It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


MIRAPEX for RLS: Another Case of the Cure Being Worse than the Ailment?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 11:14 AM
My usage of the term horse apples comes from my dad's description of horse droppings - it was a joke. Please forgive my lame attempts at humor - another defense mechanism, just this side of sarcasm and ridicule. I had no idea there was an actual fruit known as horse apples, or hedge balls, for that matter. ROTFL!

Seriously though, I have heard that alfalfa pills help relieve the joint pain caused by arthritis.

My comments about the FDA stem from the whole controversy surrounding approval of the so called "morning after pill", as well as the approval, removal, and reinstatement of Vioxx. Imo, the FDA has become so politicized and beholden to big pharma that its effectiveness as an oversight body has been effectively compromised.

FDA Politicized

Would you care to comment on this quote from member annestacey?

The most important thing is stay away from chemicals. Don't eat processed food. Don't drink beverages or water with added chemicals. Don't use personal care products with chemicals. Chemicals are dangerous. They cause the majority of the illnesses in our society today.

Would you agree that Western medicine is preoccupied with treating symptoms with pills, and fails to diagnose or outright ignores underlying causes?

You have to admit that curing illnesses is bad for business in the medical professions, don't you?

[edit on 31-8-2007 by Icarus Rising]

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by otherhalf

I know a lot of people have found relief through acupuncture, hypnosis, and other means. Too bad these methods aren't more accepted, especially by insurance companies.

This goes a long way toward supporting my belief that the insurance companies are in collusion with mainstream medicine to maximize profits by limiting access to treatments that will actually cure ailments.

Thank you otherhalf for your contributions to this thread. You are not off topic, you are providing perspective.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 12:04 PM
I thought you were actually being serious talking about Hedge Balls from the Osage Orange tree. Those trees are quite common in this part of the U.S. and are usually used in Hedge tree rows to protect from the wind, and were particularly used in the 1930's during the dust bowl to help prevent against wind erosion.

To cover a few of your points:

1. I agree with Annestacey somewhat in the basic premise of her argument, but speaking from a scientific point of view current research shows that many chemicals display positive attributes to human health. While I agree that some chemicals have a negative impact on human physiology, I don't see much evidence to conclude that they all do. In fact, there are some synthetic chemicals found in medicine that have a better physiological effect than many natural ones. On top of this the human body has the amazing ability to filter out a great deal of chemicals that are consumed on a regular basis, and many of the chemicals you or I consume are not able to pass through cellular membranes which almost negates any potential risk.

2. I understand people's frustrations with the FDA, but I cannot comment on anything more than the research and science behind the approval process. I try not to get too involved in the politics of such things as those arguments usually end in hearsay, and I am a firm believer that any claim must be supported by evidence.

3. Western medicine is primarily an industry based on science, clinical research, and peer reviewed studies that end in the culmination of the Pharmaceutical products we now have to treat disease. There are many branches of medical science that all deal with differing parts of the human experience. One area of medicine may specifically look at treatment options, another will be looking at diagnostic implementations, and another might look for the cause of disease. The point being that some Physicians may look to treat the patient based on symptoms, but leave everything else to someone who better understands how to find the root cause of the problem. The process can be long and arduous in many cases as the patient will see specialist after specialist with no end in sight. However, diagnosing a problem is much like detective work in that the medical professional may not always find the right "suspect", or have enough evidence to "convict" a certain disease.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 12:24 PM
O.K. I have to throw this in:

I used to live in a small community (8,000 population) in a very rural area of the state (just north of Jazzerman actually
). I was talking to a nurse that worked at the clinic there. She told me that one pharm company paid to have coffee and rolls driven to the clinic every morning from a town 160 miles away. Now obviously the town I lived in had places to get coffee. She also said another pharm company sent in booze for after hours, yet another food for lunch, another food for after hours supper, etc. Add to that all the pens, notepads etc. and you have quite a bit of money spent on these docs. She said, "If you want to know why your prescriptions cost so much, that's the real reason." Now this is just a tiny town in the middle of nowhere. Imagine what they spend and do for all the hospitals and clinics nationwide. Are some docs getting vacations or prostitutes? Not only does this make prescriptions expensive, but it's a huge conflict of interest, IMO.

On the other side:

Most people I know are struggling to get by day-to-day. I again live in a rural area and organic foods are impossible to come by (unless it's summer and you have room for a garden or raise crops). As a matter of fact, I'd have to drive a considerable distance to even be able to purchase them. Between the cost of travel and the products themselves, it would be too expensive to switch my family to all organic. I think there are a lot of families nationwide who just wouldn't be able to do it, even if they wanted to.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 12:32 PM
Oh, and on the horse apples.....

I knew what the "slang" term meant, and also that they are real apples, so watching that play out was pretty funny.

And to add to what Jazz was saying:
I know that without penicillin, my dad would have died as a child. And without certain aspects of "Western" medicine, I wouldn't be here either. So, while I think we are getting screwed by Big Pharma, I also believe a lot of good has come from the research and medications they provide.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 03:15 PM
reply to post by otherhalf

Imagine what they spend and do for all the hospitals and clinics nationwide.

I authored a thread a while back titled The Drug Rep Conspiracy that goes into this.

I have to admit that I am now somewhat of a hypocrite in regard to my sentiments in that thread, because due to my impoverished financial situation I am now dependent on sample medication from my doctor. In my own defense, the situation I am now in is a direct result of the insurance company handling my medical claim declining to certify any diagnostic or treatment options recommended for me by my doctor besides physical therapy and drugs. I guess when you have a torn disk, and extensive scar tissue and nerve damage, the insurance companies just wait you out and write you off until you either give up, go away, or die.

God willing, that's not going to happen with this old country boy.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 03:29 PM
Icarus, I'm very sorry to hear your prediciment with the insurance company. People often question why pharamceuticals cost so much, but don't understand how much research goes into each medication, and how many clinical trials are conducted on it just to get it past the trial stages. In fact, it costs between $500 and $700 million just to get one drug through these phases, and that is before the drug is even approved safe. The Pharmaceutical companies, like any capitalist driven company, want to reap as much profit off there expenditure as possible in a society driven by supply and demand. It should be up to a persons medical insurance to cover much of this cost in my opinion.

In lieu of this, I am not a fan of Insurance companies and never have been. If people are looking for a good conspiracy they would have to look no further than these providers that make the Pharmaceutical industry look like angels sent from Heaven. I'm not just talking about Medical Insurance providers, home, etc.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 03:40 PM
reply to post by otherhalf

I know that without penicillin, my dad would have died as a child.

I don't think the medical establishment started out to be this way. Somewhere along the line the process was co-opted and subverted by an unscrupulous element more interested in making money than alleviating human suffering. Thankfully, there is a remnant of socially conscious doctors dedicated to restoring the health of their patients.

I thank God for them, and pray for the success of their efforts.

posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 04:02 PM
reply to post by Jazzerman

Thank you for the sentiment. I'm not complaining, just stating the facts of my situation.

I agree that the insurance industry, which grew out of Mob protection/extortion rackets, if I am not mistaken again, has a horrible track record. They don't mind collecting premiums, but paying claims and providing benefits is not high on their list of priorities, to say the least.

As far as R&D costs and associated issues with big pharma and medical insurance, here's some factoids for you, courtesy of the September 2005 Harper's Index. (taken from The Drug Rep Conspiracy thread referenced above)

1) Amount pharmaceutical companies spent on R&D per new drug launched

in 1997: $868 million

last year: $1.43 billion

2) Minimum number of prescription drugs currently under investigation for Medicaid price-gouging or marketing fraud: 500

3) Percentage markup that Abbott Laboratories charged in 2001 on solutions of sodium chloride (salt water): 20,735

4) Amount allocated for investigating health-care fraud in 2003 that the FBI cannot account for: $114 million

The FBI can't even keep track of the money it is spending to investigate this mess. What does that tell you?

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in