Posted by yxibow on May 25, 2009, at 19:43:10
In reply to Re: Feel sick asking for meds » yxibow, posted by YOGI BRONX on May 25, 2009, at 14:08:06
> Dear Jay,
>
> Since I have a mental illness, I would choose to consult an expert in that field. Were it not for the licensing laws, I would have a variety of experts to choose from, not exemplars of the same cookie-cutter.
I'll give you one point for the hoops and hurdles that our (US) healthcare system is. But not every psychiatrist's appointment works like that -- but often the ones through HMOs do.I don't agree with the 15 minute meetings but that's how its been.
If you need expert advice, you have to pay for expert advice. Though I have a spirit for volunteering or helping the mental health community, I'd hardly want to work my main career for free, unless you're splitting the lottery winnings with me.
> If the expert told me that he thought I needed a particular medication, I would obtain it, or not, as I decided, without the necessity of his approving my acquisition. (If he told me to take morphine for my depression, I would probably not do so.)
The saying don't ask a dog to bark if you can bark yourself comes to mind.....
> Market competition, free of government licensing, would make both resorts to treatment MUCH CHEAPER and would restore the medical expert's consultation to the SERVICE position that it is, thus eliminating the demeaning and embarrassing process that seeking medical advice has become.Free of government licensing? Where does this come in. Do you really want medications that have just come out of a test tube, crystallized and sent to your door?
No phase testing? Your liver, pancreas, kidneys, entire body, they're fine to test on ?
And there is market competition. If you don't use insurance -- well its set by your therapist/doctor.
Want someone for $200 or so, good. Want a concierge 24/7 service for a $1000 an hour, go ahead.
Want a psychiatrist for $100, and you're likely to get someone... well let's just hope for your body they're above par.
> The government, the AMA, and other organizations would be free to approve service workers. I would take their judgments into account but their approval would not be mandatory for the service workers to practice their professions.
Well this is getting beyond a libertarian view -- I can't agree that, oh, dear FDA/DEA/State Licensing board, has said that Dr. X is okay.But Dr. Y who has not been approved, but has managed to have several patients die under his/her care, reckless disregard for human life, prescribing substances left and right... well he didn't get 4 gold stars on the buyer's guide to medicine, but we'll let him walk.
I mean what's another life in the hands of Dr. Y.
> Your attitude proclaims a complete indoctrination by health care industry propaganda.
I assure you there's no attitude here but I do sense a penchant for argumentation and some socio-political views that I can not fathom or agree with here. But then you're entitled to your beliefs, however odd they may seem.
And I'm not watching the grassy knoll and I have a pretty good idea we landed on the moon.
No, I'm not indoctrinated.And by the way, speaking of indoctrination, laws and bylaws at the AMA forbid pharmaceutical representatives from being at the meetings now.
Like the pretty pens or not, this was one way of learning about new medications.
But there's been one too many of those and I would agree.
-- Jay
poster:yxibow
thread:896800
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20090524/msgs/897641.html