Before You Donate
Think very seriously before donating to any breastcancer organization, or fundraising program until you read their Annual Report to see who their top contributors are, and if they have a product that appears frequently in the message the organization sends to the public. That would be unethical and its illegal. The same applies to a request that the public buys products, but does not receive a "donor receipt" for tax-deductible purpose. Read any and all food labels that breastcancer "non-profits" are promoting to raise money. Some organizations tell the public to help them raise money by asking you to visit their websites, but that only gives them "hits" to increase their sponsors.
Another tip, "signing" an online Petition is not acceptable, so don't fall for such antics. An ethical non-profit, or professional will not request your visit to their website, nor use "cookies" placed on your computer when you visit their site.
Purchase the Breastcancer Postage Stamp, the Post Office will always give you your charitable deduction receipt. Its a valid form of fund raising.
What Is Going To Be Needed To Protect Patients?
Points to ponder:
"There must be a test for commonsense in the MCAT before anyone can get into medical school" ~ a well-known MD.
Physicians will have to acquire and evidence a greater knowledge of the basic and pharmacological sciences. Such will remove their dependence on sales and marketing representatives who generally have much less education than a medical doctor but are 'trained' to be detail sales people and advise physicians on the drugs they should prescribe. Ask your doctor what if s/he know the level of education and background of his "drug detail reps." Haven't you been in your doctor's waiting room when one comes in with his or her black bag and gains immediate access to the doctor, and charms his or her staff, often passing out "promotional gifts?"
Drug companies and corporate medical groups have a sort of "draft pick" each year. They draw lots determining which pharmaceutical representatives may visit specific doctors or practices. Thus, the physicians no longer "live" with their PDR, to learn all about a drug they are prescribing as they used to do, as well as RNs, instead, they are told about new drugs and given samples, usually by a member of the opposite sex no less, who are Bachelor degree graduates (many in PE), and many doctors openly talk about this, those with little or no self-esteem or professionalism.
Now, other drug companies are prohibited from visiting specific corporate medical groups to give them information on, for example, a drug that is less costly but equally effective. This "draft pick" process will have to cease. The medical profession must become more bound by a strict code of business ethics, as well as medical ethics, in fact, that will mean that they must also cease giving incentive gifts to medical school graduates to entice them to their hospitals, and medical schools to do internships, and residencies. Why? Because, such incentive (promotional) gifts are very costly, and add to the cost of medical care—any graduating medical student, or one completing an Internship (one year after graduation) should have already set their goals to achieve the best medical education and experience they can attain, regardless of incentives.
Medical groups must sincerely rely only on those whose ethics they trust and maintain their own information and education on pharmacology from, for example, local or regional medical school pharmacology experts who have their doctorates, minimally, and often are MD/PhDs, in fact. A flip of their laptop and those academics can answer a cadre of questions and concerns for even patients who contact them. I've done it!.
Physicians and nurses will have to become more community-oriented, giving their time and resources toward making the community a healthier place to exist and grow.
The medical professional practices may evidence their caring through the establishment of foundations to help care for those most often needing their services. This invites the community to participate by also being donors, as well as the nurses and staff, who now 'chip' in with no charitable deduction that such a foundation can offer. The physicians in that practice may then have access to estate and tax-planning, thus not only helping to care for the sick who are un or under-insured, but also benefit from the expertise right at hand in the workplace. Their tax-planning will precede their income and have every possibility of providing the doctors with no tax due at the end of the year.
During this techno-medical revolution, discernment and reality will be two critical qualities in determining the validity of new technology and equipment in relation to cost, safety, adaptability, and low cost-ratio for the practice and the patient.
Physicians must learn to observe the ethics of science, understand the rules of research, use the Internet, and be active on the web, share their findings with everyone, and anyone, and be available to their patients. Many of us have professions that demand ease in accessibility by our clients, patients, etc. not only doctors.
Five to six day weeks will be fact rather than fiction, but far more flexible.
Each day will become easier as the rewards of the internet, technology and continuing education increase and time management will become imperative in order to support it.
The medical professional, individually and collectively, must evidence each physician's primary values or "core consciousness." Without such ethics it will not be possible to keep up, and maintain a quality life.
LANGUAGE ABILITIES: The U.S. in particular is well-recognized for its graduate education, but not its undergraduate education. Therefore, many medical students are sent here by the countries for their medical school educations, internships, and residencies in their specialties, often taking 3-4 years after the one-year internship.
Many such physicians are greatly lacking in the ability to speak English. In every country physicians must be able to communicate in that nation's language, or not be permitted to practice, perform Internships or Residencies in their specialties—far too many patients cannot understand doctors who attend them, or the physicians cannot understand enough to make ethical, purposeful decisions. Talking is good—thus nothing can replace the ability to communicate in the healing and psychologically safe process.
English in the U.S. to permit patients to answer their questions (such doctors may think that speaking English is sufficient—it's not). The patient is the de facto employer, and must be served in a manner that benefits their total health.
The realization that all of us become patients at some time in our lives, suggests that it is better to have fewer patients with whom the relationship is one of shared knowledge and responsibility, and thereby reduce the litigious aspects of the profession.
Healing will become more greatly effected by the "comfort zone" between patient and practitioner. Because of diagnoses via algorithms and distant telemetry the importance of human interaction is going to be even more relevant as a component of the healing cycle.
Touch will have to be acknowledged as a vital aspect of healing, and pain control (for example, tactile stimulation, the afferent, efferent nervous system must be well-understood by physicians), rather than a placebo effect as it is labeled today (e.g.: medical professionals will be able to drop their distancing personas and cry with the patient or the patient's family over losses that occur, lessening the litigious relationship that exists without caring teams). The local doctor must interact more effectively via empathy and touch that ever before.
Medical doctors must increase their knowledge of the basic sciences, with more lab hours in their education, and they must be able to integrate that knowledge and apply it to basic scientific principles must be proven by testing licensure is granted.
Separation of patient from healer will dissipate, as each understands the force within each life, and how it can be strengthened and shared. Gone will be the common practice now of many doctors and dentists who may enter a room, greet a patient without applying his or her medical skills, and leave, charging the patient a "doctor's fee." This is common practice in dentistry now, after a patient has prophylaxis (cleaning of the teeth by a hygienist), then the dentist goes in to "see" the patient, often not examining the mouth physically, or even looking at the cleaning "job," yet charging the patient a fee.
There are many caring, well-educated, competent and caring physicians, but they know they have many immature, incompetent colleagues, and they must do something about their own profession. The AMA must pass a regulation that no physician reporting a colleague, or testifying on behalf of a patient, or against a colleague, will not suffer any back-lash by his/her colleagues, or the AMA, their Boards, or any other entities, or those offenders will be publicly brought before the AMA, and the Press invited. Good doctors deserve to be protected. RNs are not afraid of reporting a colleague, but the male medical model has created a very unfair situation for ethical, purposeful, and competent physicians to speak openly to their peers, Boards, or testify in Court, as any other citizens are required to do. If that does not happen soon, medical neglect, malpractice, and other harm dealt to patients will be soon tried in criminal courts.
There are very few cases of medical malpractice or harm done to a patient for which any other citizen on the street would not be tried in criminal court.
Insurance companies must acknowledge their role in the 'draft pick' monopoly that exacerbates the separation of patient and healer, and become an integral part of the triangle. Indeed, insurance companies will have the potential to become the center of core consciousness, seeking philanthropic and governmental collaborations, in the perpetuation of health, life-saving technology, and may be viewed as the model of business ethics in this triad to save and improve life.
The patient must be kept informed of changes and updates in the healthcare 'arena,' by each other, patient advocates, and healthcare professionals. A recent concern has been the collaboration between two groups of physicians (e.g.: radiology and surgeons, oncology corporate groups and radiology groups) which "direct" patients to the other for their care, scans, etc. However, the patient isn't aware that they are dealing with the same corporation, because it appears different. Only insurance company watchdogs, the FTC, and hopefully the AMA will maintain vigilance to prevent this emerging practice. This web site began receiving questions regarding such actions in July 2001. You, the patient, have every right to pick and choose to whom you go for radiology tests, scans, surgery, oncology, internal medicine, etc....check first with your insurance company. Do not automatically accept a "Referral Slip" to one particular specialty group. And, always, request that your scans, x-rays, etc. be put on a CD for your use, or request the original mammograms immediately after you have one, and have met with an FDA certified breast radiologist--or find someone else to interpret your mammogram.
Call the local medical society or look in the Yellow Pages, or telephone directory, for the possible presence of other practices. Go to an Internet Search Engine (Yahoo.com, Google.com, etc.) and type in the name of the test or scan and your city (limit your search), and see what comes up.
If you find research papers, contact the authors. Be thorough. If you question the corporate structure of any medical practice or hospital that you are dealing with, ask for their Annual Report, and a list of their present collaborations with other medical entities as well as their investments (financial statements of each physician, which must indicate their financial involvements with drug companies, etc.
Too many physicians today are "prescribing" over-the-counter drugs and supplements to their patients—last year, I had a urologist and an ENT specialist "prescribe" an over-the-counter vitamin preparation for my "conditions," and both were clearly marked, "Not approved by FDA." I did not take them, nor buy them, of course, in fact, I was getting the same components in my one-a-day vitamins.
In my opinion, had those two doctors been health food store sales people, or TV infomercial nuts, I would have reported them to the FTC, and FDA (so, I did!).
As the medical and healing professions return to their caring selves, they will have unlimited technology, intelligence transfer, enormous data bases to draw from as they free themselves to become caring and loving, and sensitive to the humane changes and losses in daily living.