De Anza Busfield Offers an Interesting Argument on Pharmaceutical Industry Discussion

Each week students are required to post a comment about that week’s readings or lectures. These

should be an observation or insight made about the readings or lectures, or they can be a

clarifying question in which you ask about some aspect of the readings or lectures that you did

not understand. In addition to posting your comment, you should also “like” one comment made

by one of your classmates and respond to that comment.

di question

How has your understanding of the pharmaceutical industry changed after reading Busfield and watching the lecture?  

POST

Rueshil Fadia11:20amJul 21 at 11:20amManage Discussion EntryI believe it to be problematic that many clinical trials actually pay the participants to join the trial (this was seen in the Tuskegee Syphillis study but is still seen today). I believe that if a participant wants to join a clinical trial, their decision should be only focused on the idea that this could be a revolutionary medicine for their specific conditions that may not be on the market for multiple years. If that in it of itself is not enough lure for the patient to willingly join the study then they should not be in it. Unfortunately, paying patients to join the study adds ulterior motives and disproportionately attracts lower-class patients. Kristina LittleYesterdayJul 20 at 11:28amManage Discussion EntryWhat caught my attention the the readings was the idea of nurses vs. doctors. I have always wanted to go into the medical field ever since I was a child and I felt as if there was a pressure to reach highest by being a doctor rather than a nurse. I was unintentionally taught that doctors were seen as more important than nurses meaning they earned more money and got more benefits. Being a black woman, I was also put under the impression that they need more black doctors to show that we could do as much as others can do. From this lecture/reading, I was able to see the reliance doctors and nurses had on one another which played an important role in their jobs.Sahithi Chekuri2:39pmJul 21 at 2:39pmManage Discussion EntryThe Tuskegee studies, while it was criticized, showed the US how it was possible to lose trust in medical organizations. There is no guarantee that researchers or their doctors for that matter have their best interests at heart especially after this study. But this wasn’t the only instance of medical abuse on minorities. James Sims, who pioneered the field of gynaecology, used black, female slaves to study reproductive organs without giving them anesthesia. The case of Henrietta Lacks showed how there was a lack of consent when researchers took her tumor samples without permission. Furthermore, pharmaceutical companies are notorious for pressuring doctors to prescribe unnecessary drugs in order to drive up profits. Although minorities in the US still have a severe lack of trust in medical organizations, these groups are also victim to medical abuse because they need money or want a free health check-up. This cycle of abuse tends to repeat and each new case bought to light only serves to expose the increasing abuse of power between researchers and the people who volunteer for these tests. It is a shame that only extreme cases of medical abuse bring about change in the scientific community.