Except for narcotics and things like that. But making them OTC doesn't mean that you should try to prescribe yourself. You'd be an idiot to take a drug like that without a Dr. advising you to.
if you need a doctor's opinion, you get one, the doctors don't need to be the prescription police why should people have to go to the doctor every year to renew a prescription, waste of money
You go every year because your situation may have changed. As you age what drug (or dosage) may have worked for you in the past may not be working in the future. Also as a non Doctor you don't know if there have been new drugs that may have been developed that improve on the ones you are taking. So yes, the doctors DO need to be the prescription police. That is what they went to school for many years to do.
but if it has not changed, and you know you need it, regardless if it changed, you should just be able to buy it nope, if people need advice, they can get it... we do not need prescription police
Okay let’s start with Where is the proof it does diddly squat? I mean doctors are apparently “free” to prescribe any rubbish for anything in America - does not make the medication effective
Do you WANT people taking antibiotics for viral infections? There is such a thing as “antibiotic stewardship” because we now have a version of TB that is resistant to every antibiotic on the planet as well as other resistant bacteria. In fact if we don’t deal with multi resistance we could face the very real possibility that no antibiotics will be effective for a wide range of diseases https://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/drtb/xdrtb.htm
Yes we do……. Let’s look at the latest debacle over the drug “Ozempic”. It has found to be one of the few that is effective for weight loss but was originally designed to treat type 2 diabetes. Thing was shortly after the word got around about the weight loss every young thing who wanted to lose a kilo or two to fit into “that outfit” was hounding their medical officer to prescribe it. https://www.ozempic.com/how-to-take/side-effects.html
Hey! But the next Ice Age, er, I mean Global Warming, er, I mean Climate change, um, Climate Crisis is all legit, amiright? But seriously: a number of people should be looking at charges of mass 2nd degree murder. Anyone that might have lived had they been treated that did not get treatment and died, because, if treatment already exists, you have no excuse to make the clot shot at warp speed so powerful people threatened doctors with the loss of their medical license so they could make $. Those people should be in a lot of trouble. If they are not? We've created incentives for them to do this all to us again. Forbes reporting that Boston University is working on "Directed Evolution" on Covid. They had some that killed no mice and got it to be able to kill about 85% of them.
good point, antibiotics would be a valid one, but most are not, there needs to be a valid reason for every one
yes, and people should have that knowledge, good or bad and decide for themselves no different from being allowed to drink the poison known as alcohol
No doubt there are some drugs that could be made OTC. The thing is, any drug you make OTC becomes an out-of -pocket expense. If an expensive drug became OTC, insurance likely wouldn't cover the cost even if a doctor wrote a prescription. And why would a doctor write a script in the first place? It's OTC!
In Canada, the unvaccinated 15% of the people have been doing 48% of the dying from covid. Why are you misrepresenting the protection provided by covid vaccines?
What does a guy working in a shop have to do with anything? Is this where you got your medical advice on ivermectin?
You think a guy protecting himself in the shop is relevant? Hohhhhh-Kayyyyy. If respirators (not masks, fer crissake) don't work, why are these hospital workers wearing them? What's next? Idiot Republican governors like Abbott and DeSantis banning them in hospitals?
This doesn't have much to do with efficacy, it has to do with the privileges of doctors under the law. Doctors are free to prescribe things "off-label" if they deem it medically appropriate, but at the same time, they are responsible for what happens to the patient. So if something has unknown efficacy, a doctor can prescribe it, but if they prescribed it instead of something that is the standard of care, it opens them up to being successfully sued for malpractice. Generally, it is best to prescribe something based upon evidence of efficacy, unless it's a desperate situation. The evidence wasn't there initially. Not sure about now, haven't looked into it lately. I have seen well-designed studies that didn't find an effect though, so it seems likely it is a small benefit if any. On the other hand, the risks and costs are also low. So it's kind of a "who cares" kind of thing, especially now.
One need not attend medical school to learn to read and comprehend what one has read. Critical thinking is learned by some, but not by others. If you're not aware of how Oxy Contin was brought to market by the Sackler Family, I would not be surprised. If you do not understand that humans can be paid to do damn near anything, right or wrong, you are typical.
Life has the answers sir. One need only keep one's eyes open to see what's happening. Critical thinking also helps. Some of us have it, some of us don't.