12-year old girls be forced to have a government injection through an executive order is just flat out wrong.

 

Perry cited a $5,000 campaign donation from Merck, but according to records from the Merck PAC, Perry has received nearly $30,000 in donations from the drug company over his decade as governor of Texas.  The $5,000 Perry referred to was merely the Merck donation from 2006, one year before he established the executive order.

 

=========

 

I want to add, this is an example of what is at stake and why our doctors jobs are becoming so hard. I'm not saying their job is easy, and doctors are bad. I am saying, regardless of how hard and political this job has become, it still no excuse to follow quietly along.

 

There are only two reason many are following along, they make more money today, and they're just tired. It's too much work to go to capital hill for us as they can't win either with this industry. Look at what they're up against.

 

IMO all the more reason to say, "Stop using our once noble profession as a cash cow" and speak for us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[[Ch...]]

VG,

 

I agree with a lot of your points.  Accountability on all sides is the key to a functioning health care system.  It's impossible to list all the shortfalls of the system that has let so many of us down in a single thread.  I think the intention of the thread was to identify and underscore how it does not.  At least in comparison to some of the less stable systems in the world.  We still live in a world where TB and Malaria are the 7th and 8th leading causes of mortality respectively.  Many in the world have never seen a doctor.  Now of course this isn't meant to detract from our negative experiences but it does put things into perspective.  I believe that was PJ's ( aka Sweetie's  ) point.

 

Christopher 

[[...]]

What a great debate team we would have made in college.  Some very good points being made here by a group, who I would assume, are as different as night and day regarding their politics, religion, and their personal goals and aspirations....yet done in a civil and most cordial manner.  It is refreshing to see this.  We are all above the slugfest mentality.  

 

The opinions that you have all stated are so very valid, it's difficult to counter them.  I fervently agree with you vancouver girl regarding Guardasil and the mandatory immunization of young girls and possibly young boys in Texas.  It most certainly is "flat wrong".  

 

Thanks BillyF, WWWI, Chris, vancouvergirl, Klonkers, and princezz. You are all terrific, can't reiterate that enough.  You all have a great and enlightening day.

 

PJ

 

 

 

[[Pr...]]

It's fine to be contrary, WWWI. There are lots of different opinions being expressed here and we all feel very strongly about things. But I do ask that you follow the tone of the thread.

[[Pr...]]

VG, I really like what you said there - "I want to add, this is an example of what is at stake and why our doctors jobs are becoming so hard. I'm not saying their job is easy, and doctors are bad. I am saying, regardless of how hard and political this job has become, it still no excuse to follow quietly along. There are only two reason many are following along, they make more money today, and they're just tired. It's too much work to go to capital hill for us as they can't win either with this industry. Look at what they're up against."

 

I struggle to keep myself from reaching a point of resignation. Things just don't change in this world. No matter WHO we elect next year, Washington and politics will remain the same. If you try to go against the flow or upset the status quo, you get ousted because you're playing with someone's money. It's the same with the "healthcare" industry.

 

I can only expect the pharmaceutical industry to bombard me with ads mentioning how great an antidepressant is in one breath and that it can kill me in the next. Doctors - well first of all, they're trained from the start to liaise with the drug companies (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/business/03medschool.html?pagewanted=1) Secondly, western medicine isn't about prevention. I don't know if it was always this way but that's how it's ended up. Again, this is the training that doctors receive. It takes a curious, big-hearted person to rise above all the challenges and take a different approach to treating patients.

 

The scenarios you posed are the easy ones - high blood pressure, high cholesterol. Those are obvious. I'm talking about nutrition as it pertains to conditions like CFS, fibromyalgia, mood disorders, autoimmune disorders, etc. I'm not a researcher. I have conducted no double blind studies. All I know is that I suffered from severe symptoms of Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome for five years until I spent two weeks on the Specific Carbohydrate Diet. End of stomach saga.

 

That's why I brought up the point of personal accountability. Not to berate anyone for falling victim to false promises of hope. But to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we don't need all of this in our lives. Maybe there is a better way. Maybe we need to get the word out.

 

-P-

[[Wi...]]

Princezz

 

My apologies if my benzo rage got the best of me and I "de-toned" this thread for a bit.

 

When you talk about nutrition and personal responsibility that touches my life, as I'm sure others.  Long story short, I've suffered from severe PMS my entire life. After exhausting all other possiblities (Ob/gyns, PMS experts, hormones, psychotherapy to learn to manage my life around this condition) I was referred to psychiatry for the possibility of symptom relief.  As many here have experienced, my original condition was dismissed and instead was diagnosed with "the bipolar" and put on an anticonvulsant that ultimately  resulted in two chronic autoimmune diseases (celiac disease and lymphocytic colitis) both which attack my GI system.

 

I cannot change the outcome but what I can do is implement those dietary changes that will minimize the symptoms and encourage the best health I can attain.  I firmly believe, despite the pesticides, hormones and occasional lysteria, food is our best hope for healing and maintaining health.  I respect that you are fighting the good fight attempting to avoid the point of resignation.  I, at least at this time, have resigned.  I have decided it is in my best interest to opt out.  Once I have completed this taper and am then psych med free, as I've mentioned before, unless I'm in dire pain or happen to set myself on fire, I have no interest in interacting with the medical profession.  Perhaps that will change.  However in my personal experience the cost of the "cure" far outweighs the alternative.  As a result of my experiences and so many others, I would rather suffer the consequences of inaction than the alternative.

 

Just curious, other than this forum where in many ways it's preaching to the choir, who do you suggest we get the word out too?

 

WWWI

[[Pr...]]

That is such a sad, oft-repeated story. Gynes in particular are often guilty of this, sending women straight to the psychiatrist. That's how I ended up here too so I can truly empathize.

 

Seriously though, go to Amazon and order a copy of Elaine Gottschall's book - Breaking the Vicious Cycle. It worked 100% for me and I can recommend it without reservation. It is specifically designed for people with Celiac, Crohn's etc.

 

In terms of getting the word out - I applaud the makers of movies like Supersize Me, Food Inc, and Fat Sick and Nearly Dead. What I like about the last one is that it's not full of mumbo jumbo and herbs and supplements. Dude, blend your veggies and fruits for 60 days and drink up. He cured himself of several autoimmune disorders in 60 days. How can we ignore stories like that? You know, they say the most medicated state in America is West Virginia. I hope I'm not misquoting but I think I remember the article saying that people there are on an average of 17 prescriptions I wonder how many of those people would like to know there's a possible alternative. To me that sounds like a prison sentence.

 

I also have met a woman at my old church who cured herself of CFS through changing her diet and losing 100 pounds. I know the only reason I haven't tried the juice fast yet is because my w/d would scream at me if I did. Sigh.

 

Sorry, I'm just rambling now. I don't know the answer to your question, WWWI. Maybe we can form a think tank here on this thread and solve that riddle.

 

[[Wi...]]

 

I want to thank everyone for keeping this thread on such a friendly and non-confrontational level.

.

When a discussion concerning  doctors arise, often times it can become quite heated because of all the varying opinions that are sure to surface.

 

To become a doctor is not easy.  To receive a medical degree can exceed $200,000.  School and training seemingly go on forever, and once graduated, doctors work long hours and are faced with life-and-death decisions daily.

 

A doctor in a clinic setting, is scheduled to see a patient, on average every fifteen minutes or so.  They are meeting as many as thirty people a day, which makes it extremely difficult to really get to know and assess their patients needs.  If they seem to come across as flippant and non-caring I think it's due to the fact that sometimes, just as we do, they can become overwhelmed by an unrealistic work load, but unlike us, the added pressure of knowing that someone's very life is in their hands adds tremendous  pressure to an already pressure-filled environment.

 

It is estimated that in about fifteen years there could be a shortage of up to 200,000 physicians.  This is due in part to the heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients.

 

On a lighter note, I know of a doctor in Mississippi who opted out of the big city, high paying, stress inducing environment that exists there, and instead practices in the rural countryside, making a fraction of what he had been earning.  But as he so eloquently states:  "How can I place the almighty dollar above a hug and an "I love you, doc"... "from a shy little boy or girl and their dear mother"?

 

Sometimes we have to remember the old adage; Walk a mile in my shoes.

 

Alright, I  will shut up for now.

 

pj

 

Aside from the doctor you mention in Mississippi and possibly a select few, do you genuinely believe the primary motive for the majority of people who put themselves through such torture is because they are altruistic and really care about people or would you consider the possibility that they know on the other side, despite a heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients, it is still incredibly financially lucrative?

[[Kl...]]

 

Aside from the doctor you mention in Mississippi and possibly a select few, do you genuinely believe the primary motive for the majority of people who put themselves through such torture is because they are altruistic and really care about people or would you consider the possibility that they know on the other side, despite a heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients, it is still incredibly financially lucrative?

 

Dear WWWI,

 

In my experience of working in health care for over 2 decades, quite simply, there has got to be a better way to make a living.

 

Define "lucrative".  Long hours and being "on call" coupled with low insurance reimbursement and high malpractice rates make medicine anything less than lucrative.

 

As far as the motives of others, I have never been very adept at figuring out what makes others tick.

 

If I decide to stay in healthcare, it has got to be for the love of what I do and certainly not for the paycheck.

 

Hugs, KL

 

 

 

[[Wi...]]

You said:

 

"Doctors cannot force us to adopt a healthy lifestyle, but if we did, chances are we would have fewer doctor visits. Lipitor is a billion dollar drug because people would rather taker a pill than cut down on the saturated fats in their diets.  The jury is still out regarding issues that may arise from long term use of  this drug."

 

I find many things disagreeable about those first two sentences, not the least that I find it presumptuous and judgmental.  Not to be contradictory, but the jury is still out as far as the efficacy of statin drugs to begin with let alone issues arising from their use.   People who ARE healthy and who DO live "healthy lifestyles" are also being sold this drug as a preventative measure even tho it's not been proven to be beneficial  in women at all and only mildly effective for men and then only when they are high risk AND have already suffered a heart attack. 

 

Would eating healthy benefit people, sure.  But statins are a marketing bonanza, not a proven method for the general populous for staving off heart attacks or strokes.

 

 

 

Hi  WWWI,

 

When I say that people who live a healthy lifestyle would probably have to see a doctor less often, how can that be perceived as judgemental?  Comparing an individual who eats a fast food meal twice a day versus someone who consumes lots of veggies, fruit, and lean chicken , who is the doctor going to suggest that taking Lipitor may be something they may want to consider?

 

Personally, I would not take any statin drugs.

PJ,

 

Your statement "Doctors cannot force us to adopt a healthy lifestyle, but if we did, chances are we would have fewer doctor visits. Lipitor is a billion dollar drug because people would rather taker a pill than cut down on the saturated fats in their diets.

 

First, there is a large percentage of the population who for finanical reasons, can't afford to eat "well".  Additionally, those people who can't afford quality food are also typically those who can't afford health care and as a result logic would dictate that they would be those who see doctors less often.

 

Your final sentence where your use of the word "People" is a blanket generalization regarding a statement that is unfounded and speaks more to your own personal view then statistical basis is what struck me more as a judgemental opinion than an informed statement based on fact.

 

I realize your conversation appears to be well intentioned, and being responsible for oneself is essential for not only good health but essential for most aspects of life.  However, having already discussed the issue of statins, in the case of doctors, you ask "who is the doctor going to suggest that taking Lipitor may be something they may want to consider?" and my answer is all of the above.

[[Wi...]]

 

Aside from the doctor you mention in Mississippi and possibly a select few, do you genuinely believe the primary motive for the majority of people who put themselves through such torture is because they are altruistic and really care about people or would you consider the possibility that they know on the other side, despite a heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients, it is still incredibly financially lucrative?

 

Dear WWWI,

 

In my experience of working in health care for over 2 decades, quite simply, there has got to be a better way to make a living.

 

Define "lucrative".  Long hours and being "on call" coupled with low insurance reimbursement and high malpractice rates make medicine anything less than lucrative.

 

As far as the motives of others, I have never been very adept at figuring out what makes others tick.

 

If I decide to stay in healthcare, it has got to be for the love of what I do and certainly not for the paycheck.

 

Hugs, KL

You are a physician? a surgeon? a psychiatrist?

[[Kl...]]

"Just" an RN. 

 

 

[[Pr...]]

I think we might need to clarify the context of the discussion. People not being able to afford proper nutrition is a separate social ill, in my opinion. There's a segment on that in one of the movies I mentioned. It's either in Supersize Me or Food Inc. Not sure now which one. As you mentioned, these people often cannot afford "health" care or medicines, so can we really include them in the current discussion?

 

[[Wi...]]

Klonkers, It is hard for me to understand, of all people, you, the one who actually does the heavy lifting of the medical profession, whose job requires the output of more empathy and compassion than doctors, spend more time with people than the doctors and who is severly underpaid for the privilage of putting up with the lack of recognition for the essential service that you provide, your defense of those same individuals.

 

When I challenge the medical profession, it is never directed at those who in addition to trying to make a living, are in the thick of it and who genuinly carry the true burden for wages that in no way convey the value of the services that they provide.  So if I have offended you in anyway, please know that was not my intention. 

 

WWWI

[[Wi...]]

I think we might need to clarify the context of the discussion. People not being able to afford proper nutrition is a separate social ill, in my opinion. There's a segment on that in one of the movies I mentioned. It's either in Supersize Me or Food Inc. Not sure now which one. As you mentioned, these people often cannot afford "health" care or medicines, so can we really include them in the current discussion?

 

 

My point was simply that to make global statements is inappropriate.  There are no absolutes here.  There aren't the "good" people who some perceive do it right and the "bad" people who some perceive do it wrong.  Is it "acceptable" to eat fast food once a week and then eat healthy the rest of the time but not "acceptable" if it's more frequent?  And just for information purposes, there are some issues and contradictions concerning the validity of the findings and the actual caloric intake that was presented in Supersize Me.  Do not believe everything you see. Bottom line the system is broken and ceasing to eat french fries is not going to solve the problems.

[[Kl...]]

It is hard for me to understand, of all people, you, the one who actually does the heavy lifting of the medical profession, whose job requires the output of more empathy and compassion than doctors, spend more time with people than the doctors and who is severly underpaid for the privilage of putting up with the lack of recognition for the essential service that you provide, your defense of those same individuals.

 

When I challenge the medical profession, it is never directed at those who in addition to trying to make a living, are in the thick of it and who genuinly carry the true burden for wages that in no way convey the value of the services that they provide.  So if I have offended you in anyway, please know that was not my intention.

 

Dear WWWI,

 

No offense delivered or one taken.  But I sincerely appreciate your thoughtfulness.

 

I have no problems with challenging the medical profession.  I have been doing so for a very long time as a staunch patient advocate.

 

I believe you realize there are outstanding individuals in every profession as well as those who are not.

 

I stand on my position that medicine is not a lucrative profession.  Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Hugs, KL

[[...]]

 

I want to thank everyone for keeping this thread on such a friendly and non-confrontational level.

.

When a discussion concerning  doctors arise, often times it can become quite heated because of all the varying opinions that are sure to surface.

 

To become a doctor is not easy.  To receive a medical degree can exceed $200,000.  School and training seemingly go on forever, and once graduated, doctors work long hours and are faced with life-and-death decisions daily.

 

A doctor in a clinic setting, is scheduled to see a patient, on average every fifteen minutes or so.  They are meeting as many as thirty people a day, which makes it extremely difficult to really get to know and assess their patients needs.  If they seem to come across as flippant and non-caring I think it's due to the fact that sometimes, just as we do, they can become overwhelmed by an unrealistic work load, but unlike us, the added pressure of knowing that someone's very life is in their hands adds tremendous  pressure to an already pressure-filled environment.

 

It is estimated that in about fifteen years there could be a shortage of up to 200,000 physicians.  This is due in part to the heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients.

 

On a lighter note, I know of a doctor in Mississippi who opted out of the big city, high paying, stress inducing environment that exists there, and instead practices in the rural countryside, making a fraction of what he had been earning.  But as he so eloquently states:  "How can I place the almighty dollar above a hug and an "I love you, doc"... "from a shy little boy or girl and their dear mother"?

 

Sometimes we have to remember the old adage; Walk a mile in my shoes.

 

Alright, I  will shut up for now.

 

pj

 

Aside from the doctor you mention in Mississippi and possibly a select few, do you genuinely believe the primary motive for the majority of people who put themselves through such torture is because they are altruistic and really care about people or would you consider the possibility that they know on the other side, despite a heavy work load, the high cost for them to be insured against malpractice suits, and the large increase in Medicare patients, it is still incredibly financially lucrative?

 

I would venture a guess that probably 94% of doctors are quite happy to be earning their high salaries, but keep in mind that until they pay for their $200,000 in student loans, pay for malpractice insurance, which depending on their specialty, could be another $200,000 per year, a recently accredited doctor's salary is not all that great.  A thoracic surgeon, who gives us back our loved ones,  can make 400k a year. A professional ball player can earn ten times that, but that is another debate for a different venue.

 

The other 6% of doctors feel a calling to serve the less fortunate of society, and earning a high salary is the least of their priorities. Dr. (no name) left a lucratice practice in the states, packed up his wife and five kids, and moved to a remote area in  Africa. He and others like him, of course are the exception.

 

Putting all the above aside, you are correct WWWI.  Many doctors got into the doctoring business, and continue there because of very lucrartive salaries.

[[...]]

You said:

 

"Doctors cannot force us to adopt a healthy lifestyle, but if we did, chances are we would have fewer doctor visits. Lipitor is a billion dollar drug because people would rather taker a pill than cut down on the saturated fats in their diets.  The jury is still out regarding issues that may arise from long term use of  this drug."

 

I find many things disagreeable about those first two sentences, not the least that I find it presumptuous and judgmental.  Not to be contradictory, but the jury is still out as far as the efficacy of statin drugs to begin with let alone issues arising from their use.   People who ARE healthy and who DO live "healthy lifestyles" are also being sold this drug as a preventative measure even tho it's not been proven to be beneficial  in women at all and only mildly effective for men and then only when they are high risk AND have already suffered a heart attack. 

 

Would eating healthy benefit people, sure.  But statins are a marketing bonanza, not a proven method for the general populous for staving off heart attacks or strokes.

 

 

 

Hi  WWWI,

 

When I say that people who live a healthy lifestyle would probably have to see a doctor less often, how can that be perceived as judgemental?  Comparing an individual who eats a fast food meal twice a day versus someone who consumes lots of veggies, fruit, and lean chicken , who is the doctor going to suggest that taking Lipitor may be something they may want to consider?

 

Personally, I would not take any statin drugs.

PJ,

 

Your statement "Doctors cannot force us to adopt a healthy lifestyle, but if we did, chances are we would have fewer doctor visits. Lipitor is a billion dollar drug because people would rather taker a pill than cut down on the saturated fats in their diets.

 

First, there is a large percentage of the population who for finanical reasons, can't afford to eat "well".  Additionally, those people who can't afford quality food are also typically those who can't afford health care and as a result logic would dictate that they would be those who see doctors less often.

 

Your final sentence where your use of the word "People" is a blanket generalization regarding a statement that is unfounded and speaks more to your own personal view then statistical basis is what struck me more as a judgemental opinion than an informed statement based on fact.

 

I realize your conversation appears to be well intentioned, and being responsible for oneself is essential for not only good health but essential for most aspects of life.  However, having already discussed the issue of statins, in the case of doctors, you ask "who is the doctor going to suggest that taking Lipitor may be something they may want to consider?" and my answer is all of the above.

 

Very good, WWWI, point well made

[[Kl...]]

With respect to medicine being "lucrative" let's get a perspective from the other side. . .

 

 

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2010/06/doctors-money-people.html

[[va...]]

VG,

 

I agree with a lot of your points.  Accountability on all sides is the key to a functioning health care system.  It's impossible to list all the shortfalls of the system that has let so many of us down in a single thread.  I think the intention of the thread was to identify and underscore how it does not.  At least in comparison to some of the less stable systems in the world.  We still live in a world where TB and Malaria are the 7th and 8th leading causes of mortality respectively.  Many in the world have never seen a doctor.  Now of course this isn't meant to detract from our negative experiences but it does put things into perspective.  I believe that was PJ's ( aka Sweetie's   ) point.

 

Christopher 

Hi Chris, I completely hear what you're saying, I do, and your points are valid as well.

 

This is more specifically what I was driving at eg: you say, "It's impossible to list all the shortfalls of the system that has let so many down in a single thread".

 

I can list them in just one word as THIS is what I have been getting at in my posts. IMO the problems where all the "shortfalls in the system are coming from":

 

Industry

 

So from my side it is actually a SHORT list. Therefore it's not impossible for me only because this is how I see it. Now that it is the 'health industry' the stakes have changed as it's a full on 100% money making business. I see the words "public health" and "health care" only being thrown around to try to make it look like what is was designed to be and it's not at all being driven this way.

 

Yes, we are lucky because we can see doctors and I've traveled a great deal of third world, no doctors for people and no vets for animals. Horrifying.  (I would see one injured and couldn't help and it would ruin my day or days backpacking.) BUT, just because we can see doctors isn't enough for me. These doctors I see have to be completely on OUR side and against the influence of "industry" for me to see them as safe as a whole for the public TODAY.

 

As well, with the 1rst world pharmecuetical company's set up now in the 3rd world and testing it on the local people there, they get sick, then manipulating the clinical trial data again, sending the information back to the 1rst world, guess where it ends up?

 

At my doctors appointment.

 

Again, one word, industry. What a cycle and it literally bleeds into every facet of the medically community and general public.

 

So I do understand what you are saying and where you are coming from but because of my points here you can see it doesn't put it into perspective at all for me at all.

 

And Christopher thankyou for this exchange. I really appreciate the frankness and openess of which everyone is responding, commenting etc., on all varying opinions and ideas as PJ has said.  

 

PJ, we sure would make a GREAT debate team and thankyou for starting this thread. So many of us come out of the woodwork lol. We're all just people trying to figure things out, from our individual perspectives in what we personally see as the problems in this as well as, perhaps decide how or where we fit in this. That will decide if we want to be active in solutions OR "can" be active in solutions as well as 'will our voices even be heard' in the avenues we see as problems?

 

That brings me to when some say, "I'm just going to enjoy my life and work around this deal." That's valid too. If a mole hill turns into that big of a mountain, it's enough to care for yourself, and care for your family if you have one. This is what makes everyday people "vulnerable" in that we need to keep the lights on and gather food. How active can we be and for how long? This is life. Reality.

 

Princezz, that kind of validates your sentence of  "I struggle to keep myself from reaching a point of resignation. Things just don't change in this world. No matter WHO we elect next year, Washington and politics will remain the same. If you try to go against the flow or upset the status quo, you get ousted because you're playing with someone's money. It's the same with the "healthcare" industry."

 

I know, it then makes it very complicated for change. We sign petitions, walk with signs and protest, camp out and protest, and then the nest day there is a new story in the headlines about "doctors find a way to thin eyebrows" as Pianogirl stated.

 

I totally agree see what you are saying about personal accountability and #1 I am so glad you could correct that with carbohydrate diet. (Holy smokes what a terrible condition.) You were accountable, and what results. It's amazing actually and I'm very very happy for you. Could not have been fun when that condition was active.

 

Here's the other side of that coin too with personal accountability.

 

I got saline implants as they were deemed safe by the FDA. One side leaked. I had them removed. The fluid in the bag goes out to the body, picks up blood and other things in the body, sucks it back into the faulty valve side into the bag and cycles this while you don't know it's happening. It grows bacteria and fungus inside of the warm habitat of the shell which starts "auto immune" disorders. Proven by chemists and doctors all over the world. The outside shell is silicone which I wasn't told and that is still making women sick just like if they got the new approved silicone implants. AND, saline implants had not being passed as safe by the FDA until 2000 but I was implanted in "97". That's legal. I can source all of it.

 

Device company's were to trail woman for 10 years with saline. They lost 80% of women year 1, 100% year 2. Woman now surface with problems and FDA denies testimony and proof from chemist and doctors that study it. Current 2011 committee meetings. Plastic surgeons keep business as usual and Dow is now paying a new class action out on pre-approved silicone but plastic surgeons are still implanting both saline and silicone denying allegations saying it's not being proven. It wasn't that is wasn't proven, they didn't finish the science experiment and keep it open to collect data. (Not all women react to silicone, FYI or leaks, but many do.) There should be a warning with the new proof.

 

Industry.

 

I was accountable, listened to being told the product is safe and it wasn't. My auto immune that attacked my joints, (fitness girl wasn't happy about that) luckily is clearing slowly by natural methods I use (accountability like you), some woman get super benzo like sick and it doesn't resolve. Lupus, arthritus, neurological the whole nine yards. I've talked to them.

 

Which brings me to when you say "I'm talking about nutrition as it pertains to conditions like CFS, fibromyalgia, mood disorders, autoimmune disorders, etc."

 

I couldn't agree more. BUT, what about the ones listed about that are in fact CREATED by drugs and devices like my experience, and food. That covers all 4 of your conditions too. My experience proves one. Not to mention those here diagnosed with fibro form benzowithdrawal and many on drugs that are not benzos are getting this diagnosis.

 

I truly believe the conditions you've listed are ALSO being created by what I've listed, and and these "man made" conditions are cropping up at the same rate as the ones that would happen on their own.

 

Accountable people are getting equally affected by TODAY'S meds, devices, genetically modified foods, all of this creating the very things many of us proactive in our health are trying to prevent or already have and to manage for a daily quality of life are given more things that make people more sick.

 

Industry.

 

And I love your link with how doctors are changed from the drug company's. Thanks for that. You said, "It takes a curious, big-hearted person to rise above all the challenges and take a different approach to treating patients."

 

Ain't that the truth. YOU said it. THAT'S it EXACTLY. That's what I personally want to see more of. A higher % of MD's taking a different approach against the grain of certain influence.

 

Hi WWW, when you said, "I was referred to psychiatry for the possibility of symptom relief.  As many here have experienced, my original condition was dismissed and instead was diagnosed with "the bipolar" and put on an anticonvulsant that ultimately  resulted in two chronic autoimmune diseases (celiac disease and lymphocytic colitis) both which attack my GI system."

 

This is a very real cycle like mine and it created auto immune for you too. This is prevalent on this board as well.

 

So what do we do and how do we get the word out you asked? I don't know either. People are trying and much info is skewed and inaccurate. Using protest with addictive drugs as an example of one type of protest. It's always about addicts abusing but a reference here is a little different in that our variable is somewhat identified.

 

"Protestors claim that pharmaceutical companies are profiting from getting people addicted to their drugs."

 

I think these protesters may be a select group of politicians with some clout unlike us.

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/108576/20110203/protests-against-addictive-prescription-drugs-could-cost-pharma-companies.htm

 

I might just heal and live around it a little wiser while protecting and informing those close and those I am in contact with at random.

 

P.S WWW, I read that link you posted before on the #3 reason of deaths today being from medical causes of procedure or meds if I'm not mistaken.

 

Thanks so much for this thread. It seems we've covered so much on "both side".  

 

I feel this thread is a balanced perspective on people being accountable for their health, and when people get sick from medicine being lucrative.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[[cd...]]

Yup Klonkers, that's the "other side" alright.  One man's viewpoint.  I wonder if there are stats available on how much the consultant fees are yearly to pharmaceutical companies, how much the free lunches from pharmaceutical reps add up to yearly, fees accumulated from being expert witnesses in lawsuits.  And how do you put a price on other intangible benefits?

 

To be honest, I have not read this entire thread.  Mostly because the very name of the thread made me recoil in anger.  But if the argument is that doctors don't make enough money... well, I can't support that.  Every doctor I know drives a high end car, lives in upscale neighborhoods, has kids in private schools and dresses very well.  To me, that speaks for itself.  

 

cdawg

[[...]]

With respect to medicine being "lucrative" let's get a perspective from the other side. . .

 

 

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2010/06/doctors-money-people.html

 

Thank you for sharing that, Klonkers.  It is always helpful to see another perpective when discussing an important issue.  Thank you for becoming a nurse.  I read where there is a tremendous shortage in the nursing field.  Has it improved any?

[[Pr...]]

I think we might need to clarify the context of the discussion. People not being able to afford proper nutrition is a separate social ill, in my opinion. There's a segment on that in one of the movies I mentioned. It's either in Supersize Me or Food Inc. Not sure now which one. As you mentioned, these people often cannot afford "health" care or medicines, so can we really include them in the current discussion?

 

 

My point was simply that to make global statements is inappropriate.  There are no absolutes here.  There aren't the "good" people who some perceive do it right and the "bad" people who some perceive do it wrong.  Is it "acceptable" to eat fast food once a week and then eat healthy the rest of the time but not "acceptable" if it's more frequent?  And just for information purposes, there are some issues and contradictions concerning the validity of the findings and the actual caloric intake that was presented in Supersize Me.  Do not believe everything you see. Bottom line the system is broken and ceasing to eat french fries is not going to solve the problems.

 

Well that's good to know. What I took away from that movie was a perfectly healthy man ate nothing but fast food for whatever period of time it was and came away with a fatty liver, lots of weight gain, etc. It could never be considered the be all end all of the situation. But it's the first movie I heard of or watched that tried to put a spotlight on the issue. From that perspective I consider it to be a start in getting the word out.