Well I think we here at ADR support haven't even read that article until you posted your reply. Just look at the number of reviews and also pay attention that we didn't write that article, a journalist did. It's a very important article for both doctors and patients. The overall point is for the patient to take their medical care into their own hands because more often than not doctors won't. I for one can empathize with the patient in question because I too have undergone the same procedure only to find out I was never a candidate.
Your point of corporate/doctor relationships is valid. I would go so far as to say the FDA has failed us time and time again. However if you noticed an article I posted about the courts finally catching up to this behaviour, we the patients factually have a valid point.
http://adrsupport.org/eve/forums/a/t...1/m/2231071813
I believe what we advocate here is that 50% of success and failures are the patient's responsibility and the other 50% is the doctor's. In my case I jumped into getting surgery and the doctor had no problem giving me what I wanted. I didn't even doc shop around to find the response I wanted. 2 doctors recommended a disc and 2 others were leaning towards a fusion, but wouldn't give me a proper response. Afterwards 1 year later most doctors agreed I should never have received the ADR, as I was never a proper candidate due to scoliosis and facet degeneration. Where The F#%* was the FDA to oversee or prevent that kind of outcome? Not to mention there's no recourse because corporations have rigged the justice system against the patients if any recourse is requested.
I blame the system. I think there are great surgeons/doctors out there, but there are more than plenty of ignorant one's too. I don't follow the philisophy that the general population should be the guinnea pigs for invasive surgeries or drugs. I think there needs to be a system based on consensus between the doctors, FDA and PT's. I also believe the results need to be displayed by a gov't oversight agency instead of the corporations who manufacture the devices and take zero responsibilty when things go wrong.
Face it, we live in a corporatocracy. Doctors are going to make more money off corporations than they will the cash paying public. They are therefore more persuaded to follow the protocols setup by the corporate influenced FDA and insurance companies rather than patient advocate groups. I'm not saying doctors are heartless, but it is very common to see stories here where the doctors have shirked any responsibility towards the patients after a worse than expected outcome.
For better oversight and tougher requirements placed on doctors before they prescribe a therapy, I think we can all agree that doctors wouldn't need the outrageous litigous insurance they have to carry these days. Both sides would feel much more comfortable in their decision making processes.
With all the failures of prescribing bad medications and improper operations abounding in numbers, we all need to take a step back and fix the system from the ground up before the large conglomerate corporations make it impossible for us to receive the proper treatment. Right where it stands we can either accept the doctors' corporate influenced treatment, or we can die a slow death.
I for one don't feel those should be the only decisions offered to us in an industrialized country.