Court: No Unapproved Meds For The Dying

Federal Appeals Court Says Terminally Ill Patients Have No Constitutional Right To Experimental Drugs

(AP)  Terminally ill patients do not have a constitutional right to be treated with experimental drugs, even if they likely will be dead before the medicine is approved, a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned last year's decision by a smaller panel of the same court, which held that terminally ill patients may not be denied access to potentially lifesaving drugs.

The full court disagreed, saying in an 8-2 ruling that it would not create a constitutional right for patients to assume "any level of risk" without regard to medical testing.

"Terminally ill patients desperately need curative treatments," Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote for the majority. But "their deaths can certainly be hastened by the use of a potentially toxic drug with no proven therapeutic benefit."

Food and Drug Administration approval of drugs generally requires extensive testing that can involve years of trials and thousands of patients.

The Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs and the Washington Legal Foundation sued the FDA in 2003, seeking access for terminally ill patients to drugs that have undergone preliminary safety testing in as few as 20 people but have yet to be approved.

Abigail Alliance founder Frank Burroughs pledged an appeal to the Supreme Court. Burroughs' daughter, Abigail, was denied access to experimental cancer drugs and died in 2001. The drug she was seeking was approved years later.

"What the opinion by Judge Griffith is saying is, 'We don't want to risk one life or a few lives, even at the expense of the lives of hundreds or thousands of people,"' Burroughs said. "The logic of that escapes me."

In a sharply worded dissent, Judge Judith W. Rogers called the ruling "startling." She said courts have established the right "to marry, to fornicate, to have children, to control the education and upbringing of children, to perform varied sexual acts in private, and to control one's own body even if it results in one's own death or the death of a fetus."

"But the right to try to save one's life is left out in the cold despite its textual anchor in the right to life," Rogers wrote.

Rogers was joined by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg. The case cut across party lines, with conservative and liberal judges taking both sides of the dispute.

A spokeswoman for the FDA did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The court noted that there are government programs that provide access to experimental drugs in certain situations. It said the matter is not closed and said Congress might be a better venue than the courts to address the issue.

Burroughs said he expects such legislation to be introduced this session. Both the Senate and House have considered such legislation but it languished in committee.

[rafterman1]

F*cking clueless court. Let's see, you *might* be dead from an unapproved drug but it might save your life. Don't get the drug and you will 100% die. I know what choice I'd make. I didn't realize that Constitutional interpretation included ignoring the obvious.

[susanhelit]

This is fracking nuts! You might die from the drug, so it's better to absolutely die from your disease???? No way! A chance at life beats certain death, and it's my choice - if nothing else, your death should be something you can choose. What a bunch of interfering idiots!

[retmilspouse]

Wow what a bunch of hooey. Let them sign a wavier. Whatever happens so be it.

[hrb8113601]

This alone show you who is in charge of our health care ,bunch of idiots that just work for insurance company and get kick back from them.long live michael moore(sicko)

[marcpcbs]

Many of the drugs that the FDA has not cleared for doctors to subscribe are still available for trial basis under extreme conditions such as someone having a terminal illness. What this law is try to control are situations like those people who say they are sick so it%u2019s OK for them to grow hundreds of pounds of marijuana and make hundreds of thousands of dollars while more than half the pot they sell ends up in this nations school systems destroying the health, memories, educations and futures of literally tens of millions of our children.

[marcpcbs]

Many of the drugs that the FDA has not cleared for doctors to prescribe are still available for trial basis under extreme conditions such as someone having a terminal illness. What this law is try to control are situations like those people who say they are sick so it%u2019s OK for them to grow hundreds of pounds of marijuana and make hundreds of thousands of dollars while more than half the pot they sell ends up in this nations school systems destroying the health, memories, educations and futures of literally tens of millions of our children.

[xxmorosxx]

I think the argument that this is to prevent people from growing and using marijuana is inaccurate. I mean, these people are after life-saving treatment, even if the medicine in question has not been fully tested out. It is not about maintaining or reducing pain levels, which is what the marijuana argument is.
I think people have a fundamental right to do what they want with their own bodies, especially in regards to using experimental medicines to try and save their life if they are dying. It seems ridiculous that the courts are saying that it is okay for people to have abortions and prevent the birth of a child, but they cannot attempt to save their own life, and in the process further research about potentially valuable medicines.

[marcpcbs]

When people decide they want to use an untested medication they aren't just acting on their own. Who ever supplies them with the drugs is taking responsibility for the dosage and frequency of usage. When you put the control of meds in the hands of someone dying, their administration can quickly get out of hand. After someone has died, family members frequently take court action against attending care givers. There's a lot more to this than just "Let the dying person do anything they want".

[burneb]

"[The Court] said the matter is not closed and said Congress might be a better venue than the courts to address the issue."

Oh, great. We saw how well Congress does with medical decisions for the terminally ill in the Terry Schiavo case.

[linfinster]

Live Free or Die ... Hmm

Of course we have to take into consideration ALL the evil people out there that can and WILL convince someone who is dying to "try" a new drug they are testing ... I can see the headlines now .. " ..Dr accused of giving untested medication to hundred's of dying patient for experimental testing .." probably NOT for what they were dying of ..
It's such a shame we can't trust anyone anymore.
If I were dying and couldn't get a med that could potentially save me or reduce my suffering I would do most anything.

[johnshaft4]

Christian 'Conservative Compasion" at its finest...
We can only hope that those judges develop a painful, terminal disease so that on their death beds they may develop empathy for US citizens.

[johnshaft4]

US citizens can get better health care in Castro's Cuba. The US Government is an abomination and embarrasment to humanity.

[john0211]

I think they made the right decision. I think it must have been very hard for them. Without extensive medical back grounds. But I think they nailed it. Human beings are not guinea pigs. Or cash cow%u2019s for the medical industry to experiment on like animals. Even one hour of a human life is to precious to be exploited, and wasted with reckless medical care. That may diminish their quality of life. And shorten their life. With no scientifically significant possibility of benefit to that individual patients remaining life.

People are being killed, and injured in America at an alarming rate with drugs already approved by the FDA. But improperly prescribed, and administered by Doctors who%u2019s primary therapeutic motivation is profit, and personal gain.

Most American Doctors seem to have forgotten the meaning, and importance of Hippocrates warning. And the oath they swore to. %u201CTo Above All Do No Harm%u201D

Instead replacing it with the oath %u201CTo Above All Get Rich%u201D. As American medicine sinks further into the abyss of it%u2019s orgy of greed, and the medical profit motive.

The reality of human mortality. And the fact that we all have to die some day is sad. But there is a vast difference between death as a natural consequence of life, and diseases. And that of being injured, or dying prematurely because the people that were supposed to protect your life, and at the very least %u201Cdo no harm%u201D. Killed you for profit.

[mbburch06]

This is yet another symptom of the attitude among so many in this country that The State knows best and should tell us how to spend our money, what to eat, and what type of medical care we are allowed to receive, etc. Perhaps this will open some eyes to the foolishness and danger of state paternalism, but I doubt it.

[johnshaft4]

They can take their ruling and shove it up their a$$. If I am dying, I will resort to "experimental" drugs to save myself. What do we got, here?
Option "A": Guaranteed death
or
Option "B": Roll the dice with the X drugs wherein you at least have a chance to "win"/live.

Is common sense an endangerded species with these absurd, psuedo intellectual courts and judges?
Rest assured, if I was in that situation, my tail would be in another country wherein I at least have not given up and have a chance of survival.

[sandycat2]

Yes common sense is in short supply in this judge's ruling. If a terminally ill person wants to try an experimental drug, let the do it if it's their decision. How can it harm them? They are dying anyway. And it might save their live. The choice should be theirs, not some pinhead judge.

[brianbwb-2009]

"hundreds of pounds of marijuana and make hundreds of thousands of dollars while more than half the pot they sell ends up in this nations school systems destroying the health, memories, educations and futures of literally tens of millions of our children." Posted by marcpcbs

Other than the risk of being jailed because of its' illegal status, How does pot destroy the "the health, memories, educations and futures.." etc?

Millions of people used, and continue to use marijuana, yet are healthy, happy, productive members of society.

Your claim is not only unproven, but actually is contradicted by a mountain of empirical evidence .

[john0211]

Admit it. You just want to be able to exploit vulnerable sick people with false hope. And cheat them out of what life they have left. By raping them for your personal profit. You know who you are.

Just like some of these preachers that pray on vulnerable people frightened about death. Who promise them a sure ticket to heaven. If they just give them all their money. When the truth is. The only chance they have of missing out on the pearly gates is by following false profits like these tax free so-called preachers.

[marcpcbs]

brianbwb

You need to wake up and join planet earth. 22 % THC makes it imposible for millions of our kids to get an education we now have a 50% drop out rate.

" healthy, happy, productive members of society."
Where have you been?

Ask any teacher what pot is doing to the kids today.

Join reality.

[doevam]

I lost my dad to cancer one year ago and when someone you love is that ill, what the courts think seems so irrelevant. I would have done anything, legal or not.

[wiredwilly]

The Spanish Inquisition had more compassion.

[john0211]

doevam: You said it. "I would have done anything." That is why it is so important that people not be victimized, cheated, and robbed of what life they have left with false hope.

And that is why it is absolutely essential for doctors to remember, and respect their primary obligation to "above all do no harm."

[METAUSTIN]

Twenty-six U.S. troops killed this past week in Iraq but King George has enough time to meddle into dying people's private affairs. It must be really something to know you have never made a mistake in your life and still fear God so much that you can pass judgement on others even when they are dire need for a cure.

George, do everyone a big favor and quit! You are undoubtedly the worst President this country has ever had and probably the worst human being that has ever lived on this planet.

[searingtruth]

Aaahhh ... the new era of Republican/Democratic inhumanity.

We all knew that the Republican party abandoned humanity long ago, but at least they proudly and boldly advocated and admitted it.

But now we have the spineless Democratic party claiming to love humanity, while regularly voting for the exact, and I do mean exact, same things as the Republicans.

Tyranny, war, and suffering for all.
ST


"Children should not know fear, or death, or suffering, for it is not their lot to know. Theirs is a time for joy, and wonder, and a time of great discovery. Let them never despair, or hurt, or want. This should be our highest calling, and our most sincere dedication."
SearingTruth

"The depth of human compassion may be measured by how often they forgive their gods."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[blondmadison]

Put the judges in the same boat as the terminally ill. I said IN the same boat. Not on a bench with a great retirement package, the best medical insurance and benefits and care--put them INSIDE the same boat with the terminally ill.

HOLIER THAN THOU IS A REAL MENTAL ILLNESS.

DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR IS A REAL MENTAL ILLNESS.

WHO ARE THEY TO MAKE SUCH A DECISION in the face of the gross toxicity of CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADIATION TREATMENTS!

GET THESE SO CALLED "JUDGES" OFF THE BENCH AND BACK INTO THE SOCIETY THEY THINK THEY ARE SO ABOVE AND BEYOND.

HORRIFIC.

[cantshutup]

F*CK THE COURT~!!!! WE DON"T NEED OR WANT GOVERNMENT MEDDLING IN OUR PRIVATE AFFAIRS!!! F*CK YOU TOO bUSH!!!!

[searingtruth]

"I lost my dad to cancer one year ago and when someone you love is that ill, what the courts think seems so irrelevant. I would have done anything, legal or not."
doevam


My fellow human being, I am so sorry for the loss of your father, and want you to know that the salvation of innocent human life is always legal.

In fact, it is the most legal cause of all.

And yet I understand your plight. Humanity, and the law meant to support it, does not exist in America anymore.

I am anguished that your father, as my mother and father, became ill under the ping pong rule of the Republican/Democratic parties.

And no, I have no political axe to grind. I am not a member of any political party, and do not work for any political organization or candidate. I am simply a human being like you.

I grieve with you, for all of our loved ones.

And I have a plan to end our anguish, outlined in "A Future of the Brave".
ST


"Who are we then?
We are compassion.
The most precious resource in our universe."
SearingTruth

"I understand. For I have been disappointed also. Humanity, overall, almost always disappoints me. However humans, individually, almost always fill me with hope. This has led me to the conviction that humanity is good; it is our organization and ideologies that have proven pitifully and woefully ineffective and inadequate."
SearingTruth


A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[dakotaclark]

Hmmm...

Once more a Court decides what is or is not ok for someone to take during serious illness.

If someone is in a terminal condition and that person believes that "rarified goat dung" will help, they should be able to get it for free and use it if they so desire...

[usayesterday]

The big pharma companies shovel drugs in our face every day, on TV. These drugs are later to be determined as "risky" by the same corrupt organization (FDA) that originally approved the drug.

These same pharma companies brainwash the public and corrupt the politicians into thinking that cheaper drugs from Canada are "dangerous". Thus, they create laws that forbid Americans, (some in desperate situations), from trying to improve their own health in a less costly manner.

So with that I ask, how the H3LL could an "experimental" drug be so bad that a court decides them to be off limits. And who in this case was the defendant? The foundation that fought for the right to use such drugs was the plantiff. Was the big pharma companies trying to, once again, prevent Americans from having complete access and control over their own health?!

There is a natural human instinct to do anything to save oneself or another fellow human being. Essentially, that basic instinct and the actions resulting from that instinct can all be called "experimental". For a terminally ill patient, either the result of dying faster or having one's health improve and living longer, is clearly a 'win-win' situation! It's clear that some courts lack the sociological and philosophical foresight to realize that.

[usayesterday]

TO TAKE AMERICA BACK, WE MUST EDUCATE OURSELVES, AS OUR SCHOOLS HAVE FAILED TO DO THIS ADEQUATELY!

STEP 1:

Watch -- WWW.ZEITGEISTMOVIE.COM

(scroll below the screen to see the links associated with the website and look at all of them, after the movie plays, or you can download the movie instead of watching the stream online)

STEP 2:

Go to -- WWW.SEARINGTRUTH.COM

Read his short novel: "A Future of the Brave", and most definitely click on the 'Forward Media' button on the left column and VISIT EVERY WEB SITE LINKED IN THAT SECTION!

STEP 3:

Share all of this with your friends, family, and coworkers.


With any hope, someday our idividual rights and freedoms will take precedent over the control of the elite few.

Someday, this BULL *** will hopefully stop!

[searingtruth]

"Hmmm...

Once more a Court decides what is or is not ok for someone to take during serious illness.

If someone is in a terminal condition and that person believes that "rarified goat dung" will help, they should be able to get it for free and use it if they so desire..."
dakotaclark


Aahhh...

Once again inhumanity proudly rears its ugly head. Josef Mengele would have agreed with everything you have to say, and forward, about common human compassion, and the remedies for its disease.

Honestly, look him up on the Internet.

Inferring that those seeking experimental treatment for terminal illness simply seek "rarified goat dung" is inhuman, not inhumane.

Mengele would be proud of your bold and audacious discount of human life.

Congratulations.
ST


"Cruelty and brutality are evidence of evil, not strength."
SearingTruth


A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[drinuk]

This should be called Playing God for a Dollar.
For far too long the dollar has ruled what we the people should and should not do. Too many vested interest groups pervade our lives and not in our best interests. Sadly humanity and caring comes far down the list behind the the value of Stocks. The sick, the elderly and the poor are not in the equation, profit by the few is the order of the day.

When you read that the FDA has banned a Natural Organic medicine, you can put your shirt on the fact that 1) It Works. 2) It cannot be patented. 3)The action has been instigated by Big Pharma. (Who of course control the FDA)

The sad truth regarding this story is that Cancer, Aids, MS and many other terminal conditions are Big Business, Cancer is a very profitable industry and there is no profit in a cure. We have to do it ourselves because Big Pharma and their clandestine supporters in Government will not.

[grammawhamma]

I am a retired nurse. My husband died of cancer. If I was diagnosed with "terminal" cancer I would volunteer to be a guinea pig...not to be cured...but to perhaps help find a cure for the future generation.

[drinuk]

GrammaWhamma, There would be little point in doing as you say because they have no interest whatsoever in finding a cure. What we need is the freedom and genuine desire to fund honest independent research.
We need to expose the corruption root and branch throughout the pharmaceutical and medical industry and we needs laws which will severely punish politicians and government officials who take even a single dime from vested interest to the detriment of the public.

[slim1h2o]

This should be called Playing God for a Dollar.
For far too long the dollar has ruled what we the people should and should not do. Too many vested interest groups pervade our lives and not in our best interests. Sadly humanity and caring comes far down the list behind the the value of Stocks. The sick, the elderly and the poor are not in the equation, profit by the few is the order of the day.
by drinuk

Wow you took the right out of my mouth. In fact you said it better than I could.

For too long we the people have been the guinea pigs, Doctors have no vested interest in "curing" their patients, but to keep them locked into the cycle of medicne for life, which ruins the patients lives.

[gramto7]

I think a lot of the people posting here are confused about the term 'drugs'. Drugs do not necessarily mean pain killers or uppers! It can also be something that will kill the cancer cells, or bio-genetics to treat one of the more insidious diseases like Parkinson's, diabetes, lupus, neurofibromatosis, etc. There are many deadly diseases that can kill painfully or painlessly, but kill nonetheless.

I think a person should be granted the opportunity to try the experimental drugs if they choose. They have nothing to lose, and possibly so much to gain!

[cbsreader4]

Speaking as one who has been told by his doctors that he should go home and live what little time he has left to him as best he can this issue is particulary disturbing to me.

My thoughts are as follows:
1- What possible reason would anyone have to keep lifesaving drugs from the dying; providing, of course, that they endanger no one else?
2- Drug companies could utilize the data they obtain from the results of such use of their drug(s) and may actually want to donate the cost of their medication for this purpose.
3- From the perspective of the dying I certainly would volunteer to take an experimental drug if it offerred hope of reasonable results. Unfortunately in my case this is not possible.
4- Although terminal, I can't even get decent pain meds because some desk jockey at the federal government believes he/she knows better than my bevy of highly-trained specialists what's best for me. No surpise that they would keep the dying from life saving drugs, too.
5- Isn't it telling that it's the Bush appointees that have done this? No surprise there. When is this menace going to be squashed?
6- This issue might be readdressed from a different angle; one that does not include constitutional involvement. Perhaps then it might have a chance. It'll have to wait until the dictator is out of office, though.

[rational_1]

I'm not sure if I have this correct but is it the court's ruling that if an individual does not have a constitutional right to an experimental medicine, even if they and a physician can obtain one, then that also means the government has the right to deny this patient that experimental medication? Where exactly in the Constitution is the government granted that right and authority? I'm no lawyer but this smells a bit fishy to me.

On the flip side, I can see a potential slippery slope if the court had agreed with the plaintiff. Every once in a while (with unfortunately depressing regularity it seems) we read these stories of morons who kill their kids by 'treating' them with some unapproved medical practice (largely a wacky religion thing I think), in effect denying them real medicines that could save them. Whose blood doesn't boil when that happens? Could these parents make the same arguments that the government should not be involved in the treatment of their diseases or their kids'? Just wondering...

[slim1h2o]

Go eat an herb or something, and quit writing such nit-witted remarks.
Posted by seandgreen at 09:16 AM : Aug 08, 2007

Well, Apparently, being a doctor you have that GOD mentality, because you think you're right and we're wrong! Or is it that you went to school an extra 7 yrs , you're smarter than us?, either way, I'm glad you are not my doctor, you'd be fired! Nit Wit

[rational_1]

For too long we the people have been the guinea pigs, Doctors have no vested interest in "curing" their patients, but to keep them locked into the cycle of medicne for life, which ruins the patients lives.
Posted by slim1h2o at 07:59 AM : Aug 08, 2007

I think you better up that Haldol dose buddy!

[john0211]

The court ruling as I understand it does not stop an individual doing anything they want to do. No court can actually do that. You can waste what life, and money you have left on hopeless, and desperate acts of self-destruction, and self-abuse all you want to. You can let the witchdoctors, con artist, preachers, and faith healers use, and rape you all you want to.

But the court I think, correctly chose to not legitimize it by making it legal. There are legitimate experimental drug trials already. Maybe the government should expand them. But they are there.

Drug trials hopefully with very, very strict criteria for patient education, and consent. And very, very strict requirements for strictly unbiased, totally independent medical, scientific, monitoring, documentation, and full disclosure of all results. Whether good results or bad. Whether profitable, or unprofitable.

See, there is know limit to the number of people that want to just exploit desperate people. They don't really give a D*M about you. They just want what they can get out of you. Then they will just kick you to the curb. But you can still be their sl*ts, and b*tch*s if you want to. The courts just wont sanction it.

Best of luck!

[sierraskier]

I find this ruling appalling! If a patient is terminal, it means they'll be dead soon. No hope left. They should have the right to try last resort options including unapproved experimental drugs.

My uncle is an excellent example. In 2000, he had a heart transplant at Stanford University Medical Center and was placed on anti-rejection medications that supress the immune system. A few months later he developed a severe fungus infection in his lungs. This was a common fungus that immune systems in most healthy people can fight off, but because of the anti-rejection medications, he couldn't beat it. Stanford tried every anti-fungal medication that was approved by the FDA and nothing worked. This fungus was resistant to everything on the market. So Stanford got special approval from the FDA to give him an experimental drug that wasn't even in human clinical trials yet. Risky? Yes! But without it he was dead anyway. He WANTED to take the risk. He wanted to live! This drug worked. It killed the infection and my uncle returned to excellent health and a life full of fishing, hunting and spending time with his family. Without that unapproved experiemntal drug, he would be dead. What right do these self-rightous sanctimonious "do-gooders" have to deny ANYONE a last ditch hope????? This law is WRONG!!!!!

[klingon69]

What this law is try to control are situations like those people who say they are sick so it%u2019s OK for them to grow hundreds of pounds of marijuana and make hundreds of thousands of dollars while more than half the pot they sell ends up in this nations school systems destroying the health, memories, educations and futures of literally tens of millions of our children.
Posted by marcpcbs at 09:52 PM : Aug 07, 2007
Oh no, That evil temptress Marijuana is back. It will steal our children, run hide. What a joke.

[slim1h2o]

Look, if you don't want to take medication. Fine. Don't do it. If you get cancer, then don't waste your time on treatment. But if you do, please know there are a mass of providers that will take excellent care of you and look for a CURE through researched methods, not conjecture.

by seandgreen

Every doctor I encountered was fu(king quack then. all 12 of'em.
but then, I guess, thats what you are as well.

Also sounds you need some bedside manner skills,
judging by how you're responding to my posts

[susanhelit]

The paranoia is thick here. People die - real living, breathing people - because an experimental drug, still going through FDA approval, is denied to them. The company can't let you have it even if you want it. Add that to our inhumane pain management philosophies, where terminal patients are treated as drug seeking addicts - it's just insanely stupid!

When you are terminal - a critical word - terminal - you are going to die, we've got nothing that is saving you - the law needs to recognize that this is a very different state than a person with a life to live. If an experimental drug might save their life - let them try it! It's their life, their choice should be the only relevant factor. And likewise for pain meds - it doesn't matter if they were to get addicted - they're dying! Be human, and let them avoid dying in horrible pain!


Yeah, there are idiots who prey on the dying, the sick, desperation. But that's not drugs seeking FDA approval, and the law can take care of the quacks and thieves. That's not what the case is about - it's about real drugs, from real drug companies, in testing to be approved, but not there yet. And yes - drug companies save lives. They make money - anyone who disapproves of this, I hope is working for free at their job.

[rational_1]

Every doctor I encountered was fu(king quack then. all 12 of'em.
but then, I guess, thats what you are as well.
Also sounds you need some bedside manner skills,
judging by how you're responding to my posts
Posted by slim1h2o at 01:46 PM : Aug 08, 2007

Actually I've read all of seandgreen's posts and in all of them he is quite reasonable and makes his arguments in a rational and forthright manner. You clearly don't like what he has to say and have a beef against the medical & pharmaceutical fields. It is your posts that are often rude, accusatory and confrontational not his.

[slim1h2o]

Posted by rational_1 at 02:09 PM : Aug 08, 2007

Sorry about that, I do have beef with the people you mentioned, and I will continue to speak out against the medical establishment, because it is broken. Plain and simple!

Only the rich get treatment, OBTW I had insrance, key word HAD.

[john0211]

seandgreen: Doctors, and "BigPharma" are killing patients at an alarming rate. almost every week we hear of a new drug that has to be pulled off the market for injuring, and killing millions of patients. Or has to be reevaluated, and re-labeled for killing, and injuring millions of patients. Drug coted stints, Vioxx, Avandia, Adderall, antidepressants. And the list goes on, and on.

And the reason for this is because doctors, and BigPharma keep pushing new less proven drugs on innocent, unsuspecting patients. That their patients either did not need in the first place. Or by switching their patients from older more proven safer, cheaper generic drugs. To newer more risky, more costly brand name drugs.

Why do they do this. GREED!!!!! These doctors primary therapeutic motivation is GREED, and PROFIT!! They are "BigPharma's" wh*r*s. And their patients are their B*TCH*S.

The only way to fix this disgrace is universal health care. You have to take the profit motive out of it. Then all these people that became doctors to get rich will high tail it out of medicine.

[rational_1]

Why do they do this. GREED!!!!! These doctors primary therapeutic motivation is GREED, and PROFIT!! They are "BigPharma's" wh*r*s. And their patients are their B*TCH*S.
The only way to fix this disgrace is universal health care. You have to take the profit motive out of it. Then all these people that became doctors to get rich will high tail it out of medicine.
Posted by john0211 at 02:23 PM : Aug 08, 2007

Why does anyone do anything? Ultimately because of a concern with one's self interest. Some (SOME) doctors chose that profession because it's lucrative, but I think they are a small minority. I think most physicians chose the field because they genuinely like to help people and they feel satisfaction at accomplishing something significant when they successfully treat patients (getting back to the concern with one's self interest thing). You think the guy on the line at Ford is there just because he really wants you to enjoy your new F-150? People do things because they get something out of doing those things. And not all of it is financial as you imply.
My mother was a physician in Canada (sometimes held up as this great model of universal healthcare). She strongly advised me against thinking of a career in medicine because of all the bureaucrats that made a doctor's life he!! there. If you are unhappy with your doctors now when they at least have a financial incentive, how happy will you be with them when they feel like a bunch of government-led lackeys?

[slim1h2o]

Don't be such a hypocrite. Maybe you should sue the doctor who dropped you on your head as a baby! LOL! (just kidding). ;)

Just ease up a bit, my man. Get some help, anyway you can.

Peace.
Posted by seandgreen at 02:30 PM : Aug 08, 2007


I know I have been a hostile, but with good reason, I live with pain every day due to these "good" doctors that failed to do anything what so ever.

Didn't mean to direct my disgust at you personally, but took yours personally. As for finding a lawyer to sue, try that when you're in pain, and go thru THAT ringer, espeaclly when some one is not feeling well and you are by yourself. Also I did contact a couple of lawyers, they were of no help either when I told them what I wanted to do, sound fair to you?