We just disposed of some prescription medications (drugs, if you prefer) through the courtesy of our police department. It should be noted that these prescription medications can harm our environment if they are not destroyed in an appropriate manner -- extreme heat in specially designed incinerators. That fact alone begs the question of how they affect my system beyond the prescribed purpose recommended by the physician that wrote the prescription. But, the purpose of this article is not to deny the need for medications when required, but rather to look at some interesting questions about the pharmaceutical industry as a whole.
Have you noticed how many advertisements on television give the indication that the subject drug is "the answer to a life-style" - not just a specific problem? You can tell from the reaction of the lady who was just informed by her doctor that her cholesterol was down with drug X. It must have changed her whole life expectancy because she tells everyone she meets about the "drop" in her cholesterol with that particular drug. We still don't know by how much it is down but it must have been dramatic based on her reaction. Maybe that is part of the answer to being "high on drugs."
So many of the television commercials are careful to add, in very small print and frequently fleeting fashion, some of the potential warnings or make cautionary statements. The commercial that troubles me most is the one that tells you not to take it if you are allergic to any of the ingredients or the drug itself. Can you explain, because I cannot, how I can determine what the ingredients are before I take it, or can I know if the combination of all of the ingredients together is going to cause me undesirable reaction until I take it? Who, other than a pharmaceutical sales person, or the doctor, actually know what goes into these prescription drugs? The sales person introduces the new "wonder drug" to the medical profession with what ever promise they make about its effectiveness. Under some set of circumstances that the man on the street does not understand and is not privileged to know about, the drug is prescribed by the doctor for the patient based on a term "indications." If the drug works as prescribed and the patient benefits from its effect, the outcome is that desired by patient, physician and drug manufacturer. Hopefully that event ends with this ideal scenario 100 percent of the time. No doubt you too have wondered about the truth between the commercial's promise and the actual outcome when you take the drug, but we are at the mercy of the system that not only allows it, but actually contributes to the disclaimers protection.
The reality of the medical profession and the science of drug compounding is not an exact science and, as our physician reminds me "we are (still) practicing medicine." All of this comes back to our destroying those multiple prescription drugs that didn't meet this 100 percent threshold and had to be destroyed. There is no acceptable means for recycling prescription medications that I am aware of. If the doctor prescribes a drug (regardless of the cost -- it might be $1 per pill, or $10 per pill) -- it can't be returned, if you are allergic to it. I realize these drugs are potentially dangerous, but they are frequently very expensive. What we took to the police station for destruction represented lots of dollars of investment in our desire to find relief from some physical or emotional problem. The success of the ones that work cannot be minimized, but the expense of the unsuccessful trials cannot be returned to the pharmaceutical company. We as the consumer are also the subject of their trial for that drug and bear the expense of a failure. The pharmaceutical company happily chalks it up as another profitable sale. They have no idea what caused a reaction or failed to work in any specific case unless there is a lawsuit.
Many products come with money back guarantees or open return policies. We have none of that in our drug industry. Maybe the feedback to the medical profession needs to be improved and some kind of recycling program initiated for drugs. We do it for cell phones, eye glasses, etc. The drug companies might cry to their lobbyist but it's an interesting thought.
•••
Editor's note: Leo Lynch is an award-winning columnist. He is a native of Benton County has deep roots in northwest Arkansas. He is a retired industrial engineer and former Justice of the Peace. He can be contacted at [email protected].
Editorial on 04/29/2015