Allies Voice: The Sale of the Century! How did they do it?
I'm insatiably curious how pharmaceutical reps work their magic. The training involved in polishing pharmaceutical reps is a mesmerizing craft! The formula begins with two factors: the seductive appeal of an irresistible personality, steeped in the broth of tenacity for top sales rewards. Add to this - unlimited buying power to reward good behavior and you've set the stage for the greatest crime in medical history: insulin analogues. When Nancy Regan began her campaign to say no to drugs back in the 80s - her psychic advisors must've known how apropos her plight would be in the dawning of the turn of the century. WARNING: The video is long but the question is LONG OVERDUE!
Insulin marketing to patients is saturated with an arrogant sense of security, like an abusive spouse. "You need me. I have a new insulin analogue. You're going to take it, whether you like it or not. It even has an obscure name -- made by morphing the amino acids we tweaked. Thank your lucky stars for Big Pharma! We answer your inadequacies with our brilliance. We handsomely repay our investors (and save plenty in case you decide to sue us). A pharmaceutical company in the business of making the world safer for people with diabetes is a fairy tale. It'll never happen!! Stick with the profitability of defying science. The complications are par for the course. It's not us -- It's you! Didn't your doctors explain all this? If you don't achieve perfect control you deserve complications. That's exactly what we told them to tell you."
The marketing to doctors' is more like buying friends than substantiating science. A pharma rep would say something like, "this is the best stuff EVER!! You Trust us, don't you? We've had great results with former insulins. This is even better! Plus we're sending you and your better half to Hawaii to learn all about it. Make sure you see the waterfalls while you're there. It's an exquisite experience - my company will pay for everything as a token of our appreciation. "
Doctor then says to his/her endearing pharma rep, "why didn't you stick with the tried-and-true NPH and Regular insulins? In the 70s and 80s my patients were on insulins that worked fine for them. More often than not -- those patients didn't have the level of complications I see nowadays. I'm not so sure of the long-term outcome of these insulin analogues. I've read in "Diabetes Health" that insulin analogues are more carcinogenic than insulins like NPH and Regular. After further investigation -- I found a discussion thread on Islet.org that had patients who used insulin analogues and developed cancer. Why must your company keep changing your products? It's tough enough for my patients to live with diabetes. Constantly introducing and pulling insulins doesn't make my job, or my patients lives, any easier! In med school - insulin was insulin. How many times can you reinvent the wheel?"
Pharma rep replies, "Well, we know our manipulation of insulin may cause complications. You can't please everybody. Off the record -- we need to please our investors…the patients are secondary. That's just the nature of the beast. Death or complications - those are the options we face as a pharmaceutical developer. We can treat your patients with insulin analogues that may cause more complications BUT…complications are par for the course. We've discussed this before. Don't you remember? There is no room for growth (and profitability) if we stick with plain old insulin. Let's be honest, doc. We're not making money by protecting people with diabetes from complications. We're making money by developing new drugs and new revenue models. Speaking of - did you enjoy Hawaii?"
Doctor replies, "Yes, it was beautiful. It saddens me to learn the nature of your business. However -- I guess it's all about give and take. My patients come to me. I give them samples. They take it. I suppose you're right - the complications have been around for centuries. If only we could use modern day technology to reproduce the safer insulins of days gone by. I rarely see a "Honeymoond Period" in my newly diagnosed Type 1s these days. Something about diabetes treatment seems to be catalyzing the destruction of beta cells these days. Whatever it is -- it's causing the rate of diabetes complications to rise with reckless abandon. No sense in bucking the system as long as you've got something I can prescribe to treat complications, right? Speaking of... how about funding C-peptide trials to reverse complications for my patients? Like I said before - the level of complications these days is exponential compared to when I first began my practice in 1972. My patients are doing their best to control their sugars - but the complications seem to keep unmercifully affecting them. I've heard some remarkable results were seen out of Karolinska Hospital, in Sweden. Your company is enormous. Why not fund these trials here in the United States?Pharma rep replies, "Oh THAT! Our company has decided not to pursue that route. We understand Type 2s don't have a C-peptide problem."
Doctor replies, "Actually, they do. Type 2 patients have microvascular and macrovascular problems that are mitigated by efficient absorbption of C-peptide. Dana Spence PhD, and Anders Sima PhD, have been advocating the vital importance of C-peptide to both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. In fact the protection C-peptide provides people with diabetes may be the Holy Grail of overcoming complications caused by the disease! Your company does not realize..."
Pharma rep fervently interrupts, "We have DRUGS to treat those conditions. I'll leave you samples. Now about lunch for the office next week -- how does Chinese sound?"
- From blame to understanding - moving diabetes care forward
- "Diabetes Health article: Can Insulin Cause Cancer?
- The Islet.org discussion on Can Insulins cause cancer? Lantus and Analogs
- HowStuffWorks defines a revenue model: various revenue streams your business will be putting in place and how each will bring in money
- A Role For C-Peptide: Peptide formed during insulin production facilitates glucose clearance and may benefit diabetic patients
- Karolinska Hospital studies in more than 400 type 1 diabetes patients have demonstrated encouraging nerve and kidney efficacy data.
- Your Diabetes May Vary: C-peptide (and a wee rant)
Please help fund the mission of "Allies Voice" and checkout our featured sponsors. Disclaimer: These ads may not reflect the opinion of "Allies Voice" however these click-through ads PAY for "Allies Voice" to blogcast LOUD AND CLEAR (and free!)
Hi Allie,
If a company came out with a line of insulin products that were shown to be safer for insulin users than the existing analogs, I would be rushing to invest in that company at the ground floor. Think of it this way, if you had a chance to invest in Whole Foods when they first started and you had the insight to realize that people will want more organic and natural products, wouldn't you want to be one of the pioneers with them?
Best,
cashpotato
Reply to this
I believe that anybody with diabetes who must use insulin would want the safest, most pure, and most natural source of insulin they can access. I think the urgency and unmet need of such insulin is on the horizon of being met -- with affordability and superior quality control!
Reply to this
I started out on Animal-derived Insulin that did have C-peptide contained in it. At that time, I was able to feel on-coming Hypoglycemia,
I no longer am able to sense Hypoglycemia. Whether that is due to the removal of C-peptide in today's Insulin analogue or/and the longevity of T1DM, I do not know.
However, after reading many papers in research journals on C-peptide, I remain convinced that the removal of it, has exacerbated the Complication known as Hypoglycemia Unawareness.
Logically, wouldn't yet another avenue of Pharmaceutical Profitability be in the creation of a separate vial of C-peptide and then market this *new drug* "that is a benefit to T1DM" to Physicians and Patients? If the answer is yes.......then do it!!
Reply to this
If the answer is yes -- and they finally acknowledge that C-peptide was known about since the 60s-70s... it looks like more a crime than a profitable drug. Think of the hundreds of millions it's cost the workforce and government plans (medicare/medicaid) in treating complications of diabetes. If I was part of the government -- I'd be suing the Big Pharmaceutical companies for remuneration to what they've done to people with insulin-dependent diabetes and goverment budgets!
Reply to this
The bigger question is what Col. Eli Lilly would think? I suspect he would not be would be pleased with how the company has behaved over the past 30 years in particular, but now the company is reaping what it has sewn ... with its share of the market having plunged so rapidly as the company ignored the insulin biz as they chased blockbusters ... today I posted something about the new strategy, but I think they'll need more than some fancy pens to stop the bleeding!
Reply to this
The manufacture of new Insulin Pens is like what Gilette Razor Company does with razors.......coming out with a new one each couple of years. Totally Unnecessary!! Just stick with a reliable Insulin Pen such as NovoPen and use all the remaining R&D Dollars for something *truly beneficial* like C-peptide Vials for T1DM!!
Reply to this
I started on the Animal Beef-Pork mixed and tried the Humlin and Humlogs insulin for only 9 months and went back to the animal and I will stay on it unitl it is my day to die. Because if I use another insulin my life will be a living hell. I feel so sorry for the next generation of diabetics who have to inject themselves with this stuff. Animal Insulin is by far the safest and best for most Diabetics but guess what a higher profit margin is with the Humilins and Humalogs and why is it that they change every year or two now. Why. All any Diabetic needs is a good source of insulin that allows them to live a reasonable quality of life and today I do not believe most Diabetics have that anymore. I so sorry and I would have never believed that this day would ever come but come it did. Good night and good luck.
Reply to this
.
What is GLUCAGONIC and INSULINIC training ...HOW ?
.
.
.
Glucagonic activity Cures HYPOglycemia & Relative HYPO-glycemia Distress "RHOD" ...HOW ?
.
.
Glucagonic activity is the release of endogenous glucose from glycogen stores including the brain & liver and the generation of 'new glucose' from non-sugar carbon substrates like pyruvate, lactate, glycerol, and glucogenic amino acids.
The vast majority of Glucagonic activity takes place in the liver and, to a smaller extent, in the cortex of kidneys. This Glucagonic process occurs during periods of INTERMITTENT... fasting, starvation, or intense exercise and is highly endergonic.
Glucagonic activity is often associated with ketosis.
.
.
Insulin inhibits Glucagonic activity.
video >
www.NicholasDynesGracey.blogspot.cOM/2008/03/what-is-glucagonic-and-insulinic.html
< video
Hi AnyOne, also re HYPOglycemia-Distress ... WHAT DO YOU DO or WHAT SHOULD YOU DO or WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST FOR every day 'FITTENING' the HUMAN BODY'S CAPACITY for NATURAL GlucoNeoGenesis ?
…Warm thanks & Adrenalin Love
Nick Gracey, BSc(Hons) Medical Biochemistry, Birmingham University, UK, WATerian (C) TUE.18.MAR.2008 @ 12:40hrs c/o www.LoveDiabetes.cOM & www.HYPO-thesis.cOM
.
'The Gracey HYPO=thesis' for the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes... www.1MealEveryDay.cOM
CURE auto-immunity [100pc Fresh Organic Raw Liquidiet]... www.LIQUIDarian.cOM
CURE diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2guhfd CURED diabetes ... www.tinyurl.com/yno298
PREVENT ... HYPOglycemia-Unawareness (HOU)... www.tinyurl.com/2hht4z
PREVENT ... Relative-HYPERglycemia-Distress (RHRD)... www.tinyurl.com/ynpp4g
PROVIDE ... Relative-NormoGlycemia (RNG)... www.tinyurl.com/3bcn7j
Eat not less but less OFTEN... www.Intermittent-Fasting.cOM
Eating less OFTEN is profoundly more healthy than eating less... www.tinyurl.com/299t3f
Eating too OFTEN sustains & CAUSES all diabetes... www.tinyurl.com/2j7p3t
PROTECT from HYPERglycemia-Dehydration-Coma (HRDC)... www.tinyurl.com/2mcyx6 &
...from HYPOglycemia-Distress-coma (HODC) ... FOR Liquidiet... www.tinyurl.com/2ohk2a
Diabetes is NOT a disease ... www.tinyurl.com/2uxb99 ... diabetes is the CURE...
...for ... Relative-HYPOglycemia-Distress (RHOD)... www.tinyurl.com/36qxn3
Eating-less-OFTEN-Fasting-more-OFTEN-Loving-more-OFTEN ... www.CELIBATOR.cOM
http://www.DiabetesHealth.cOM/read/2007/11/29/5564.html#comments
AdrenaLINE... www.1MealPerDay.cOM ..."Lovingly-I-Fast-Every-23hrs-45mins-OrMore"
.
Reply to this
Why do all your post seem to repeat the same propaganda you promote? Your post is off topic. Is it your underhanded way of getting to post links back to your website to get free traffic and improve your SEO (Search Engine Optimization)?
We've all read your propaganda that you post ON EVERY BLOG whether it is on topic or not. By now, it's become SPAM on the board.
Get on topic or get off the board.
Reply to this
You are correct. Allie should Filter/Delete that Junk which just occupies space and is un-readable/non-relevant.
Reply to this
$elf Interest -- or DIABETIC APARTHEID or -- "Junk which just occupies space and is un-readable/non-relevant"
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/03/17/allies-voice-the-sale-of-the-century-how-did-they-do-it.aspx#comment-902182
BetterCell wrote:
You already know this Allie, that MANY people with IRD(aka Type 2 Diabetes) do not or are unwilling to make the necessary Lifestyle changes that will correct a faulty nutritional pattern, lack of exercise and positive thinking that will enable them NOT to be on any Insulin.
In addition, I have just seen a video on a Medical Website that is "promoting" the use of Insulin for IRD(Type 2 Diabetes). After-all, isn't it just so much easier to take a shot of Insulin with a sharp needle that you will not feel than to stop eating all those carbs and continue to sit on your overweight buttocks while watching TV? LOL
http://alliesvoice.com/2007/12/14/allies-voice-bushs-remarks-after-the-1214-cabinet-meeting.aspx#comment-710995
In my opinion the negative words above amount to 'DIABETIC APARTHEID' -- or 'worse' ... in any event they elicited this response which is either true or false --
"I see more abuse of diet from Type 1's because they know that all they have to do is 'shot' a little extra."
Russell Scott wrote:
I guess I must not be the normal Type 2. I have lost 37 lbs since my diagnosis and have gone from a 1 mile walk to 5 miles a day. I am still FAT but have a plan in place to loose what I need to. I just had my ENDO appointment and my A1C is now 5.3, never prescribed insulin. I am LOW carbing on the Dr. Richard Bernstein's diet. Your comments upset me. I am 61 and fighting very hard to get to a point that I may be just diet exercise and an oral med. I see more abuse of diet from Type 1's because they know that all they have to do is 'shot' a little extra.
http://alliesvoice.com/2007/12/14/allies-voice-bushs-remarks-after-the-1214-cabinet-meeting.aspx#comment-716980
Nicholas Dynes Gracey wrote:
Yes BetterCell's comment, whilst funny, is completely out-of-order. All jokes are negative. Both type 2 Diabetics & pregnant Women are prescribed GM insulin for, substantially the same, entirely QUESTIONABLE reason ... ie lowering plasma blood glucose [PBG].
http://alliesvoice.com/2007/12/14/allies-voice-bushs-remarks-after-the-1214-cabinet-meeting.aspx#comment-718802
Nick Gracey's comments have been 'consistent' for months. There's been no sudden change in style on his part. Of course his ongoing objective is to promote the www.HYPO-thesis.cOM and since I began understanding that HYPO=thesis better I've been assisting with that -- its called collaboration and respect for the information that I continue to learn from his work (no money has changed hands). Allie appears to have entered into a similar agreement. (Apparently the legal terms are "implied agreement" and "non-censorship")
Lovingly,
Mollie, WATerian
www.LIFE2345.cOM
Reply to this
Nick has relentlessly and consistently self-promoted his websites and his propaganda. Allie and the rest of the members have tolerated that for the sake of "non-censorship." "Mollie" has also followed in promoting the same propaganda and has likewise been tolerated. Once again, you polluted your latest response with several links back to Nick's websites. hmmm... Are Nick and Mollie one person? Or do they have the same motivations? Either way, you are abusing this board.
You have no legal agreement with Allie. Your are a GUEST at her website. Just like being a guest at someone's house, you must respect your host and their other guests or leave. Why is that so hard to understand?
PLEASE STOP ASSAULTING THE REST OF US WITH YOUR PROPAGANDA!!!!
Stay on topic or get off the board. Simple.
"Everyone Else Reading This Blog"
Reply to this
I'd have to agree. Nick, Mollie, please get on topic, stop cutting and pasting, and write in complete sentences to make your points. Your input could be valued and appreciated. As it is, it's largely, if not primarily, not. Is this your goal? What is it, exactly, that you're after through your participation in this blog? To annoy? Fight? Offend? Anger? Vent? Mislead? Injure? Life's too short as it is.
Kelly
Reply to this
"INSULIN INHIBITS GLUCAGONIC ACTIVITY"
As per usual with Nick Gracey's comments/video -- the issue that "Insulin inhibits Glucagonic activity" is entirely relevant to this 'INSULIN-TREATMENT' topic.
A number of comments made via www.LoveDiabetes.cOM appear to demonstrate a substantial lack of understanding between the difference between "glycogen" and "glucagon".
Allie states "...I'm insatiably curious how pharmaceutical reps work their magic..." and in association with answering that question it is reasonable to raise the relatively NEW issue of 'Glucagonic activity' --
The ability to produce glucagon is NOT "magic" -- nor is 'CENSORING' the "glucagon" word from virtually every discussion about 'treatment' with Non-Human-Insulin "NHI" -- but it is an 'illusion' and it is "curious" WHY there appears to be so many negative fingers pointed at 'entrepreneurial pharmaceutical companies' rather than MD's who purport to have made 'Hippocratic type declarations' to protect their patients EG -- from suppression of GLUCAGON production by way of inappropriate prescribing/dosage recommendations of Non-Human-Insulin "NHI" -- from whatever Non-Human source.
Discussing alternative treatments without even mentioning GLUCAGON -- INSULIN 'interactions' is beyond wrong.
Negative comments made again and again, over and over, at LoveDiabetes.cOM, about 'free enterprising companies' do not assist with working out the CAUSE & CURE of diabetes unless those negative comments are redirected towards a reasonable ALTERNATIVE diabetes related HYPO=thesis.
It is reasonably foreseeable from reading the extraordinary 'breakthrough' at www.HYPO-thesis.cOM that the likely degree to which any inappropriate dosage of Non-Human-Insulin "NHI" suppresses 'Glucagonic activity' -- is directly relevant to increased levels of HYPOglycemia Unawareness "HOU".
www.BetterCell.blogspot.com/2007/11/first-aid-at-whole-foods.html
"Insulin inhibits Glucagonic activity" -- and when you watch the cited 'glucagon/insulin interaction VIDEO' it is reasonably foreseeable that every time blood glucose is rapidly reduced by Non-Human-Insulin "NHI" there is a loss of Glucagonic activity and a loss of the 'skill' of responding to Relative HYPOglycemia Distress "RHOD" -- and the subsequent diabetes that you allegedly seek to CURE is so obviously (I believe) perpetuated.
http://alliesvoice.com/2008/01/22/allies-voice-could-delta-force-explain-diabetes.aspx#comment-787097
A lot less negative comments and a little more gratitude for such profound insight into a cogent HYPO=thesis for the cause & cure of diabetes would be far more productive -- and given the obvious DAILY support that Nick Gracey has given to LoveDiabetes.cOM (?) since its inception -- the 'anonymous' comment, clearly lacking in love, by "Everyone Else Reading This Blog!" is substantially 'out of order' -- at the very least.
Lovingly,
Mollie, WATerian
www.LIFE2345.cOM
Reply to this
Mollie aka Nick,
Please, we're begging you to STOP SPAMMING THIS SITE!!!
What part of EVERYONE getting tired of re-reading your obscene attempt for free publicity, traffic and attention are you not getting.
Nick has a theory. Woohoo! We read about it. Some agree. Some disagree. We don't need to hear about it over and over and over. And, we don't need to see the incessant links back to all of Nick's websites.
Allie knows very well who "Everyone Else Reading This Blog" is and why I am on this site. Yes, I have several websites I could blatantly promote with every off the subject remark I decide to post. But, I prefer not to do so for the integrity of the site.
So, as I said before, stay on the topic or get off the blog. And yes, I can make that happen too.
"Everyone Else Reading This Blog"
Reply to this
A Taiwanese man weighing over 300 kilograms (660 pounds) lies on the floor of his home in Hsinchu. A Japanese study has shown that men who sleep fewer than five hours a night run greater risks of becoming obese and of having high levels of blood sugar that could lead to diabetes. (AFP/sam yeh
Get more sleep BirdBeak!!
Reply to this
Hello all,
I've read multiple accusations that Nick, Mollie and Bird54 are one in the same person. I was skeptical at first, but in looking at Mollie's post on this blog, she signed it:
"Lovingly,
Mollie
www.LIFE2345.cOM"
The website is Nick's. It appears Nick forgot who he was when he wrote this one. Allie - if you can, would you kindly confirm or deny that these two people are one in the same? It really does diminish the integrity of your blog if people pull crap like this. It'd be nice to know who we're talking with.
Thanks,
Kelly
Reply to this
Hey Kelly, Sarah, BetterCell and everybody reading "Allies Voice" -- I've notified Nick if he is deceiving the board by posting as alter-ego(s) -- I will ban him. I agree with the sentiments that deceitful alter egos damage the integrity of the board. I will NOT allow this to continue. Furthermore, I requested (many times) that he cease his campaign of curing diabetes. Intermittent fasting is fine but NO CURE for diabetes. Water is great for hydration, but again – no cure for diabetes. I apologize to EVERYBODY for any inconvenience his comments have caused. He/she and it have been put ON NOTICE.
Reply to this
Don't you wonder HOW doctors were influenced . . . and by whom? I have read other blogs (and books) that indicate doctors DO actually take a course in ethics during med school. Interestingly, a survey (not recent, mind you) showed that when asked if s/he (the doctor being questioned) would be influenced by perks/favors, most stated emphatically, "I would not." But when asked about their peers, they were largely skeptical that their peers had such a high moral/ethical standard . . . and felt that a large number of peers WOULD be prey to industry influence. Did the individual respondents not recognize that THEY were held in equal regard by THEIR peers? Astonishing, isn't it, that these highly moral/ethical deliverers of healthcare are in fact influenced by financial perks, and yet cannot understand why their prestige is diminishing. Isn't their anger at patients who now challenge them (physicians), or who ask to actively participate in decisions that affect their health misplaced? Simplistically, doctors are either part of the solution (better healthcare, more affordable healthcare, unbiased decision-making), or they are part of the problem.
Reply to this
A few months ago, I visited a new endocrinologist, hoping he'd be able to answer my specific research-oriented questions about which immunological tests to take, if any, to determine if what I'm doing is improving my condition. He was clueless on answering any of my questions, but very good in that he told me I was talking to the wrong person (this was a first for me, no small hurdle for any doctor to admit.) Then he referred me to two researcher scientists.
What was unique about this appointment, and eye opening for me, was that he educated me in that doctors are clinicians. Their job is to distribute the information and drugs they have and they experiment with people and drugs all the time. Doctors don't by and large have the time or inclination to read the research. Their days are crammed with 15 minute over-scheduled appointments. They get their information by and large from other doctors, networking and pharmaceutical reps.
So here's the thing - while I was in his office, not one but TWO pharmaceutical reps dropped by with their "goodie bags" of free drug samples to drop off to him. I witnessed the drop off, which was much akin to a drug peddler on the street handing out his drug bags, just better clothes. There was no unbiased research in the goodie bag, just the drugs, there for the doctor to "distribute" as he or she saw fit. Another doctor/friend of mine talked to me about how strong the pressure was for them to switch people from animal insulins to GE synthetic. Looking back at the research now, it was performed by the drug companies and biased.
My point is: it's caveat emptor - let the buyer beware. The only ones doing the preaching are the drug companies and they pay big money to be the loudest megaphone on the block. No one's fighting back or protecting the patients. The doctors aren't doing the research, they're distributors of the products. If they step outside the "standard of care" - what other doctors in their community are doing - even if they're doing the best evidence-based care, they can still be held liable in a court of law if something goes wrong. If they practice the standard of care, even if it's non-evidence based care and sub-standard care and something goes wrong, they won't be held liable. So what are they going to do? Protect their patients or themselves?
Ultimately, the responsibility is ours to protect ourselves. Do you take the drug or don't you?
Long story short: Once I understood this, I fired my endocrinologist. I don't want what he's selling. It isn't evidence-based. BetterCell is right. We're our own best doctor.
Kelly
Reply to this
So - a question. Who are the lemmings? Doctors who mindlessly accept and distribute the drugs they get from the pharmaceutical reps, patients who mindlessly take the drugs without doing their own research, the drug company reps who do whatever they can do to get product placement or the drug companies who continually make new products to improve company profits and please investors (many of whom are the patients)?
It'd be really nice to be able to abdicate responsibility so we can blame somebody else - the doctors, the reps or the pharmaceutical companies - but ultimately, the responsibility of what we put into our bodies is still ours and the responsibility to demand better products or the old ones is still ours.
The question is: what do we do to advocate for and get what we want? And like Allie's earlier post - what is it that we want?
Kelly
Reply to this
Hi Kelly....
Doctors have been part of a system that is almost "locked-in," to keep the door open to Pharmaceutical Reps. This has been going on since they were Medical Students and invited to *Educational Lectures* sponsored by a Pharmaceutical Company whereby free lunch and pens would be made available. Who could pass that up, particularly if you were a "poor(financial) student" as well as hungry from not having time to eat? In addition, they (Pharmaceutical Reps) were dispensing an up-to-date seminar on a new drug for a *popular-existing disease*
As future Clinicians, it becomes your responsibility to know what is and will be available in the tools category to deal with Illness/Disease.
In addition, as a licensed Physician, you are expected to earn on-going credits for lectures attended related to Medicine.
The important point to remember, is that not all pharmaceuticals are bad. The ones coming from China and India that go into the production of Generic Drugs(Heparin) and are contaminated are bad. This is a case where everyone is responsible for providing a much needed drug to the Market-Place whereby it is used in Dialysis and Cardio-vasular Medicine. Here is an example where the source of the chemical/s wants to save money, the manufacturer wants to save money and the patient wants to save money. It then becomes a source where saving/making money becomes more important than the safety of the patient☜Bad Medicine.
The ethical Physician will always tell their patient that there is a risk/benefit equation involved with the taking of any pharmaceutical.
The patient has the responsibility to keep his/her Body as healthy as possible by incorporating a Lifestyle that will promote that in order to not only *feel good,* but to possibly prevent Illness.
The Physician has the responsibility to correctly diagnose his/her patient and provide all the information and available medications to that patient so as to *cure,* alleviate or manage the Disease/Illness. This entails making sure that the patient knows the effect of the medication that will be administered and the risk-benefit involved.
What lays between these two groups, are the Traditional Healers that will use Body Movement/Herbs/Phytopharmaceuticals/Chants/
Meditation and more for the "Integrity of The Body as a Whole Unit."
Reply to this
Kelly,
I’m laughing out loud thinking about your comment on lemmings. Immediately I was thinking of the FedEx commercial: lemmings / leaders. That’s a great one! In addition – I love the “Bill...you have no idea where China is, do you?” LoL – another great one depicting how clueless some people (with gainful employment) are when it comes to their job!
Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeOkx0q1qFs
Reply to this
Kelly--
I couldn't agree more with your conclusions. But . . . with a long memory . . . I remember when doctors were only a step below "God" in the order of things .. . and we abdicated our responsibility BECAUSE of the expertise, knowledge, education represented by those initials, "M.D." In short, we trusted them; and at the time (again, I use my long memory here), they DID place patients before profits, and did the best they could with the available tools.
As you so appropriately point out, doctoring is now a 'business', merely hiding behind the label of professionalism. But, consider too, that many patients do not have the wherewithal--the knowledge, education, or access to scientific literature--to look after their own best interests. Our frantic society, demanding a pill for this and a pill for that, seeking immediate results, is unwilling or unable to do their own research (though it appears more and more are finding the time/resources.)
There's plenty of blame to spread around (doctors, pharma, educators, individual, societal) . . . and like you, I think many of us are hoping or expecting a leader to step forward. In the meantime, your advice is well-intended and should be well-heeded.
Reply to this
Kelly--
A further consideration on where to apportion blame: whatever prescription drug enters a patient's body CANNOT do so with participation by a prescribing physician. The blame should be placed at the feet of doctors who do not honor their oath, "Above all else, do no harm." They abdicated their responsibility to know everything possible about a patient and a drug, before introducing the two.
If doctors in the early 1980s had listened to the patients complaining about rDNA insulin and expanded this information one step further to consult with their colleagues and mount a response to the insulin cartel, maybe, at the very least, we would have freedom of choice of insulins as well as MORE choices. What was noted by the insulin cartel as business decisions based on 'unpopularity' of some insulins was thinly disguised propaganda used to validate their streamlining and profit maximization.
The answer is in the question: Who sold us out? Who had the ONLY direct one-on-one interface with the patient? Who had the opportunity and the obligation to hear patients?
Reply to this
Hello all,
The thing that kicks me is that the whole concept of "informed consent" is utterly b.s. Had my doctor truly laid out the risks, benefits and alternatives, including the alternative of doing nothing and taking a wait and see approach - I wouldn't be having this discussion at all. I would have opted for a drug I had already taken or opted for none. I wouldn't have taken a new chemo drug (literally) that made me hyperglycemic and seemingly necessitating treatment. And I wouldn't have then taken exogenous insulin that kept me there.
The whole concept of "above all, do no harm" is nice in theory, but it isn't what they practice here in the U.S. Western medicine practices "anti-precautionary" medicine, i.e. a new wonder drug or technology comes out and they experiment with it on people until it's proven unsafe, not the other way around as it should be. There are so many examples of this that it makes your head spin (e.g. Cytotec, Vioxx, Xrays on pregnant women). It still seems to me like everyone's asleep at the wheel - except the pharmaceutical and technology marketers, who are taking all of us to the bank, as long as they can keep us alive.
It seems to me that the U.S. government ought to have a strong patient advocacy hand in here. In the U.K., when the insulin manufacturers tried to stop producing animal insulins, the U.K. government stepped in and said "no". There was a huge outcry there and the result is clear - they still have animal insulin production. Here in the U.S. though, we rolled over - all of us. There was no organized outcry. Why? Are we all so hypnotized to believe that the newest, latest and greatest high tech gizmo is always the best? And how do we as a community change the direction of this boat?
Kelly
Reply to this
Hi Kelly....The American Diabetes Association and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International were the organizations to *step-in* and prevent the elimination of Animal-Derived Insulin.
After all, aren't they suppose to represent us?
Where were they?
Ans. In the Hands of the Pharmaceutical Industry!!
Reply to this
Better Cell:
You've got ONE answer RIGHT. Now the more important question is . . . how do WE make a difference? Answer: Advocate, educate, write letters to . . . your elected representatives, the heads of ADA and JDRF, and most importantly--your doctor. (Hint: You may get fired by the latter if you advocate too strongly.)
The following is my most recent contact with ADA. Granted, I would probably get more flies with honey than with vinegar . . . but after years of trying to enlist support or get off their list, I felt it was time to 'vent.'
ADA--To Whom It May Concern:
I am returning your nickel and want you to remove my name from your mailing list. Please consider that if you had saved the bulk-mailing cost for this letter, you would have had a few more nickels to “find a cure for diabetes.”
In fact, any group that has done such a poor job of finding a cure for diabetes over the many past decades should probably cease operation. At the present time, you are nothing more than a “shill” for the pharmaceutical industry and ancillary businesses that prey on the diabetic population. Your emphasis on “education” is also nothing more than a ruse. All you really do is “educate” diabetics to patronize your corporate sponsors.
The enclosed letter is only your latest attempt to fraudulently elicit contributions from me. I will consider any further contact by you as harassment and proof that your charitable efforts are akin to fraud/false claims and specifically target vulnerable individuals like myself who has been diabetic for over 50 years.
What gives you the right to harass me, use my disease as a tool for extortion, and accept money in my behalf from gullible people and corporate sponsors when you have no intention of ever finding a cure.
Reply to this
Well-said Melody.
The ADA has become an Entity onto itself, and just like any other corporation it seeks the goodwill of those that will continue to support it financially and publicly by providing favorable articles written on its behalf as well as the *endorsement* of people w/Diabetes(mostly Type 2 Diabetes) so as to stay relevant in the eyes of the people around it, while making more $$ to further itself rather than the people it should represent.
Pure Marketing genius.
People such as yourself, me and many others who are able to think for themselves and are not "Sheeple" are often "pushed to the side" so as to stay non-relevant.
Reply to this
Wow. BetterCell, Melody - you're both absolutely right. BetterCell - what's amazing to me is that I have never thought of either the ADA or JDRF as advocacy groups. It didn't dawn on me that they should be! The ADA strikes me as a be-happy "semi-educational" group only; the JDRF as a research organization. Although I've sent money to the JDRF numerous times, I throw away anything I see from the ADA immediately and with what borders on disgust, sight unseen. I can't stand the whole mentality they have of accepting this dis-ease into my life and being happy about it. And Melody - here you're tackling the ADA to hold them accountable for what they should be doing. You're right - and the anger is warranted. They're not serving the needs of patients, they're serving the needs of the pharmaceutical industry to promote their products. There needs to be a whole new advocacy organization whose intent it is to forward unbiased research, advocate for patient rights, promote evidence-based education, and protect against pharmaceutical marketing might through governmental action and lobbying. That's food for thought under my cap. Thanks for your posts.
Kelly
Reply to this
Hi Kelly, BetterCell, and Melody - I agree with all of you! I remember hearing about the cure for type 1 diabetes was just around the corner. Now, that was 29 years ago! Unfortunately,
some people and/or organizations do not want a cure. I fired my endo a long time ago, mentally buried all of this negative diabetes stuff and moved forward. I am so happy I did, since every year I get healthier and continue to reduce my insulin. Thanks for sharing everyone! Happy Easter, Julie
Reply to this
Melody,
Wow! What a great letter. I DO NOT support these organizations. I only support my own business (Diabetes Done Right) which helps children and adults mentally bury diabetes (all of the negative stuff) so they can live a happy and healthy life. I believe they deserve the BEST!!
Thanks for stating the truth.
Julie
Reply to this
By the way, Great piece Allie. It was a treat to read.
Kelly
Reply to this