Re article:Don't become a victim of medical marketing

[sahuaro]

This is in response to the article posted by Harrison in the Article Library. As a very grateful patient of Dr. Regan, as a wife of a physician and as an office mate of a psychiatrist, I find this article to be utterly offensive.
No doubt that there are physicians whose decisions are too influenced by drug and device companies but to defame any physician who sees a drug or device rep is to go too far. Where do you think all those free samples from your doc comes from?
And we all know that Ms. Lewis should have educated herself and sought second--and third--opinions.

[ZorroSF]

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.

[Cirobi]

I was going to reply yesterday and even had a post typed up but decided to think on it some more rather than emotionally react as I'm very apt to do.

Overall I agree with sahuaro's reaction because I don't think the article was very tastefully done. With as widely spread a problem this is, they use Dr. Regan's name profusely as if to slander him. There are plenty of other doctors tied in with various medical companies including my own according to other articles that have been found and posted as FYI material. Unfortunately Dr. Regan was used as the example in this article.

I believe that the overall idea of the article was to urge patients to take more care in their own health care processes. This is an action that many of us are and have been attempting to do as we go through our back pain adventures. All too often patients don't take the time to actively participate in their own health and instead just throw it in the hands of an imperfect stranger. I phrased it that way because our doctors aren't superheros. Yes, they are specialized and trained in their artforms/sciences but they are human and they do make mistakes from time to time. I think this can go not only for back patients but for other orthopedic patients.

After my initial reads of that article, I thought only on the side sahuaro points out, but after some thought time... I do sympathize to an extent with the article. We just have to be careful and not assume we can be 100% cured with a single procedure. It's possible but not probable in most cases. I also think that in most cases, our doctors are trying to do their best for us, but they are not immune to mistakes either. Seeing as how humans are imperfect beings to begin with, no matter how much one attempts to be ethical there are always stumbling blocks one can trip over. While this is not an acceptable excuse by any means, it is a fact of life that has to be faced.

Now, the FDA... an organization that's supposed to be for our protection... that is a completely different issue and not one I wish to vent about at the moment. The more I find out about certain things involving the government, the more angry I get so I'm going to avoid thinking about it at the moment since I have a bunch of things to get back to for work!

~Sara

[Toebin]

Actually I don't see anything wrong with the article as posted .. and I appreciate that this forum is open minded enough to post not only the good but the bad in our little medical circle.

Yes the article in question brings up a name of a well known giant in back surgery, but his name really means nothing to me.. I have never had any dealings with him..and have just heard his name on these forums.. However it does point out that MD's are as human as you and I.. and they do fall victim to marketing schemes as well... after all they might still be altruistic enough to care about their patients, but the bottom line is also financial for them. They too are out for the big bucks and an early retirement.

I've had relatives who were drug reps and device reps and the amount of greed and graft in this area is HUGE...

I think the article is good in the fact that it points out to US the patient.. buyer beware.... just like anything else in our lives..

Unfortunately many citizens still feel their physicians are only out for their best interests.. and sadly that is not always the case.

With the amount of bad responses we have seen here regarding disc replacement therapy I believe the field is in it's infancy and many guidelines still need to be developed and FOLLOWED for the proper selection of ADR candidates. It's just another tool for a doc to use, but not always the best option depending on the patient and the medical condition involved.

I actually thank my lucky stars that I DID NOT get an ADR with my surgery. The last words my surgeon told me before they put me under was.. "I will do what ever is best for YOU" and I truly feel the fusion I received was THE BEST choice for me...

Of course I have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.

[JeffreyD]

I believe the field is in it's infancy

That's a 20+ year old infant, mind you.

-Jeff