The FDA greatly investigates these companies to make sure that food, human and veterinary drugs, medical devices, cosmetics, and electronic products are safe to sell to the public. If the products turn out to be unsafe, the company will have to announce a recall. In this scenario, the FDA had yet to investigate Pro Health’s new product ProBio. Before then, Pro Health had found out that ProBio had the same brand name as another product already out for purchase. Having the same brand name as another product is also one of the things that are against the FDA’s regulations because this could protect the consumer from buying the wrong drug because of the similar names.
I am curious to know why the insurance companies started this trend on restrictive billing practices or how come the contracts were not clearly understood by each Payee. I was shocked to see how recent this article was. With updated national licensing requirements for PTAs, in a perfect world, these insurance companies should have been educated and informed on the PTA role before encountering these billing issues. PT being not only a focus on reactive but preventative medicine, I would hope that principal or prevention would be engrained in this profession; shouldn’t the role of the PTA been clearly defined
The only physicians the author interviews in his book involve the topic of genetic doping. How could you write a book on steroids and not interview Harrison Pope, M.D. from Harvard, the leading expert on anabolic steroids? Jendrick dismisses the medical consequences of steroid use, blaming the media for sensationalizing and spreading misinformation about steroids. While I agree that the media uses scare tactics to alarm the public and grab more ratings, his claim that 99% of testicular shrinkage returns to previous size after discontinuation of steroids is more irresponsible.
Supposedly, the switch was to create operational diagnostic criteria’s, which is seen as more consistent than ones based on clinicians descriptions. The shift in the DSM paradigm was not based on scientific information or the recognition of disorders by their biological causes. It was due in part to politics and discord in the psychiatric field the government’s involvement with research and policy making in mental health. Insurance companies demanding proof of diagnosis and that treatment are necessary and pharmaceutical companies needing an avenue to push their products. The DSM has been unreliable in helping clinicians consistently diagnose patients, 2e children remain victims of the diagnostic system which can lead to misdiagnosis thereby children are prescribed dangerous
The case of Davis v. Davis is a highly controversial case regarding the disposition of human embryos/entities after the failure of Junior Davis and Mary Sue Davis’s marriage. Instead of looking at the decisions made by the Judges in the different Courts, I am going to look into HOW the Judges/Justice came to their conclusions. In the cases of Junior L. Davis v. Mary Sue Davis v. Ray King, MD, d/b/a Fertility Center of East Tennessee, Judges Young and Franks did not epoché, or suspend their judgment in order to properly investigate all options; however, Justice Daughtry did epoché when taking the case under advisement. In the Circuit Court of Blount County, Tennessee, the Honorable W. Dale Young presided over the initial divorce proceedings between the Davis’s. Judge Young begins his written opinion by stating right off the bat that this case, “…is one of first impression,” meaning that it was a case unlike any other heard before.
For example, through the Socratic seminar I was able to learn that there isn’t a clear definition of bioethics or informed consent. It is really hard to define theses two key terms from the book. Informed consent could be about a lot of things. It could describe the medical procedure used, what’s its purpose, what is the significance of the results from the procedure, the financial value, and as well as the post procedure follow-up. Although the Socratic seminar and the novel left many questions unanswered for me, it made me understand more why things are they way they are in the healthcare and scientific research industries.
‘“Good intentions without thought make for bad laws and I think we have a risk of that,’ said J. Reid Meloy, a forensic psychologist and clinical professor at the University of California San Diego, who has studied rampage killers’’’ (Goode). “This point-of-view article discusses how the decades of case law interpreting and applying the other provisions of the Bill of Rights point to the troublesome approach to gun control and constitutional analysis” (Rivkin). “But you wouldn’t know from the current gun-control debate. Several states, for example are considering gun-insurance mandates modeled after those for automobile insurance. There is no conceivable public-safety benefit: insurance policies cover accidents, not intentional crimes, and criminals with illegal guns will just evade the requirement.
Pharma Care Ethics and Corporate Responsibilities Andrea Staton Strayer University ELLEN KAPALKO May 25, 2015 Pharma Care Ethics and Corporate Responsibilities Numerous people do not know the full story about their pharmaceutical companies in place of a well-known problem involving unpublished influence, according to mounting the evidence. Often, medical journals that patronize research will make statements only "active" results leaving out the findings of false results where an original drug or wok experience may have been upheld more hurtful than help. The new study of the difficult points to hidden or misrepresentation for all sorts of conditions. Meanwhile, modern pharmaceutical companies like Pharma Care ethical treatment of workers in a foreign country factory is beyond cruel and cold-hearted. The large manufacturing facility in the African nation of Calabria, which is own by Pharma Care.
When Doctors and Scientists wanted to find out more about the cells Henrietta’s children were then used in research without their consent. This same kind of unethical practice continues to happen now. The bioethical legacy of Henrietta Lacks, as Skloot conveys, is complex yet instrumental to out legal understanding of human experimentation today. Debates over bodily rights, doctor-patient confidentiality, and the use of information acquired through genetic testing, have led to state and federal oversights such as the 1978 Protection of Human Subjects in Medical Experimentation Act, the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and the 2008 Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. (Tunc 40-41) “Today many Americans have their tissue on file somewhere.
Then there are the people who feel that if people who are suffering have the right to stop life sustaining-treatment then why other suffering patients can’t ask physicians to give them life –ending treatments. Physician assisted suicide has been a big debate here in the America. In 1997 the Us Supreme Court said that there is no constitutional right to physician assisted suicide and the State Legistratures may choose if they want to vote to legalize physician assisted suicide then the Oregon board of Pharmacy put in an order requiring physicians to document if this is for an assisted suicide. In 1999 Oregon became the only US state that voted to legalize physician assisted suicide and in January 1998 one doctor announced his or her participation in the assisted suicide act. There are several countries that currently allow one or the other types of physician assisted suicide.