Monday, March 25, 2013

One Listener's Noise Is Another Listener's Music



"Turn that noise down, Junior!
You call that music?
It's just a bunch of crazy sounds!"

I bet we all heard our Dad or Mom issue that imperative a thousand times as we grew up listening to our precious tunes. Human ears seem to separate what they hear in two broad categorizes: pleasing sounds and noise.

What is the difference between sound and music? It it all a matter of preference and aesthetics, or does "music" have distinct characteristics from "sound"? Engineers, music theorists, and mathematicians have wrestled with research to reach some conclusions. To be honest, acoustics and sound are complex concepts that require fields of study for comprehension. But, today, I am hoping this blog entry will clarify the matter for the novice, discerning ear.

Acoustics is the scientific study of sound, especially of its generation, transmission, and reception. Today, let's scratch at the basics of acoustics to appreciate the power and beauty of music.


Sound

Sound is the sensation arising when energy from a vibration, within the ear's perceptual limits, reaches the ear.

Sound is a term used to refer to

* An auditory sensation that often has irregular wave form and wave length that are not harmonious
* The disturbance of a medium (often spoken messages) that may cause an auditory sensation, or
* An intended/desired auditory sensation (as opposed to noise, with flat and dense spectral distributions that are undesirable)

Sounds alone do not constitute music or sound art. Let me use a metaphor: Sound is like paint an artist uses to produce artwork.


Music

Music is temporally organized sound and silence, a-referentially communicative within a context.
 
* Emphasis is placed on the temporal and communicative aspects of music. Music is an essentially temporal art, fact that may point to its significance [music as virtual time (Langer) - music as articulating our emotional dimension (Reimer)].

* In listening to music, there is always some sort of response, some kind of behavioral change, indicating that we "received" and/or participated in the creation of something. What is received is an intention communicated in terms of patterning/configuring/organizing (akin to the prosodic aspect of language - prosody: the rhythmic and intonational aspects of language).

* The importance of context is a direct consequence of music as communication. All communication involves shared and unshared knowing, and this is what we will broadly refer to as context.

The potentially a-referential/self-referential nature of music (i.e. music may but does not have to refer/point outside itself in the same way as language) is what distinguishes it from other forms of communication. Music may be seen as a "noun-less" language, made just from verbs (potential, motion, action, narrative: time.)

So, to get down to the Appalachian, nitty-gritty understanding of music, allow me to summarize with a simple working definition:

Music is sound organized and presented by a composer
meant to elicit an emotional response from the listener 
as a direct consequence of listening
to the unique auditory communication.

OR

Music is man-made sound
that attempts to "hit you where you live"
and "communicate" a message
as you listen to its meaningful patterns

The potential for new organizations and meanings to be discovered, by means of listening, permits sonic works to outlive their composers, era, style, intentions, and cultural context during creation.


Music Is Perceived as Uncommunicative Sound To Uninformed Listeners
 
The listener is the agent through whom sounds and sound combinations are elevated into music/art; the composer of a work can be considered its first listener and, in some respects, this may be where his/her privileged status ends

Understanding music involves interpretive translation across frames of reference, with music arising as the result of interaction (at some level) among composer(s), performer(s) , and listener(s), all broadly defined.

Music, as a form of communication, is possible only when the parties involved share some common explicit and implicit knowledge (more on implicit and explicit knowledge later on in the course). This sharing helps make the messages we infer, as we observe a musical behavior, relatively consistent and meaningful.

Acoustics is based on fundamental concepts/measures (and units): mass, distance, time. All other concepts/measures (and units) derive from these three. These particular acoustic considerations are velocity, acceleration, force, pressure, work/energy, power, and intensity.

All of these wonderful concepts emerge when I turn on my stereo system and listen to recorded music. I think hearing the dynamics at play is an experience like no other. Music sets me free and allows my spirit to fly. I feel the music I hear becomes an inseparable part of my soul, a part I long to share with others as a true extension of my love. The universal  experience is, to me, beyond parallel.

 

 
“If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician.
I often think in music.
I see my life in terms of music . . .
I get most joy in life out of music.”
—Albert Einstein
 
 
 

Sunday, March 24, 2013

Let the Healing Music Wash Over Me





"Soothe me baby, soothe me
Soothe me with your kindness
For you know your powerful love is
Soothin' to me"
 
-"Soothe Me," Sam Cooke


Recorded music can be strong therapy. Musical healing is used to help treat different physical, mental, and emotional problems. It has been proven to be effective because people have definite, measurable responses to certain sounds and tones. Music can induce states of relaxation and increased well-being, which practitioners believe makes both the mind and body more receptive to recovery.

Music therapy has gained credibility in the medical community due to a large amount of supporting research. This alternative therapy may help those who suffer from these conditions:

* Depression

* Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

* Substance Addiction

* The Need For L-O-V-E  (Dr. Thompson and Sam Cooke)


"Getting the "Vibe" or the "Groove"

We all have experienced the power of music while listening to recordings, attending concerts, or hearing an artist perform in church or in some other public ceremony. The music we heard did "something" to us that we didn't really understand. It elicited immediate emotions, yet, somehow, it struck deeper chords inside our bodies.

Did you ever consider that the music we hear may be "pleasing" to our bodies as well as to our spirits? 

Healing with sound is related to the effects of sound vibration. Research of the connections between the brain and immune system has shown that the nervous system provides a definite connection between emotional responses and immune function. When sound waves travel through the ear canals to the brain, these waves are converted to different frequencies of electrical energy. These enervated frequencies then move down the spinal cord and are picked up by the nerve fibers of the autonomic nervous system.

Music can be a healer as it produces marked changes in the body's vital signs. These include respiration, blood pressure, heart beat, and muscle contraction. Melodic, soothing tones from a harp or piano have been shown to relax certain muscles and lower blood pressure, which can have the positive effects of reducing mental anxiety and speeding up the physical healing process.
 
(Angela Farrer, "What Is Musical Healing," WiseGeek, 2003)

“There is something about music that evolves over time, as do emotions. When we hear the song, we re-live the emotional sequence that happened when we first heard it,” says Professor John Sloboda of Keele University and author of Music and Emotion, “that’s why music is more powerful than, for example, smell or painting, it draws you into a sequence of re-lived experience.”
You can actually "anchor" emotional states to particular songs.

Stanley Jordan, in An Introduction to Neuro-Linguistic Programming for Music Therapists says “Internal states are essentially feeling and emotional states and when these states become conditioned responses to stimuli, the stimuli are called anchors and these anchors can be used to gain access to these emotional states”

Jordan goes on to explain that "setting" an anchor means forming the association and "firing" an anchor means recreating the stimuli to elicit the emotional response.

(John Slobada, Music and Emotion: Theory and Research, Oxford University Press, 2001)


Here are some examples of recordings that might help you set various emotion anchors:

Gloria Gaynor: "I Will Survive" (strength and resilience)

James Taylor: "You’ve Got A Friend" (reassurance and companionship)

Nat King Cole: "When I Fall In Love" (relaxation and tenderness)


Listen to These Songs and See If You Experience a Unique Emotional Response

Anchors aweigh!


Jeff Buckley  "Hallelujah"

http://youtu.be/y8AWFf7EAc4


Van Morrison  "Into the Mystic"

http://youtu.be/gVAnlke_xUY


Simon and Garfunkel  "Sounds of Silence"

http://youtu.be/4zLfCnGVeL4


Uncle Cracker  "Follow Me"

http://youtu.be/zvx9tDq2pmk


Eva Cassidy  "Somewhere Over the Rainbow"

http://youtu.be/4RDmXsGeiF8


The Impressions   "People Get Ready"

http://youtu.be/l9BfEjoC8Ks



“What seems to happen is that a piece of familiar music serves as a soundtrack for a mental movie that starts playing in our head. It calls back memories of a particular person or place, and you might all of a sudden see that person’s face in your mind’s eye. Now we can see the association between those two things—music and memory.”
 
--Petr Janata
 
 
 

Friday, March 22, 2013

The Power of Music: "Have Ye Been Healed"?




"Hard times call for awesome music." 
 
--Unknown 
 
 
I strongly believe that sound can heal. I cannot fathom a life void of beautiful, rhythmic music. I marvel about how many people love visual stimulation, yet they seem to neglect the complex magic found in great recordings. And, I believe many of these folks have never taken the time to enjoy the richness of the listening experience.

Sound is a healer? Yes, I am a true believer that music appreciation can be great therapy. In fact, the field of Sound Healing is a rapidly growing discipline. The hope of music's curative powers has spawned a community in the United States of some 5,000 registered music therapists, who have done post-college study in psychology and music to gain certification.

Many of the techniques that are employed in healing with sound stem from ancient traditions. But, modern scientific research is adding to our understanding of how sound interacts with and enhances our bodies and minds.

Healing musical effects often occur in intricate combinations. These effects interplay in so many ways to please our discerning ears. Scientists believe it is the magical and complex interaction of special sounds with the human body and mind that give the impressive results that are achieved.

Artist, musician, lecturer and author Jill Mattson describes why sound is so transformational.

(Jill  Mattson, "Healing with Sound: The Transformational Aspects of Music,"
The Healers Journal, March 12 2013) 

Access the entire article. Click here: http://www.thehealersjournal.com/2013/03/12/the-healing-power-of-music-why-sound-is-transformational/


Let's look at three musical aspects that have received a lot of attention.


Music Aspect #1: Intervals

"An interval is a technique used in music where two different notes are sounded at the same time. The individual notes combine to produce a new sound effect different than either of the two originals. This phenomenon is due to the interaction of the sound waves comprising each note.

"When the brain receives tones that are presented extremely close to the ears (as when you wear headphones) the brain can only “hear” one tone at a time. If you play a different tone into each ear then the brain combines and averages both tones, and you hear a pulsing sound which is the average of the two tones. What is thrilling about this is that you have just introduced “whole brain” functioning. Regular use of “whole brain” functioning has been shown to enhance intelligence and overall mental performance, reducing mental decline.

"Certain intervals impact our states of consciousness and produce different feelings. For example, a major fifth interval produces a harmonious, spiritual feeling while a major seventh interval produces a moody emotion and a minor third creates a melancholy feeling. Techniques employing sound intervals have shown impressive results relieving depression and other negative emotions such as loneliness, self-pity and anger."
 
Music Aspect # 2: Pitch

"The pitch of a note is how high or low it sounds. Higher frequency is higher pitch – corresponding to faster vibrations or “tighter waves” and higher energy. Lower pitch is due to slower vibrations.

"French physicist, Joel Sternheimer, discovered that: “while a protein is being assembled (in a plant) from its 20 constituent amino acids a frequency can be calculated…and transcribed into a note… for each amino acid”. If you play the notes, corresponding to the amino acids, back in the order that they are combined in a protein, a melody results. When the melody of the amino acids is played back to the plant, its growth and overall vitality is increased.

"Just as plants have shown to be positively affected by Sternheimer’s melodies, there are many researchers studying the effects of pitches and melodies on human health. Robert Monroe, (founder of the Monroe Institute), discovered that listening to recordings of specific pitches produced psychic phenomena in some listeners. The French ear, nose and throat doctor, Alfred Tomatis, demonstrated that higher pitches affect the neocortex of the brain – energizing people."
 
Music Aspect #3: Rhythm

"It has often been said that the human body is an orchestra with the heart drumming out the constant beat. In the womb, we hear our first communication in the rhythm of the mother’s heartbeat.

"Rhythm can affect our pulse and heart rate, breath, stress response, and the pace of our speech, gait and numerous other physical activities. A healing rhythm increases or slows our energy down, strengthening the elasticity of our pulse, helping us gain vitality.

"Our own rhythms can be a more complete expression of who we are than we realize. On a busy street watch the variations of walking. Some people bounce, others shuffle and a few march. Some are rigid, others flexible. Other variations include jerkiness versus regularity of rhythm, or a calm rhythm versus a rushed one. Our personality and emotions can be revealed in the rhythm of our walk.

"Words have rhythm. Our rate of speaking and associated movements is an expression of individualism, and in fact often show unspoken communication; the underlining meaning beneath our words. While our words may say one thing, our rhythm of words and body language can say another, revealing a deeper truth.

"Reinhard Flatischler, who developed the revolutionary approach to rhythm, combining pulse, breath, voice and rhythm, said in his book, The Forgotten Power of Rhythm,”The drum returns my energy by translating it into audible rhythm and thus completes a circuit of energy that allows me to connect with my own power.” The rhythm expresses our own energy and power."
 
Music Heals Illness and Injury

In another article (“The Hope of Music’s Healing Power,” The Los Angeles Times), reporter Melissa Healy writes about neuroscientists who research the field of music. One of the areas they are exploring is how music can help people with an illness or injury related to the brain. They believe they can use music to rewire the brain.
Healy quotes Harvard University neurologist Dr. Gottfried Schlaug as saying “Music might provide an alternative entry point to the brain, because it can unlock so many different doors into an injured or ill brain.”

Here are a few examples of what science has discovered through studying the healing powers of music:

• Music has helped Alzheimer’s patients remember pieces of their lives after they have forgotten almost everything else.

• By engaging the motor regions in the brain, music has helped patients with Parkinson’s disease to walk.

• Music therapy has also helped stroke victims that have damaged their speech centers to regain their word acquisition and speech.


Music Alleviates Pain

According to the American Music Therapy Association (AMTA) music therapy is a clinical and evidence-based use of music interventions. Music therapy is used for the following reasons:
* To alleviate pain

* To elevate mood

* To counteract depression as well as apprehension and fear  

* To promote movement and wellness

* To express feelings

* To enhance memory

* To improve communication

* To make calm or make relaxed

According to Leslie Faerstein, Ed.D., LCSW, executive director of Musicians on Call, the impact musicians have on patients, families and staff at health care facilities is remarkable.

Faerstein cites findings from a 1983 study by Lucanne Magill Bailey on the Effects of Live Music vs. Tape-Recorded Music on Hospitalized Cancer Patients, which showed a significant impact on emotional and physical changes in patients who heard live music.

“There have been many studies performed to show that music can help to manage stress, reduce pain, enhance memory in Alzheimer’s patients, and express what people are feeling who can’t otherwise access their feelings,” said Faerstein.

Faerstein uses this example: “We saw in the movie The King’s Speech how music helps with stuttering.”

For about 1 in 5 patients who suffer a stroke, difficulty with speech — aphasia — is a lingering effect. Dr. Gottfried Schlaug, a Harvard University neurologist and other researchers have found that by practicing to express themselves with a simple form of singing — something that sounds almost like Gregorian chant — aphasic stroke victims significantly improved the fluency of their speech compared with patients whose speech therapy did not include singing.

How about helping Parkinson's victims? By engaging the network of regions that perceive and anticipate rhythm, music with a steady, predictable beat can be used to cue the brain's motor regions to initiate walking.

(Jessica Pasley, "Music’s Healing Power," Vanderbilt Medicine, July 2011)
 

My Take
 
We have decided to share our love for music with anyone who wishes to join in the benefits of listening and/or dancing to recorded sound. Offerings will range from Big Band to Rock to Popular Dance to Blues and Rhythm and Blues. We promise to use a wide range of musical offerings to appeal to all ages and all tastes. Senior citizens through kids, please attend.
 
I am calling this new venture the EAR FARM (Encouraging Aural Relaxation For the Appreciation of Recorded Music). In collaboration with SOLACE support group, SOLACE Director Jo Anna Krohn and I are scheduling club night/music night offerings in a clean, alcohol-free and smoke-free environment. We want the diverse community to share a few hours of sound healing every week.
 
SOLACE is a group of many different people with one common bond -- they have lost a loved one to a drug related death. Scioto County, our home has the dubious distinction of being designated the unhealthiest county (of 88) in Ohio. We believe that sharing the magic of music can improve the health of our citizens, young and old.
 
Our first event is scheduled for April 5, 7:00-11:00 P.M. at the SOLACE Center on Scioto Trail in Portsmouth, Ohio. It is open to the public and music lovers of all ages. We encourage everyone to engage in music appreciation and sound therapy. We hope to see you there.
 
Here is the link to click for information about the event. Please confirm you are "going" so that we can arrange the facility. Thanks.
 
 

 
 

Thursday, March 21, 2013

The Unheathiest County In Ohio -- And the Recognition Goes Again to Scioto


Going Down the Second Time


I am mad as hell.

The 2013 version of the national "County Health Rankings and Roadmaps" study came out today, and Scioto County is still ranked the unhealthiest county in Ohio (88th in a state of 88 counties). Two years in a row, oh my.

Also, consider that last year (2012) Scioto County ranked as the 8th most unhealthy county in the United States. I'm sure this dubious distinction couldn't have improved much in one year although national ranks have yet to be published.
In the fourth year of research, the Rankings show that how long and how well people live depends on multiple factors including rates of smoking, education, and access to healthy food. They also help to lay the groundwork for governors, mayors, business leaders, and citizens across the country to take action to improve health.


I salute and support the Scioto County Health Coalition that was formed in 2012 to combat the health emergency.

In the coalition, Eli Allen facilitates tutorials during the All Hands meeting conducted by Dr. Terry Johnson, Medical Director of the Counseling Center.

SCHC reports are also filed for the following committees:

Wellness (Sharon Carver);
Medical (Dr. Aaron Adams);
Economic Development (Chris Smith);
Code Enforcement (Andy Gedeon);
Community Initiative (Craig Gilliland), and
Prescription Drug Action Team (Lisa Roberts RN).

The Coalition is open to all government agencies, all businesses, non-government organizations, volunteer organizations, and all interested citizens.

Scioto County Health Commissioner Dr. Aaron Adams said the purpose of the Coalition is to reach out, finding partners in the community to improve the health and welfare of the community.


But...

Separate meetings, reports, and committees are largely uncoordinated in respect to drawing the SCHC into one cohesive, active, aggressive force. And, believe me, without strong "in your face" solidarity and actual work, results are often handout papers and "look at what we could do" pleas.

I feel the time citizens invest in this movement makes all the difference. The public has to be willing to unite, to help effect changes, and to demand that our public officials, politicians, and health community "get on the same page." This will not happen as long as the people choose to be indifferent to their fate.

In fact, paid coalition members who view the work as simply part of a "job" description lack sufficient dedication to this very important cause. Talk and promises are not enough. I do not want to put a burr up the wrong butt, but, let's face it, decline has been a long time in the making. Things are not getting much better in respect to total outcomes. If the proverbial "shoe fits" and it's more like a slipper than a work boot ... wear it.

I know the concept of coalitions. A coalition involves a pact among individuals, factions, or groups in which they cooperate in joint action, each in their own self-interest, joining forces together into one body for a specific reason. The reason is evident: to improve the health of people in Scioto County.

The rub in coalitions can be in their strict adherence to "their own self interests." Those within various factions of coalitions may have very limited expectations and goals; they may operate under the necessity of satisfying grants and funding sources; they may suffer the burden of completing tons of paperwork; they may have no interest in some phase of the essential work be it wellness, medical, economic development, code enforcement, community initiative, or prescription drug abuse.

Personally, I have seen a lot of "wait" and little "action." I commend the efforts of the SCHC. I know each member of each coalition group means well. Now, it's time to qualify and quantify some good results. I don't think this can happen on a satisfactory scale unless (1) the group unifies, and (2) the public takes massive interest.

To refuse to join efforts to overhaul the National health system insures Scioto's defeat. The "head of the snake" that injects poisonous venom into our loved ones must be severed. The truth is that the health system is broken. The system cares more about your money than about your health. They have successfully drugged America in Pharmageddon, and their misconduct just keeps growing.

The FDA and Big Pharma are two of the major criminals in this conspiracy to keep you and me ill and begging for meds in order that they may reap outrageous profits. Scioto County, as an addictive community, continues to pay a terrible cost as it willingly opens its veins to sedation.

If you are in the coalition and you are afraid to tackle the Big Government and Big Business alliance, then you need to check your integrity. If you are in the coalition and you refuse to support the entire agenda, then you only hurt the forward movement for reform. I really don't care if your check depends upon your puppet reactions. Maybe the puppeteer isn't allowing you to break from your controlling "strings." Does this bug the worker, official, or politician -- good. Just produce the results you know are needed. From each according to his talents....

And, finally, if you are a citizen of the county who doesn't care about the terrible state of health here, you deserve to suffer the consequences. The consequences lie in the cemeteries, in the hospitals, in the rehabs, in the psych wards, and in the dysfunctional families of Scioto County. Do something good to help the problem today and tomorrow. God bless the children.


Fix the Problem of Scioto County Drug Abuse Facebook Site (click here and join): https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/329651420196/  


Click here and sign this Petition for some immediate action: http://www.change.org/petitions/f-d-a-commissioner-margaret-a-hamburg-require-doctors-to-have-mandatory-training-to-prescribe-painkillers


Click here for the Scioto Coalition Website:  http://www.sciotohealth.org/

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Hot Drug Reps and Smooth Operators Going After "Buckets of Money"

 


"Sales representatives still pay 115 million visits to 340,000 doctors each year, and some companies and reps have kept up the old, aggressive tactics. Doctors still complain about receiving inappropriate pitches from particular firms, and many hold the pharmaceutical industry and its marketing practices in low esteem. Earlier this year, 23% of 680,000 doctors surveyed by market research firm SK&A said they refused to even see drug reps."

 (Paul Christ, "Drug Reps See Their World Changing,"
KnowThis Blog Postings, January 13 2012)


Paul Christ says in years past, the sales tactics of pharmaceutical reps were considerably less aggressive than salespeople in other industries, who are primarily involved in getting prospects to make purchase decisions (i.e., order getters).

However, over the last decade this changed as drug companies were finding they had fewer new products to sell while also facing more competition. This led companies to increase the size of their sales force and train them to use more convincing selling approaches when discussing products with doctors.

According to Christ, the world of the pharmaceutical rep may be inching back to the earlier soft-peddling days.
 
 
Drug Representatives - Information To Consider
 
* It is very rare for reps to have any science background prior to becoming a drug rep. A drug sale has much more to do with establishing personal relationships than it does with understanding the latest science.

     One working Pfizer rep confessed, "You have to be like a chameleon. You have to blend in to every situation. You have doctors who are big sports fans; you have doctors who could care less about any sport. They’ve never played a sport, they’re more into science and more into research and stuff. You have to blend yourself to be able to have conversations and communicate with all kinds of different kinds of people."

* While it is a bonus to have a scientifically educated representative, it is far from a primary recruitment criterion. Youth is a much higher criterion for the sales position.

* Most reps are taught a modicum of science pertinent to their product. They learn the basics of the disease their product is intended to treat but still lack a significant scientific education to place their knowledge into context. 

    In 2007, AstraZeneca fired a sales executive Mike Zubillaga after his interview in an internal company newsletter went public. In the interview, Mr. Zubillaga offered the following advice to his sales reps when they visited a doctor:

 
    “There is a big bucket of money sitting in every office. Every time you go in, you reach your hand in the bucket and grab a handful. The more times you are in, the more money goes in your pocket. Every time you make a call, you are looking to make more money.”
 
    The remarks became especially infuriating when it was revealed that Zubillaga and his sales staff dealt exclusively with cancer medication.

* Drug reps need sales skills more than an understanding of science and medicine, so drug companies teach their reps only what they want them to know. Thus, reps become...

     More passionate salesmen since they only learn the most favorable side of the picture.  Reps memorize facts and statistics to support market-tested positive perceptions of their products.
 
    Easier targets for accepting a skewed perspective; one where a product is presented in the best possible light while the company shines a spotlight on the shortcoming of our competitors’ products. Reps memorize negative facts and statistics about their competitors.

    Skilled tacticians in rebutting the negative medical experience of the concerned physician with positive data from the company that addresses their concern. Here is an example:

    ‘Doctor, that may be you’re experience but the data, drawn from a much larger population, suggests otherwise …’

     An equally typical tactic is to rebut the negative data a concerned physician may have with positive anecdotes of their colleagues’ experiences and how their vicarious understanding should outweigh the concerns that the data may cause.

    ‘Sure, doctor, the paper may suggest that the side-effect commonly occurs, but how often have you seen it with your patients?’ The use of these tactics is not mutually exclusive.

* One study that reviewed promotional materials distributed by drug companies judged 35 percent of those materials to be lacking in fair balance. This finding is consistent with the results of a study of drug ads in medical journals, which found that 40 percent of reviewed advertisements lacked fair balance.If drug promotion serves an educational function, the industry can certainly do better.

   A rep from Parke-Davis told a Congressional committee in 2008 that a senior marketing executive once said: "I want you out there every day selling Neurotonin. Neurotonin is more profitable than Accupril, so we need to focus on Neurotonin. Pain management, now that's money…. I don't want to see a single patient coming off Neurotonin before they've been up to at least 4,800 milligrams a day. I don't want to hear that safety crap, either."

   A rep cited a senior sales executive at the company who told him:

  "I want you out there every day selling Neurotonin. Neurotonin is more profitable than Accupril, so we need to focus on Neurotonin. Pain management, now that's money…. I don't want to see a single patient coming off Neurotonin before they've been up to at least 4,800 milligrams a day. I don't want to hear that safety crap, either."

  The problem is that Neurotonin was only approved for use in seizure patients at the time but the sales staff was pushing doctors to prescribe it for everything from migraines to bi-polar disorder. In 2004, the company was ordered to pay $430 million in fines for their marketing practices of the drug, which many felt was an ineffective slap on the wrist considering the company’s proceeds from the medication exceeded $3 billion.
 
* The most qualified candidates for drug rep positions are attractive and well-spoken. And, of course, persuasiveness, enthusiasm and charisma are necessary to overcome the natural misgivings of physicians. Thus companies may prefer...
 
     Certain ethnicities to make the rep distinct among other reps or to provide them with a cultural advantage in connecting with their clients.

    Male reps who are persuasive and likable.

    Female reps who are attractive with physical appeal. A former drug rep testified before Congress that “pharmaceutical companies hire former cheerleaders and ex-models to wine and dine doctors, exaggerate the drug’s benefits and underplay their side-effects.”

   Which is why pharmaceutical companies are systematically recruiting from cheerleading squads — even spawning a cheerleading employment firm. Read all about it: http://www.spiritedsales.com/

  So, congratulations to these Spirited Sales Candidates on their success in landing new sales positions this year:
 
Jennifer- Novartis
Brandy- Novartis
Angela- Novartis
Brandi- Novartis
Chelley- Novartis
Emily- Novartis
Lindsey- Novartis
Kristen- Novartis
Jackie- Novartis
Mindi- Novartis
Shermin- Novartis
Alesha- Sciele
Tim- Sciele

Jenn C.- Sciele
Jenn M.- Sciele
Kristy- Sciele
Kimberly- Bayer
Alyana- Bayer
Christina- Sciele
Kristi-Sciele
Lauren- Sciele
Sarah- Sciele
Darcy- Sciele
Elizabeth- Sciele

Susannah- Boeringer Ingleheim
Kris- Boeringer Ingleheim
Catherine- Boeringer Ingleheim
Stephanie- ADP
Monica- ADP


 
Tawnya: Years As An Eagle Cheerleader: Rookie
College: University of Buffalo
Major/Degree: Communication, Marketing and French
Career/Profession: Pharmaceutical Sales

* Among the more dubious ‘unofficial’ lessons a new rep learns are:

     How to manipulate an expense report to exceed the spending limit for important clients,
     How to exceed spending limits for important clients by using friendships and personal gifts,
     How to use free samples to leverage sales,
     How to use friendship to foster an implied "quid pro quo" relationship,
     How best to handle the importance of sexual tension,
     How to maneuver themselves to becoming a necessity to an office or clinic.

* A very common if informal part of training is learning to classify your clients’ personalities into categories defined by psychological tests such as Myers-Briggs.

* Financial rewards help drug reps rationalize the many ethically dubious situations they routinely encountered in my work.

    Seasoned drug reps can make six figures if they’re really good; good at schmoozing with physicians; or in the case of female reps, being easy on the eyes.

    Starting salary isn’t too bad either. If you happen to land a job as a drug rep with a major drug company you can expect to start out with a base salary of about $50,000. That’s around the same as the average starting salary of a Ph.D. college biology professor (public universities, although salaries do vary).

    Drug reps also get a company car with auto insurance. They’re also eligible for quarterly and annual bonuses along with lavish vacations if they meet sales targets. One rep interviewed recently said, "I would say there’s $20,000 added onto your salary that you don’t see that you get in just perks, that come with the job."

   To help achieve their sales quotas, they are provided with a large annual expense account to buy the loyalty of physicians in the form of gifts, vacations, five-star dinner seminars and other perks.

   When reps hold “educational meetings” they’re usually in fine dining restaurants with physicians free to order as much food and drinks as they wish. Drug companies spare no expense when it comes to wining and dining physicians. After all, physicians ultimately control up to 100% of drug company revenues.
 
   An assertion that sales representatives may be an important “channel of information” runs contrary to a recent study documenting an 11 percent rate of inaccurate statements made by drug reps during lunch conferences.

* Drug reps do not visit every doctor in their territory - they only visit the ones that are most likely to give them a good return on their investment of time, money, food, gifts, samples and friendship.

   Reps call these doctors “No Sees.” Cracking a No See is a genuine achievement, the pharmaceutical equivalent of a home run or a windmill dunk.

* In their PLoS Medicine report, Ahari and Adriane Fugh-Berman, an associate professor in the department of physiology and biophysics at Georgetown University Medical Center, even put together this chart of the specific tactics used to manipulate physicians.

 
 (Click to Enlarge.)


Sources:

1. Paul Christ, "Drug Reps See Their World Changing," KnowThis Blog Postings, http://www.knowthis.com/blog/postings/drug-reps-see-their-world-changing/ January 13 2012

2. "Confessions Of A Drug Rep," www.avaresearch.com, Stathis, December 29 2009

3. "Interview with a Pfizer Pharmaceutical Rep,"http://www.jobshadow.com/interview-with-a-phizer-pharmaceutical-rep/

4. M.G. Ziegler, P. Lew, and B.C. Singer, “The Accuracy of Drug Information from Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives,” Journal of the American Medical Association 273, no. 16 (1995): 1296–1298.
D. Stryer and L.A. Bero, “Characteristics of Materials Distributed by Drug Companies: An Evaluation of Appropriateness,” Journal of General Internal Medicine 11, no. 10 (1996): 575–583.

5. M.S. Wilkes, B.H. Doblin, and M.F. Shapiro, “Pharmaceutical Advertisements in Leading Medical Journals: Experts’ Assessments,” Annals of Internal Medicine 116, no. 11 (1992): 912–919.

6. "25 Shocking Facts About the Pharmaceutical Industry"
http://noedb.org/library/features/25-shocking-facts-about-the-pharmaceutical-industry March 27 2008.

7. Cary Byrd, "Introducing … the All-Pharma Cheerleading Squad!" http://www.edrugsearch.com/edsblog/introducing-the-all-pharma-cheerleading-squad/#ixzz2NRWKoe5T

8. "Why Are Drug Reps Hot?" http://www.exceptionalmediocrity.com/2010/05/why-are-drug-reps-hot.html, May 15 2010 


Monday, March 11, 2013

Highest Goal of Big Pharma: To Be Sure You Are "Sick" Or, At Least, Think You Are



73 year-old Bob Aronson received a new heart on August 21, 2007, at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. All these years later he has a very active, happy and loving life. He is on Medicare, has supplemental insurance and also participates in Medicare Part D, the prescription drug program.

Bob established and operates a great Facebook group “Organ Transplant Initiative.” He also has a website www.organti.org  and a blog on WordPress, “Bob’s Newheart.” (Don't you love the title?)

He also re-started “The Aronson Communications Group,” which includes three expert colleagues.

Both his age and his status as a transplant recipient cause him to take several expensive drugs. While anti-rejection drugs and others for blood pressure are fully covered by Medicare, COPD and thyroid are not.

These drugs are costly. I'll let Bob explain ...

"They are expensive, very expensive and while in the so-called 'Donut hole' we have paid nearly $1,000 a month so the price of prescription drugs is a big issue in our home. Upon passage of the affordable care act the cost was cut in half but $500 a month is still a lot of money. That’s my lead in to this question."

"Will someone please offer a reasonable, understandable and clear explanation as to why Medicare is not allowed by law to negotiate the price of drugs? I have researched this issue for hours and can’t find a simple explanation. There are a lot of convoluted, rambling excuses but not a clear reason.

"Here’s an example of the reasoning Pharmaceutical companies use for their opposition to allowing Medicare to negotiate the price of drugs (like the Veterans Administration does). 'Federal price negotiations would represent a policy change carrying significant risks for research and development investment in new and improved medicines. A substantial body of research shows that similar federal drug programs impose prices substantially lower than those negotiated in the private sector, and that such lower prices inevitably will reduce research and investment in new and improved medicines. This slowdown in pharmaceutical innovation will yield highly adverse effects upon future patients in terms of reduced life expectancies.'”

(Bob Aronson, "Bob's NewHeart")

And, Bob finds himself struggling with the most simple, yet the most horrifying conclusion:

"The primary goal of the worldwide pharmaceutical system
is to make sure we either are sick or think we are sick.
Consider this, they don’t make a dime on dead or well people
so making us sick or having us believe we are sick
is good for business."

Big Pharma is a huge part of a broken U.S. healthcare system. We spend huge amounts of money on healthcare — a staggering $2.7 trillion in 2011 (more on health care than any country worldwide) with no reductions in sight — and do not have as much to show for it as we should. The United States ranks 50th in the world in average life expectancy, below most developed nations.We spend $8,000 per capita on healthcare while the rest of the developed world spends $3,000, but our population is not nearly as healthy. And 75% of our spending is on chronic diseases that could be prevented.

(Matthew Heineman and Susan Froemke, Escape Fire, CNN Documentary, 2012)

Aronson asks you to consider all the syndromes we hear about: restless legs, carpal tunnel syndrome, cervical syndrome, chediak-higashi syndrome, chinese restaurant syndromeonder chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome, churg-strauss syndrome, conn’s syndrome, cornelia de lange syndrome and costochondral syndrome…and this is a short list.

All of those syndromes, real or imagined, are treated by some sort of expensive medication. Pharmaceutical companies love syndromes and discover them with great regularity so they can convince physicians to diagnose them and then prescribe for the malady.

Why are Big Pharma's latest innovations designed to treat new syndromes and disorders? Or, more specifically, initiatives to market existing drugs for these bizarre afflictions? It’s known as disease-mongering, and it’s the reason the pharmaceutical industry currently spends more on advertising than they do on research and development.

You must understand that staying profitable and pleasing shareholders means constant innovation, but the FDA approval process for a new drug can take over a decade to complete and the cost can exceed $800 million. From there, on average, only five of every 5000 will make it to market. And there’s no guarantee any of those five will turn a profit.

Since syndromes are defined by symptoms rather than pathological processes, the old “reverse-placebo effect” can stimulate sales almost immediately. Consumers hear a roll call of symptoms and become convinced they’ve got them, whatever they are. That’s why, these days, RLS “affects” nearly 12 million people in the United States alone.

(Justin Rohrlich, "Big Pharma Wants To Make You Sick," Minyanville Media, March 24 2008)

Steven Woloshin and Lisa M. Schwartz of the Dartmouth Medical School had this to say on the matter:

“Helping sick people get treatment is a good thing. Convincing healthy people that they are sick is not. Sick people stand to benefit from treatment, but healthy people may only get hurt: they get labeled “sick,” may become anxious about their condition, and, if they are treated, may experience side effects that overwhelm any potential benefit.”
For more than a century pharmaceutical companies have created and enjoyed a lucrative monopoly on health care in America. They've done this by forming unholy alliances with those inside and outside of government: doctors, politicians, and scientists. Big Pharma's questionable and unethical practices pervade an industry that is meant to keep people healthy.

The Avaaz Team ("Big Pharma: a Sick Industry," en.avaaz.org, December 2012) listed a few of the dangerous trends at play in the pharmaceutical drug business:
 

* Lots of marketing, less research

"Big pharma justifies the high prices it charges for medicine with the argument that the prices sustain expensive and innovative research and development operations – even as the rate of R&D breakthroughs has plummeted and companies have slashed their R&D workforces.

"But, in the US, the industry is thought to spend almost twice as much on marketing as it does on R&D. Academics estimated that the industry spent $57.5 billion promoting their drugs in 2004, mainly by pushing them to doctors, or about $61,000 per physician. That's a full 24.4% of US sales revenue, as opposed to just 13.4% spent on R&D.

"Pharmaceutical companies often lavish doctors with free conferences, meals and drug samples – all of which are designed to make a doctor more likely to prescribe their product. And studies show this money works. On top of that, companies actually buy prescription records from pharmacies so they can individually track doctor's prescription records – and use this to tailor their marketing and promotion to the doctor."

* Bury the data

"To get their drugs approved by regulators, and to persuade doctors to prescribe them, big pharmaceutical companies rely heavily on clinical trials. This creates serious problems for consumers.

"To begin with, published trials funded by pharmaceutical companies are more likely to be favorable to the sponsor than other studies. This usually isn't because they are rigging the results – it's because they only publish the trials that suit them.

"Dr. Ben Goldacre describes how it works with a personal recollection in his recent book, Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients:
'Seven trials had been conducted comparing reboxetine against a placebo. Only one ... had a neat, positive result, and that one was published in an academic journal, for doctors and researchers to read. But six more trials were conducted, in almost 10 times as many patients. All of them showed that reboxetine was no better than a dummy sugar pill. None of these trials was published ...'
"With between two-thirds and three-quarters of trials published in major medical journals funded by the industry, this is a major problem.

"And it gets worse. Many drug companies conduct their testing in developing countries where regulations are poor – and sometimes the people they experiment on die in the process."

* Finding new users

"Learning new ways to market old drugs is one of the industry's favourite tricks. Take the case of powerful antipsychotic drugs designed to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder that are now routinely prescribed to treat mild mood disorders, insomnia and emotional discomfort. Two antipsychotic drugs are now the fifth and sixth best-selling prescription drugs in the US: 3.1 million Americans regularly use an antipsychotic medication.

"A UK government review found that 1,800 people died needlessly in nursing homes due to the overuse of antipsychotics on dementia patients. As usual, this over-prescription didn't just happen. In the US, Johnson & Johnson reportedly reached a $2.2 billion settlement with the government after it was caught paying tens of millions in kickbacks to medical professionals to increase sales of its drugs in nursing homes, including over $100m in antipsychotic drugs.

"Quick growth in the use of drugs to treat new conditions generally involves "off-label" use – using a drug to treat a condition federal regulators have not approved it for. Companies are not allowed to market their drugs for these purposes – but they don't always follow the rules. In the largest settlement ever for the industry, GlaxoSmithKline agreed to pay a $3 billion fine for marketing its antidepressants for use as a weight loss aid and to treat sexual dysfunction. But the company cashed in tens of billions selling these drugs – making the fine little more than an additional business cost."

(Sources: New York Times, Guardian, Nature, PLOS Medicine, Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, Journal of General Internal Medicine, Health Affairs, British Medical Journal, EATG, Prevent Disease, Biomet, BBC, Bad Science, Guardian, Boston Herald, World Health Organization, CNN, Washington Post)

In Closing

Bob, I hope in all of this mess, you can find "a reasonable, understandable and clear explanation as to why Medicare is not allowed by law to negotiate the price of drugs." In its present state, the American medical system is so full of holes, it may be symbolized as "Swiss cheese." Let's keep working to effect needed change if not for those today, for those in future generations. The level of my frustration with Big Pharma is enough to make me sick... and, I guess, that is exactly what they want to do. The truth is "a hard pill to swallow."


      

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Too High To Work In O-"HI"-O -- Great Jobs Go Unfilled





Development of oil and gas fields in Ohio’s Utica shale formation is expected to ramp up in the next two years. But, industry leaders say they’ve hit a snag, too few potential workers can pass a required drug screen.

(Tom Borgerding, "Required Drug Screens Snag Potential Ohio Energy Workforce,"
National Public Radio News, January 10 2013)

The richest deposits of oil and natural gas in Ohio’s Utica shale formation are believed to be in counties east and north of Columbus in the foothills of Appalachia. There’s new demand for workers. But industry officials say too few qualify, in part, because they cannot pass a required drug screen.

Rhonda Reda, head of the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program, speaks about the extent of the inability to pass a required drug test.

“This is becoming a bigger problem or people are finally being made aware that this is a bigger problem than we ever realized."

She says abuse of prescription and illegal drugs makes it difficult to find enough workers.

 What are the rates of applicants failing tests? Reda says...

“From the companies we’ve spoke to and what actual numbers that we’re getting is 50, 60 percent. That’s pretty high.”

The industry is in a race against time. So far, it’s added about 39,000 jobs in Ohio but she predicts thousands of new jobs will be added during the next three years. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources says 45 new horizontal wells in eastern Ohio are already producing oil and natural gas. There are permits for nearly 500 more.

New Concord consultant Elizabeth Carter recruits oilfield workers. She conducts recruitment seminars in a bid to find drug-free applicants. Carter says...

“If you’ve got a crane operator and he’s on Vicodin right now do you want him on your job site, probably not.”

Carter reports that some workers who pass an initial drug screen are employed only a short time. She adds...

“You go ahead, you hire them and for whatever reason, you know it’s electronically pulled for random. The next month when you get you’re random list, those new hires are usually on there and that’s when they fail the drug test. They’ve cleaned up for your pre-employment and then think that they’re good to go and then they have positive for a random.”


This Problem Is Not Isolated

Significant numbers of people all over the U.S. cannot pass drug tests required for employment.

For example, New Mexico Congressman Steve Pearce recently spoke to a joint session of the New Mexico Legislature about jobs and drug testing. Here is what he said:

"I will tell you that I’ve had eight job fairs in the 2nd district of New Mexico in the last two years. The least number of jobs that we had in a day were 400 and we had 3,000 jobs every single job fair.
And I’ll tell you that we probably didn’t fill ten spots in any one of the job fairs. It was free, open to the public, and we publicly advertised it as well.

"The reason I had the jobs fairs is because I was hearing everyone saying there were no jobs. And then on the other hand, I was seeing employers say, ‘We have no people. We can’t hire anyone. They won’t come to work. They can’t pass the drug screen and they won’t come off of government assistance.’ So we began to have the job fairs to point that out.”
 
 (Steve Pearce, "Pearce Says Jobs Unfilled Because Workers Can't Pass Drug Tests,"
New Mexico Telegram, January 17 2013)
 
 
(Click To Enlarge)
 
 + Difference between this estimate and the 2011 estimate is statistically significant at the .05 level.
1 The Other Employment category includes students, persons keeping house or caring for children full time, retired or disabled persons, or other persons not in the labor force.

Here are national statistics about current illicit drug use differed by employment status in 2011:

Among adults aged 18 or older, the rate of current illicit drug use was higher for those who were unemployed (17.2 percent) than for those who were employed full time (8.0 percent), employed part time (11.6 percent), or "other" (6.4 percent) (which includes students, persons keeping house or caring for children full time, retired or disabled persons, or other persons not in the labor force)

Although the rate of current illicit drug use was higher among unemployed persons in 2011 compared with those who were either employed full time, employed part time, or "other," most of these users were employed. Of the 19.9 million current illicit drug users aged 18 or older in 2011, 13.1 million (65.7 percent) were employed either full or part time.

Wow! Of course, many potential workers are screaming about use of medical marijuana coming into play as the  major reason for people failing required drug tests. Others who fail are entirely truthful and admit to recreational marijuana use but feel "failure" for employment should not include occasional use of this substance.


So, In These O-"HI"-O Times of "High" Unemployment, Here Is What One Career Author Advises  Employees

J.T. O'Donnell, job search and career expert, reported an anonymous business owner recently vented his frustration to her around the number of job seekers who fail drug tests at his company:

“As a fairly active employer when it comes to hiring, I need to share with you my recent frustration when it comes to new hires and drug testing. We have had a particularly bad run in the last quarter with over a dozen failed tests. With over half of the candidates being college grads, I was particularly surprised! It actually seems more like an IQ test, why take it if you are going to fail? People currently in a job hunt should really be more aware of how testing works, and be prepared to pass. It is both disappointing and expensive for us as employers.”
 
O'Donnell said, "Now, you might be thinking, 'I bet this it was a bunch of punk kids,' or 'The job probably pays squat.' Well, you are wrong. When I contacted him to get more details around the situation, here’s what he told me the following:
  • In three months, he tested 39 prospective employees at $45/test. That’s an estimated $7,000/year spent on drug testing
  • Only 25% passed.
  • Their ages ranged between 21-52 years old.
  • The owner estimates the additional cost of the wasted time/expense went into interviewing these people prior to the test at $24,000+.
"More importantly, these people missed out on jobs that paid between $50,000 – $58,000/year!"

So, O'Donnell advises potential worker to be sure to find out before they apply if the company is going to ask them to take a drug test to avoid any embarrassment.

She also says...

"If the company fails to mention the drug test until after your interview. Simply say you’d be happy to take the test and leave. Then, call them back and say that upon reflection, you’ve decided the job isn’t for you. That way, you won’t be embarrassed when you fail and you’ll save the company the cost of giving you the test.
 
"Using drugs is your choice – you just need to acknowledge choosing to do so comes with consequences in the form of limiting your job options. It’s a small world, failing a drug test isn’t good for your career. So, be smart and move on if you know you can’t pass one."
 
(J.T. O'Donnell,  "Don’t Take Drug Test if You Know You’ll Fail," Careerealism, 2013) 





My Take

Substance abuse, dependence, and addiction are unacceptable, no matter the drug. Yes, I am sympathetic with some job applicants and employees about their frustrations over being unable to pass a drug test; however, at the same time, I realize the importance of their making necessary sacrifices to insure a safe work place and to insure public safety.

I understand the Legalization argument. I also see the reasons people lobby for the freedom to smoke marijuana. But... the extent of the substance use and the environment circumstances related to certain jobs do bother me every time I consider legalizing another vice. Getting high can be just "getting stupid."

I can say the same about alcohol use and alcohol results. Drinking alcohol in excess is definitely a vice. Yet, consumption is legal. So, testing positive for alcohol could be very minor in relation to how it negatively affects performance on a job, but, at the same time, testing positive could be of utmost importance. Employers, unfortunately, don't have the resources to investigate all results.

My bottom line: If you have a brain and want a job, a family, a house, etc., you must study the territory, know the terrain, and abide by the rules. When something within the rules bothers you and becomes an impediment to your own success, you must overcome it. It is dumb as hell to be a rebel without a cause. Too many people these days are just that -- individuals without reason.

Do whatever it takes to get the job, abide by the rules, and become a better person. If you don't, you only hurt yourself and those you love. If like a small child, you refuse to change "just because," be ready to suffer the negative consequences. Productive work is all about being intelligent.

My favorite TV personality, "Judge Judy" Sheindlin, once said this about a ridiculous claim for personal pain and suffering:

"The time to change was yesterday; the time to wake up is now. You don't get reimbursed for stupidity! Your case is dismissed."

Saturday, March 9, 2013

No Dear, Bigger Is Not Always Better: How Doing Nothing Is Often Better Than Getting Defensive Medicine

 
 
 
 "The delivery of medical care is to do as much nothing as possible."

-Stephen Bergman known as "Dr. Samuel Shem," Rule Number 13, The House of God

Website for information on The House of God:

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/11/samuel-shem-34-years-after-the-house-of-god/265675/

Heads up! Physicians -- Your first rule is "to do no harm."

Dr. Sanjay Gupta reports American doctors perform far more tests and procedures and hand our more prescriptions than in other industrialized nations, and far more than they once did. Since 1996, the percentage of doctor visits leading to at least five drugs’ being prescribed has nearly tripled, and the number of M.R.I. scans quadrupled.
 
More -- more procedures, more testing, more treatment, more drugs -- is not always better. According to Gupta, in a recent anonymous survey, orthopedic surgeons said 24 percent of the tests they ordered were medically unnecessary.
 
Americans must begin to question some very common methods used by doctors because of the following reasons:
 
(1) Unnecessary actions can be potentially harmful, and
 
(2) Unnecessary actions are exceedingly expensive. 
 
According to a 1999 report by the Institute of Medicine, as many as 98,000 Americans were dying every year because of medical mistakes. Today, exact figures are hard to come by because states don’t abide by the same reporting guidelines.
 
Consider the case of a 40-year-old mom who sought treatment for heartburn. Even though neither she nor her doctors thought she was having a heart attack, it was a remote possibility. Miss that diagnosis, and the doctors could be sued. She was admitted for “non-specific” EKG changes, had an “equivocal” stress test, and then underwent coronary cauterisation, which perforated an artery and killed her.

Or consider Jack the 33-year-old dentist and father of three, who fell and bumped his head when he was 13. He “felt a little funny” but he never lost consciousness. He had a normal neurological exam. He had no confusion, nausea or vomiting. The ER doctor ordered a CT scan. The radiation damaged the DNA in Jack’s brain and 20 years later the mutated DNA developed into an untreatable glioma (brain tumor). Why did the doctor order the CT scan? He had a very rational fear of being sued.
 
(BirdStrike M.D., "A Nameless Faceless Killer," Emergency Physicians Monthly)
 
 
Defensive Medicine
 
Tamer Mahrous, the Happy Hospitalist writes, “Some doctors and patients may be willing to experience some anxiety for the unknown. But most won’t, especially since neither party is directly paying for the testing. This selfish interest is rooted in moral hazard, at the expense of national economic security.”

Tamer is a board certified internist who graduated from medical school (UNMC) in 2000, completed my internal medicine residency from the University of Nebraska Medical Center in 2003 and practice as a board certified internist at a world class hospital as part of the largest independent private practice hospitalist group in the state, Inpatient Physician Associates. Happy is a character he created in 2007 to allow the reader to experience what hospitalist medicine is really like.

Check out the Happy Hospitalist Blog: http://thehappyhospitalist.blogspot.com/
 
A survey by Mount Sinai School of Medicine researchers has found that 91 percent of physicians believe concerns over malpractice lawsuits result in "defensive medicine." Defensive medicine is defined as "the practice of ordering medical tests, procedures, or consultations of doubtful clinical value in order to protect the prescribing physician from malpractice suits."
 
This kind of treatment is meant less to protect the patient than to protect the doctor or hospital against potential lawsuits. Read that last sentence again. Isn't this "concern for protection" ironic? So, the root of the practice of defensive medicine is really all about coverage -- covering the assets and bare asses of  health care providers.
 
Yet, a consumer group Public Citizen, a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization, says that medical malpractice payments in 2011 were at a record low and have fallen for eight straight years. That's right. Malpractice payments are not to blame for the rising cost of health care.

The group’s report says that the number of medical payments and the inflation-adjusted value of such payments were at their lowest levels since 1991, the earliest full year for which such data is available.

In the report, “Malpractice Payments Sunk to Record Low in 2011,” Public Citizen analyzed data from the federal government’s National Practitioner Data Bank, which tracks malpractice payments on behalf of doctors.

Let's make this clear. Patients are not becoming rich because of the malpractice of doctors. Just the opposite -- patients are the ones who pay not only the physical and mental costs of bad doctoring but also the tremendous monetary costs.

“Contrary to the promises of policymakers and leaders of physician groups who have spent the past two decades championing efforts to restrict patients’ legal rights, there is no evidence that patients receive any benefits in exchange for ceding their legal remedies,” said Taylor Lincoln, research director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division and author of the report. “Instead, malpractice victims and ordinary patients end up absorbing significant costs for uncompensated medical errors.”
 
("Learn When to Say ‘Whoa!’ to Your Doctor," Consumer Reports, June 2012)

In contrast to the hundreds of thousands of injuries (and tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths) that major studies attribute annually to medical mistakes, fewer than 10,000 medical malpractice payments were made on behalf of doctors in 2011, demonstrating that the vast majority of patients injured by medical malpractice are not being compensated, the Public Citizen report says.

 (Click image to enlarge.)
 

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly"
 
To be fair, let's acknowledge that certainly most procedures, tests and prescriptions are based on legitimate need. Yet, the sad irony is that many are not. The whole thing reminds me of my favorite Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western:    
 
"The Good": Defensive medicine is rooted in the goal of avoiding mistakes.
 
"The Bad":  Each additional procedure or test, no matter how cautiously performed, injects a fresh possibility of error.
 
"The Ugly": More procedures, more testing, and more treatment are not always better.
 
But, the beat goes on. Nearly half of primary-care physicians say their own patients get too much medical care, according to a survey published in 2011 by researchers at Dartmouth College.
 
 
What Procedures? What Risks? What the...?
 
Let's talk about some of the major culprits involved in defensive medicine:
 
* Pills and pills and more pills...

(a) When people show up complaining that something hurts, the easiest way for a doctor to get them out of the office is to send the patients off with a prescription for a pain medication that contains a narcotic (like Vicodin or OxyContin). You should never use them for chronic pain — and if you're on them already, work hard to get off them.

(b) Millions of Americans take statins to lower their cholesterol. Common side effects from these drugs include muscle pain and soreness. Usually those effects are just annoying, but some patients suffer muscle weakness as well, especially around the haunches, which can be debilitating.

The side effects don't always go away when you patients stop taking the pills. Orthopedists see this all the time and say it is a concern, but most docs downplay it. Be vigilant if you're starting a statin regimen, and talk to your doctor about switching or discontinuing drugs immediately if you develop severe or disabling symptoms.

(c) Many patients have been on medicines for years without change. No one tells them that many drugs, especially antihypertensives, anticoagulants and antidepressants, may no longer be necessary after a year or two. It's also often possible to lower doses of these medications — which also lowers the risk of side effects. So, make it a habit to revisit your list of medicines with your doc, and see if you can't pare it down once in a while.
 
(Dr. Scott Haig, "10 Medical Missteps," Time, October 6 2008)
 
* An EKG—which records the heart’s electrical activity through electrodes attached to the chest—is a standard part of a routine exam. Some also regularly get an exercise stress test, which is an EKG done as they walk on a treadmill. Both are key if you have symptoms of heart disease or are at high risk of it. But for other people, the tests are not as accurate and can lead to unnecessary follow-up and treatment such as CT angiograms, which expose you to a radiation dose equal to 600 to 800 chest X-rays, and coronary angiography, which exposes you to further radiation.
 
* Getting an X-ray, CT scan, or MRI  for back pain can seem like a good idea. But back pain usually subsides in about a month, with or without testing. In fact, the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) recommends that unless red flags are present, doctors should wait six weeks to order imaging for low back pain. Back-pain sufferers in a 2010 study who had an MRI within the first month didn’t recover any faster than those who didn’t have the test -- but were exposed to radiation and were eight times as likely to have surgery. Plus, they had a five-fold increase in medical costs.
 
One study projected 1,200 new cancer cases based on the 2.2 million CT scans done for lower-back pain in the U.S. in 2007. CT scans and X-rays of the lower back are especially worrisome for men and women of childbearing age, because they can expose testicles and ovaries to substantial radiation. Finally, the tests often reveal abnormalities that are unrelated to the pain but can prompt needless worry and lead to unnecessary follow-up tests and treatment, sometimes including even surgery.

Sanjay Gupta reports: "CT and M.R.I. scans can lead to false positives and unnecessary operations, which carry the risk of complications like infections and bleeding. The more medications patients are prescribed, the more likely they are to accidentally overdose or suffer an allergic reaction. Even routine operations like gallbladder removals require anesthesia, which can increase the risk of heart attack and stroke."

(Sanjay Gupta, "More Treatment, More Mistakes" The New York Times, July 31 2012)
 
* Virginia Moyer, a professor of pediatrics at Baylor College of Medicine and chair of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, points out that mammography use is responsible for about 20 percent of the cases of overdiagnosis of breast cancer. In fact, the Task Force came under fire a few years ago for recommending fewer women receive routine mammograms—even though the recommendation was based on evidence about providing the best care to women.
 
* Brain scans can reveal things that appear worrisome but aren’t. For example, doctors might mistake a twist in a blood vessel for an aneurysm. Those findings can trigger follow-up tests, and prompt referrals to specialists for expensive consultations. And CT scans of the head can deliver a radiation dose that’s the equivalent of 15 to 300 chest X-rays.
 
* People with sinusitis—congestion combined with nasal discharge and facial pain—are often prescribed antibiotics. In fact, 15 to 21 percent of all antibiotic prescriptions for adults are to treat sinusitis. But most people don’t need the drugs. That’s because the problem almost always stems from a viral infection, not a bacterial one—and antibiotics don’t work against viruses.
 
About one in four people who take antibiotics report side effects, such as a rash, dizziness, and stomach problems. In rare cases, the drugs can cause anaphylactic shock. Overuse of antibiotics also encourages the growth of bacteria that can’t be controlled easily with drugs. That makes you more vulnerable to antibiotic-resistant infections and undermines the usefulness of antibiotics for everyone.

* The activity most frequently performed without need was a complete blood cell count at a routine physical exam. In 56 percent of routine physicals, doctors inappropriately ordered such tests, accounting for $32.7 million in unnecessary costs.

 
Doc, Why Are You Treating Me This Way?
 
* "Bigger Is Better" and "The TV Told Me So"
 
One reason is that patients, motivated perhaps by an ingrained belief that more care is always better care -- not to mention ads from drug companies -- ask for it. And all too often doctors comply, in part because it’s faster and easier than explaining why a test or drug might not be a good idea.
 
* Old Habits Are So Hard to Break

Another reason doctors are less likely to own up to: It’s hard to kick bad habits. But researchers say that doctors often embrace evidence that reinforces their practice style while ignoring evidence that conflicts with it. For example, results from a trial published in 2007 found that angioplasty—an invasive procedure— worked no better than drugs plus lifestyle changes for people with stable heart disease. But several years later a study found that most doctors still chose angioplasty without giving those simpler, less expensive steps a shot first.
 
* Show Me the Money
 
Of course, doctors have financial motivations. Under the present system, hospitals and doctors earn more money by doing costly interventions than by keeping people healthy. So, doctors often order tests and recommend drugs or procedures when they shouldn't -- sometimes even when they know they shouldn’t. For example, research suggests that those who invest in imaging equipment order more CT scans and MRI tests than doctors who haven’t made the investment.
 
* The "Substandard" Is Standard
 
61 percent of 1,548 physicians responding to a survey by Jackson Healthcare in 2012 said defensive medicine has become the new "standard of care."
 
(Molly Gamble, "Top 10 Reasons Physicians Practice Defensive Medicine,"
Becker's Hospital Review, December 5 2012)
 
* The Bullies "Made Me Do It"
 
24 percent of 1,548 physicians responding to a survey by Jackson Healthcare in 2012 said the problem was peer pressure. Other physicians of my specialty are doing it, and I'm afraid I'll look "deficient" by comparison if I do not.
 
(Molly Gamble, "Top 10 Reasons Physicians Practice Defensive Medicine,"
Becker's Hospital Review, December 5 2012)
 
Patients Lost In the Wasteland
 
And, all that unneeded, expensive care can be hazardous to your health, but it can be devastating to your pocketbook as well. 
 
The problem has become so serious that such groups as the American College of Physicians, the ABIM Foundation, the National Physicians Alliance, and a coalition of medical societies in a project called Choosing Wisely began to examine the need to reduce unnecessary interventions that waste money and can actually do more harm than good. They recently found...
 
"A report by the Institute of Medicine estimated that $750 billion -- about 30 percent of all health spending in 2009 -- was wasted on unnecessary services and other issues, such as excessive administrative costs and fraud."

"An additional 90 medical services were added to the 40 items initially listed by the campaign in April 2012.

"According to a 2012 American College of Physicians (ACP) policy paper in the Annals of Internal Medicine, up to $765 billion, which accounts for around 30 percent of U.S. healthcare costs, are identified in the paper as the result of mostly inappropriate or unnecessary tests, treatments and other services.
"The routine use of 130 different medical screenings, tests and treatments are often unnecessary and should be scaled back."
 
 (Sherry Baker, "Americans Waste $765 billion on Unnecessary Medical Tests,"
 Natural News, October 30 2012)




 
Conclusion
 
Tara Haelle recently reported on defensive medicine in Scientific American. She spoke with James Froehlich, the director of vascular medicine at the University of Michigan Medical School, and Rich Sagall, a family medicine physician in Gloucester, Massachusetts.
 
According to Froehlich...
“The assumption has been throughout history that the more you know about human normal function and disease, the better equipped you are to treat disease and restore health.
 
“There are two problems with that. One is the assumption that the goal of medicine is to make people normal again. The other fallacy is that attempts to do so will lead to better outcomes.
 
“It’s been frequently commented that you can make a more informed decision about a car than about a surgeon. The point is that we all have a better idea of whether the brakes need to be changed than if we need a CT scan. This campaign is meant to empower a dialogue so there’s a better discussion about tests and procedures.”
 
The often debilitating anxiety that medical screenings can cause are also harmful.
 
Sagell said..
 
Researchers are finding that trying to make patients “normal” again or even finding out if a patient has something “abnormal” can lead to harm without changing the course of a disease or a patient’s outcome. Aside from excess radiation or treatment side effects, the often debilitating anxiety that screenings can cause are also harmful, says Sagall.

 “One question every patient should ask before submitting to any test is, ‘How will the results of this test influence the treatment plan?’” Sagall says. “Oftentimes it turns out it won’t.”
 
That dialogue is most successful, though, when consumers understand before they get sick that screening and treatment can cause harm.

(Tara Haelle, "Putting Tests to the Test: Many Medical Procedures Prove Unnecessary—and Risky," Scientific American, March 5 2013)

Real reform is unlikely to happen unless doctors' groups, supported by patients' groups interested in better medical care, band together with a common voice. Until then, the next time your doctor wants to order a test, a procedure, a treatment, or a new drug, you should ask why. Odds are that it will be the right decision, but just by asking you may be able to steer clear of actions that have great  downsides.