Dear Judi
Thank you for your concern about . . . uuuum - whatever it is that you are
concerned about. I'm just wondering. I wrote a satyrical article about Prozac
and you made some vague objections. When I explained my article, you responded
with two additional letters, neither of which addressed any specific ideas in my
response or my original article.
Are you feeling alright?
As you said, my two years involvement in the medical field is "anecdotal" while
your 20 years qualifies you as an expert. I have little doubt that you are good
at what you do. My personal experience has been that it is difficult to find a
dumb nurse. On the other hand it is easy to find a naive nurse. While you were
cloistered for 20 years in your clinic I crossed the US four times, studying and
writing about the whole spectrum of the American Condition in real life. I'll
wager that I have dealt with more mentally unbalanced or clinically insane
people than you; after all, you only see the ones who come to your office.
Actually you did give a passing nod, to my objection that American medicine
treats only Symptoms and not Causes with, "Treating the causes is, in itself,
not enough...." implying that the Causes are being fully addressed and only when
necessary are the drugs handed out. Judi, get serious. Prescription drugs today
are a hot item in clinics as well as on the stock market. They are the first
line of defense in hospitals. According to BBC radio and the Seattle Times, the
5th biggest cause of death in US hospitals is prescription drugs - they are
handed out virtually at random and, what is more disturbing, nobody is testing
the consequences of combining two or more of the 10,000 new chemicals produced
each year.
I know that you as an individual don't have a large voice in national matters
but you could get out a bit more and inform yourself. Read a good book, like,
"When Corporatiions Rule the World," by David Korten... or "No Thanks Uncle
Sam," by Noel Mamere. Mamere's book is in French so if you can't find a
translation, maybe I can help you out.
And remember, you belong to an organization that has considerable clout: the
AMA. How active is the AMA in promoting research on multiple-chemical effects?
Last I heard, some 10% of the US population was on Prozac. Whether that figure
is actually 8% or 20% is not the point; whatever the figure is, it is a LOT. And
it excludes all the other behavior modifying drugs. The suggestion that humans
suffer from a genetic deficiency of Prozac in their bloodstreams is just nutty.
Some years ago Harper's magazine cited an executive of a pill making corporation
as predicting that by 2020, 80% of the US population would be on "corrective"
drug treatment like Prozac. It may be dificult to underestimate the gullibility
of the American public but some people are going to extremes to put that to
the test.
How does the AMA stand on the subject of mind altering drugs for everyone?
My local grocery store's (Shopi, in France) tv guide advises parents "Too much
time in front of the tv can provoke sleeping disorders and increased agression."
Sweden does not permit any advertizing aimed at children (on tv or anywhere,
and that includes the Saturday and Sunday morning cartoon/infomercials). The
harmful effects of tv are well known in many countries, but in the US, where
some 20 corporations control 80% of the media - that's radio, tv, magazines, and
newspapers - the story goes unreported. What is the AMA stand on unlimited tv
for kids? What is the AMA's stand on censorship of health issues?
When I visit my dentist for an appointment I routinely find the waiting room
empty. That is because the person who is scheduled for an appointment, is
already in the chair. Can it be that the French have mastered the waiting
room technology? Or is it a comment on the American lack of self respect
that they will put up with 2-3 hour waits. Does the AMA view long
waits as a productive and beneficial part of health care?
According to Molly Ivins, the US federal government recently launched a
regimen of paying med schools for NOT training doctors. Does having
fewer doctors have any impact on the time patients spend in waiting
rooms? Will this help uninsured people get access to less costly medical
care? How does the AMA feel about reduced costs for poor people such as
permitting Africans to produce their own generic AIDS drugs and paying
a reduced fee to patent holders? How would Hippocrates feel about the
richest country in the world witholding medicine from the poor?
In 1999, the British Parliament banned the sale of vitamine B-6 in doses over
10mg (later overturned to avoid a riot in the health-food sector) as part of an
on-going attempt by drug manufacturers to make the sale of vitimins and dietary
suppliments prescription only, and to close down their competitors, the natural
food outlets. How does the AMA support the natural foods industry? I understand
that there is only one med school in the US, in Texas, that teaches nutrition;
it has a single four hour course. What is the view of the AMA on the value of a
good diet and what activities are they involved in to promote healthy food?
MK-Ultra, the 1960s CIA operation, focused on mind control through drugs; what
were their findings? Which drugs did they find were most effective? How does the
AMA stand on mind control issues? What specific social programs and community
activities are your patients who take Prozac involved in? Does Prozac help
patients take part in making changes in their lives and in the society around
them or does it simply erase the desire for change?
The US has the most expensive health care in the world, and, while European,
Cuban, South American, Canadian and Asian universal health care plans prove
less costly, Americans lead the world in obesity and consumption of behavior
modifying drugs. How does the AMA feel about universal health care?
In the US, marijuana is classified as a 'Class A' drug along with heroin, and
while it has not caused a single death it is deemed to be dangerous enough to
jail some 250,000 people for using it. Meanwhile melanoma sufferers go without.
How many patients would not need Prozac if marijuana was available? How is the
AMA combatting this anomaly?
My experience is that, in all of the above questions, the AMA's stance is
foresquare in support of a vital and vigourous corporate bottom line. The AMA
gives not a damn for its patients. While you spend all your time with your
professional work and your patients, and presumably spend your liesure
time with your broker, you cannot see, or will not see
(none so blind as those . . .) the rest of the world.
Of course, this "science for profit" as Robert Bowd put it, is the same
enterprise that replaced opium with heroin because heroin was "not addictive."
Then when heroin addiction was unveiled, they gave us morphine because morphine
is "not addictive." Another lie, but not to worry because soon they invented
Methdone which was "not addictive." We fell for it again; it appears that
nobody really tested Methdone because it has been found to be addictive. Now the
miracle of modern science has given us ABT594, a pain killer cobbed from a
frog in Ecuador, ''200 times stronger than morphine'' and guess what; it's "not
addictive." Why am I skeptical.
Please, if you cannot address the specific concerns listed above, don't bother
responding.
JWP
