(April 19, 2017 at 8:52 am)Khemikal Wrote: Would you say the same thing about chemo? That they should have stopped administering it, because of the side effects, until a safer treatment came along? Roughly speaking...all treatments and medications have associated risks (there's a small but statistically present possibility that taking aspirin for chronic headache will kill you....), treatment is an issue of managing both the risks of your ailment -and- any risks associated with it's management.
Not my point. I am talking about the rate and volume put out. Again, the pace of the global rush for the buck is the problem, not that there is risk taking in anything. There was risk taking getting to the moon, but that also included heavy redundancy and testing and falsification before they sent humans there. Yes even the space program has had deaths, but we see today over prescribing especially with opiods like oxycoton(sp) which we now see are leading those users to heroine when doctors stop prescribing them.
I think it is bullshit to put that crap on TV with the fine print when the viewer isn't a doctor. Those adds are not designed to help the viewer, but to sell the product to gain shareholders.
Any doctor can tell you yes, there is risk to medicine, and yes, sometimes the benefits outweigh the risk. Not my point. It is the same bullshit with guns. Nobody is arguing all guns should be banned, but to think we don't have a gun death problem because legal buyers have no record must mean we don't make enough.
I remember when those prescription adds were not on TV and only over the counter stuff was allowed. I see this as nothing more than greed. If medicine is to be sold for altruistic reasons, then those who make those products should care about where they end up in a more selective manor, not by carpet bombing TV cable/dish/internet.
