Different angle on Limbaugh's 'offensive' comments...

Discussion in 'Political Action Forum' started by okie drake, Mar 2, 2012.

  1. okie drake

    okie drake Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    26,961
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Location:
    Indian Territory
    Benefit to who?

    Did a doc get a free pad, some literature and these days, a lunch seminar? Yes. Do they use the pad? Yes. Are the pads (commonly for a product that has little to no insurance coverage and/or is ridiculous to even stock) conveniently marked 'do not substitute' even though the doc doesn't care? Yes. Does such usually just lead to headache and wasted time for all parties involved except the rep? Yep, along with the rx getting changed away from his/her product anyway.

    But, do such things (rep visits, pads, etc) definitely impact prescribing practices? Yes.

    Coupons definitely do due to usually being zero or low copay to the patient. Common problem there is just like samples---take something one or a few times and find that it works and THEN discover that it's nonformulary and gonna cost $247.:doh (Remember, you don't get a Fluke congressional hearing to rant).

    Another issue is what I mentioned earlier, docs have no conception of actual cost/pricing on medications---especially the morons who rattle off 'take this to Walmart, it's $4'. Often that's not the case anyway but even when it is the vast majority of the time the overall bill will inevitably be considerably higher for the patient due to following that instruction/suggestion.

    Patients are unaware as well. They often have no idea that the $25 copay they paid goes along with the $300 the insurance paid.

    Sure it's partly due to what I do, but I truly believe ignorance regarding various pharm issues plays a major role in the wreck we're in and I believe it extends to other providers as well. I think jaeger, Cabela, and Paddler would back me up on that with regards to their fields specifically and also in others.
     
  2. DR CABELA

    DR CABELA Banned

    Messages:
    9,722
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Location:
    owensboro,KY
    Off the top of my head pill sales went up 60% when the drug cos were allowed to advertise on TV direct to the consumer.......the US is only one of two countries that allow this practice
     
  3. fishnfool

    fishnfool Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,472
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Should it be illegal to advertise though?
     
  4. DR CABELA

    DR CABELA Banned

    Messages:
    9,722
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Location:
    owensboro,KY
    I guess if you think that its OK for pts to be choosing their own meds...then it shouldnt be illegal?

    instead of the doc making that decision....
     
  5. okie drake

    okie drake Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    26,961
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Location:
    Indian Territory
    I think ff's question is a good one and that the above is a diversion at best.

    Sure, pt's going in with x in mind and or telling/instructing the doctor what they want is an aspect of this and an important one. However, that frankly has nothing to do with the legality question. It also by no means indicates that the doc isn't making the decision. The patients don't write the script, legit arguments about undue pt (or other) influence included.

    I've thought about it a lot and I know this...I don't like the advertising and am certain that is has negative consequences. Having said that, like many other things, that itself doesn't justify prohibiting it. What rightfully does? Again, I say it's a good question.
     
  6. fishnfool

    fishnfool Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    4,472
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Advertising a med is different than me going to my doctor and purchasing it. The doctor still needs to sign off on the script, the phx still needs to fill it and sell it. I can't just go and force my doctor to give me Lipitor because I liked the commercial.

    I think we all understand the absurdity resulting from the said advertising, but if corporations are now people and covered under the 1st amendment, and most conservatives are for less regulation and free markets, wouldn't it make sense that a private company should be able to market their product to potential consumers?
     
  7. API

    API Political Action Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    21,500
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    Living within 50 miles of the Mexico border, I know of several folks who regularly cross the border for medical/dental/pharmacy. Partly for cost, but mostly for easier accessibility to treatments of choice. In the border area large billboards describe what's available (lap bands, dental implants, and antibiotics are a well promoted). All that's needed is a little money, ability to cross the border, and return. I suspect it's the same along the Canadian border. While some might say (maybe correctly) that alternative treatments may be ineffective, never-the-less they are treatments selected by the consumer's choice and not rejected out of hand by government edict under the guise of protecting us from ourselves.
     
  8. API

    API Political Action Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    21,500
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
  9. Paddler

    Paddler Banned

    Messages:
    3,338
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2001
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    I don't see drug reps generally, and prescribe generics almost all the time. I have never used the coupons drug reps leave, as I find it offensive that they think I will act as their agent to move product. I take my lunch to work, and don't accept any gifts. PB&J and Bic pens suit me just fine. I think our medical costs would be far lower if other doctors did the same. I went to one sponsored dinner about 20 years ago, not since.

    Actually, my company is becoming more and more restrictive, there is a move afoot to ban them altogether. It has been shown that samples increase the total cost of care, so I use them very, very rarely. As in, I don't remember the last time.
     
  10. API

    API Political Action Forum Moderator Flyway Manager

    Messages:
    21,500
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    SoCal
    I've been ruminating on this some more. Churches with their Constitutional isolation from government also enjoy tax-exempt status which correspondingly gives the government something to hold over the heads of the churches.

    There were no direct taxes back at the founding, so churches were not taxed back then either... BUT, because there was no tax, nothing was held over their head. That circumstance has changed. Even though churches do not even have to file for a 501c3 exemption, there still is the reality of government leverage.

    In other words, the existence of the tax-exempt status is because of the existence of the income tax which is something not included within the original Constitutional intent. The conundrum is that tax exempt status gives the government powerful clout against the churches.

    If I was the churches, I"d seriously consider standing up, and suffering the consequences of paying taxes. It would seem to be better to be free to speak out and resist the government (BC requirement in this case), than to be shackled by the political whims of the federal government. Today's attack upon religious freedom via birth control is a masquerade. Who knows what will come up next.
     

Share This Page