The other day I was watching the program Fareed Zakaria GPS on CNN. Now generally Mr Zakaria doesn't say incredibly stupid things; in fact, he readily admitted the old traditional jobs are not coming back to America, as opposed to those mouthing idiocies like "American workers are best"; "American companies are going to hire soon" - yes, but in India, China & Mexico. That was fine. But it was the solutions he proposed that amazed me. They were not only ineffective, but seemed Mr Zakaria was clueless about some realities.
So his first solution was learn a new language, like Chinese. Now apart from the fact that Chinese is a very difficult language to learn & master (I've heard even for the Chinese!)- I doubt very much there is a huge need for Chinese-speaking people in America. For one thing, international commerce is pretty complex, someone with say 1 year of beginning Chinese will hardly qualify to act as a language specialist. Secondly, many business processes have become so computerized that language issues are not that relevant anymore. And finally, there are enough Chinese who know reasonable English, since English nowadays is taught at high school level in most countries. So whom would you hire if you are doing business in China - someone who is a native Chinese speaker, knows Chinese culture & has learnt English at the high school level (& is cheaper to hire), or somebody who decided to learn Chinese just last year & may have never even set foor in China?
But the most bizarre of his suggestion was an 'Innovation Tax' to promote innovation in America! Now that would be popular, a new tax! It would have been hilarious except he was dead serious. Now as far as I know the Industrial Revolution didn't need an innovation tax. Nor did Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Thomas Edison, or the explosion of software development in India. Innovators are a special breed. They don't need government inducements.
And how exactly will this Innovation tax work? Ah, more money for research & development. After all, so much of innovation came from DARPA, from NASA, from Government-funded research during World War II, & so on.
It would be a convincing argument except there is plenty of research money given out, the problem is how much of it will result in innovation. Undoubtedly, more research money helps unearth more knowledge, but in most cases doesn't result in commercial products. And R & D funding goes largely into academia, where university professors are more ineterested in expanding pure human knowledge & can't care less whether it would ave any commercial value. In fact, some university researchers regard only basic research as befitting academia & consider technologically-oriented research as glorified assembly-line work. On top of that, if research money is increased, most of the times the experienced professors who are already well-funded & their minions get most of the money, while new researchers, especially those into new ways of thinking get nothing - they don't have enough preliminary data, or they are not well-connected, or their project is a 'fishing expedition' (a favorite phrase of review committees), meaning the outcome is too uncertain. Hmmm, I wonder where innovative ideas will end up. Undoubtedly, some of the early research was critical in understanding molecular mechanisms & developing genetic technologies; but even then only a small percentage of government-funded reesearch has resulted in actual product development. Like, the mainstay of cancer treatment (despite all the publicity of wonder drugs, most of which actually have pretty modest benefits) is still traditional chemotherpay & radiotherapy. At this point we have enough knowledge for innovation, more research money would only have researchers figuring out rat psychology or zebrafish development which won't have anything to do with human disease & development of innovative medical products. World War II was a very different situation. There was a confluence of superb scientists, an overwhelming urgency to develop better war technolgies, & of course government funding.(The only similar situation was AIDS research, which thanks to the AIDS activists was focused on drug development rather than too much basic research. But there aren't that many situations with such urgency).
I guess Mr Zakaria thinks you can engineer innovation through funding. Maybe he believes every piece of research results in some wonder drug or better machine, therefore putting more research money will guarantee commercial benefits (again, I have no doubt more research money will result in more information, the point is how much if that is useful in the market place & how much is pointless pile of data). In all likelihood, though, an innovation tax will enrage Americans, spend most of the money in administrative costs, & provide more money to aging but influential professors. The innovators of the world will innovate no matter what & maybe, the best way of promoting that is for the government to step aside, to reduce red tape & regulations, rather than tryin to induce it.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Bogus, Mendacious Attack on Lou Dobbs
So The Nation, a left-wing, agenda-driven newsmagazine (?) accused Lou Dobbs of being an American Hypocrite. The story: illegal immigrants worked on Lou Dobbs' property! Whoa! And some other left-wing publications, like the Huffington Post, even declared in their headline"Lou Dobbs Hired Illegal Immigrants!"
It turns out Lou Dobbs hired a contractor who had illegal immigrants among thier employees. So let's get this straight: Lou Dobbs never hired illgeal immigrants. He didn't write their paychecks. He didn't have, or should even have access to, their personnel files. The statement he hired illegal immigrnats is totally false.
Now the leftists scream: he should have been more vigilant, given his political position! He states he asked the contractors whether their workers were legal & was assured they were.
And that's where his responsibilities, and rights, end. He should not ask for, and should not be allowed, to see the personnel files or work authorization of people who are not on his payroll.
Let me give two examples. I work for a company that has clients; I do the work as an employee of my company which then goes to the client. The client may have the right to ask my company whether all its employees are legal. They should not be able to see my personnel file, which contains a lot of confidential and private information. I'm not their employee. In fact it may even be illegal for a company to divulge any of personnel file information (which has passport, visa or work authorization information) to a third party without a court order or a clear & very limited 'need-to-know' basis. And really I would be extremely upset if they did so. If a company lies, the culpability devolves on them, not on the client.
Now consider the opposite scenario: I'm in a store as a customer. What will happen if I walk up to a cashier & say "I'll shop here only if you all show me your passport/green card?" I'll surely be ejected from there.
Of course nobody takes The Nation seriously, it is one of those "America is Bad; Socialism is Good" publications run by wide-eyed leftists who think anything is allright as long as it advances their 'cause'; & of course left-wing fanatics have long been experts at character-assassination, distortion of facts & outright falsehoods. I commend Lou Dobbs for his immediate and forceful response of these bogus accusations! I hope he is more direct & calls these so-called reporters what they are: dishonest leftist thugs.
It turns out Lou Dobbs hired a contractor who had illegal immigrants among thier employees. So let's get this straight: Lou Dobbs never hired illgeal immigrants. He didn't write their paychecks. He didn't have, or should even have access to, their personnel files. The statement he hired illegal immigrnats is totally false.
Now the leftists scream: he should have been more vigilant, given his political position! He states he asked the contractors whether their workers were legal & was assured they were.
And that's where his responsibilities, and rights, end. He should not ask for, and should not be allowed, to see the personnel files or work authorization of people who are not on his payroll.
Let me give two examples. I work for a company that has clients; I do the work as an employee of my company which then goes to the client. The client may have the right to ask my company whether all its employees are legal. They should not be able to see my personnel file, which contains a lot of confidential and private information. I'm not their employee. In fact it may even be illegal for a company to divulge any of personnel file information (which has passport, visa or work authorization information) to a third party without a court order or a clear & very limited 'need-to-know' basis. And really I would be extremely upset if they did so. If a company lies, the culpability devolves on them, not on the client.
Now consider the opposite scenario: I'm in a store as a customer. What will happen if I walk up to a cashier & say "I'll shop here only if you all show me your passport/green card?" I'll surely be ejected from there.
Of course nobody takes The Nation seriously, it is one of those "America is Bad; Socialism is Good" publications run by wide-eyed leftists who think anything is allright as long as it advances their 'cause'; & of course left-wing fanatics have long been experts at character-assassination, distortion of facts & outright falsehoods. I commend Lou Dobbs for his immediate and forceful response of these bogus accusations! I hope he is more direct & calls these so-called reporters what they are: dishonest leftist thugs.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Ask What the Country can do for You!
It has been nearly 50 years since President Kennedy enunciated the famous words "Ask not what the country can do for you. Ask what you can do for the country." Kennedy was outdated & nostalgic for an America that no longer was. Indeed, within 10 years of that famous speech minorities & women demanded the country do more for them! The counterculturists demanded the country change. So much for what you can do for the country.
Historically, modern United States surely was formed by people who were fleeing their own country, due to reasons ranging from political or religious persecution to famines & poverty for a second chance, a better life. All they could ask for was an opportunity; America owed them nothing more. They worked hard, the country needed to be built - roads, factories, houses, an army (& to some extent that is the basis for America's anti-academic & anti-intellectual orientation; unlike the established civilizations of Europe & Asia wih a privileged educated class, America couldn't be built by discussing Shakespearian drama or the Periodic Table but by people who built, invented, repaired, grew crops, hunted or fought. But that's the subject for another blog).
By the 1960s, however, that had changed. The younger generation had grown up in the prosperity of the postwar era. They couldn't care less how their parents or grandparents suffered in the Old Country. They were born & brought up in America, this was their country, and they had expectations from it.
And so America matured. And the population of America is no longer a selective group of entrepreneurial, adventurous, industrious immigrants glad to get a second chance, but rather similar to populations of other countries, most people are average. And in the age of globalization, the average American will lose when it comes to employability not only compared to the above average from say most other countries, but even to the average, since it is cheaper to hire an employee in India, Phillipines or Malaysia than in America. The average citizen of most other countries are less threatened because outsourcing in not that common & there are legal restrictions as well. While American companies definitely benefit from being able to hire the best &/or cheapest around the world, the loser in this equation is the American Middle Class. Money trickles down from profit-making American companies to China & India. The benefit to multinational corporate America is now divorced from benefit to the American Middle Class.
For a long time & even now it is very unfashionable for Americans to ask the Government for economic protection. That is socialism, isn't it!? In addition, the corporate-media complex colluded to propagate this idea that one should be happy & thankful to be American, no complaints entertained. Here, see these hellish pictures from Indian slums! Read these reports of the horrors of Chinese Communism! And if that didn't work, just Do Not Think. Here's the show for that:-A Show About Nothing! Yadda Yadda Yadda. The perfect formula to keep the population empty-brained! Doesn't woek anymore. To the New Generation, India & China are the countries their jobs are going to. It may be time to ask what the country can do to protect Americans from the onslaught of globalization & outsourcing/importing of jobs. Maybe, the time has come to recognize no country is the land of unlimited opportunity, and the rules of the 18th, 19th & even 20th Century don't apply to the 21st century anymore.
Historically, modern United States surely was formed by people who were fleeing their own country, due to reasons ranging from political or religious persecution to famines & poverty for a second chance, a better life. All they could ask for was an opportunity; America owed them nothing more. They worked hard, the country needed to be built - roads, factories, houses, an army (& to some extent that is the basis for America's anti-academic & anti-intellectual orientation; unlike the established civilizations of Europe & Asia wih a privileged educated class, America couldn't be built by discussing Shakespearian drama or the Periodic Table but by people who built, invented, repaired, grew crops, hunted or fought. But that's the subject for another blog).
By the 1960s, however, that had changed. The younger generation had grown up in the prosperity of the postwar era. They couldn't care less how their parents or grandparents suffered in the Old Country. They were born & brought up in America, this was their country, and they had expectations from it.
And so America matured. And the population of America is no longer a selective group of entrepreneurial, adventurous, industrious immigrants glad to get a second chance, but rather similar to populations of other countries, most people are average. And in the age of globalization, the average American will lose when it comes to employability not only compared to the above average from say most other countries, but even to the average, since it is cheaper to hire an employee in India, Phillipines or Malaysia than in America. The average citizen of most other countries are less threatened because outsourcing in not that common & there are legal restrictions as well. While American companies definitely benefit from being able to hire the best &/or cheapest around the world, the loser in this equation is the American Middle Class. Money trickles down from profit-making American companies to China & India. The benefit to multinational corporate America is now divorced from benefit to the American Middle Class.
For a long time & even now it is very unfashionable for Americans to ask the Government for economic protection. That is socialism, isn't it!? In addition, the corporate-media complex colluded to propagate this idea that one should be happy & thankful to be American, no complaints entertained. Here, see these hellish pictures from Indian slums! Read these reports of the horrors of Chinese Communism! And if that didn't work, just Do Not Think. Here's the show for that:-A Show About Nothing! Yadda Yadda Yadda. The perfect formula to keep the population empty-brained! Doesn't woek anymore. To the New Generation, India & China are the countries their jobs are going to. It may be time to ask what the country can do to protect Americans from the onslaught of globalization & outsourcing/importing of jobs. Maybe, the time has come to recognize no country is the land of unlimited opportunity, and the rules of the 18th, 19th & even 20th Century don't apply to the 21st century anymore.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Where Will the Jobs Come From?
The official unemployment rate in America now is ~10%. Adding underemployment & those disenchanted with the job market, the total may well be close to 20%. That means, 1 in 5 Americans are completely or partially out of the job market.
Our politicians talk about creating jobs...the neocons have only one mantra - tax cuts, more money for business, especially small business, so they'll hire more people. The liberals believe more government intervention. Spend more money,stimulate the economy.
And both groups ignore the essential question: where will the jobs come from? I doubt having more money in the corporate coffers will necessarily result in more hiring. Corporations have amassed huge amounts of cash. They have also learned how to get by with less people. Maybe some small businesses would be more willing to take risks and expand if they had to pay less taxes, but in the end, even in a tough economy, somebody will take the risk & spend the money if they feel the return on investment will be high. The reason small businesses aren't hiring is not taxes but a pessimistic view of the economy. If he return on investment isn't high, even small businesses wil horde the cash if taxes are lower rather than hiring more employees.
And more government spending may result in a transient increase in hiring, but many of these jobs are temporary & unnecessary, & getting into more & more debt to create bloated jobs isn't a great idea either.
Among the major job-creaing sectors in America, manufacturing is on the decline. China has taken over American manufacturing. It will only shrink.
That leaves 3 other (non-governmental) sectors: service; research & development; special talent jobs (athletes, TV anchors, musicians, artists etc) - I'll leave the last segment out because its contribution is miniscule to the whole job market.
I was recently in India. I visited a city called Gurgaon. It is more a mega business park than a city, & most of these offices are either outsourcing companies or offices of foreign companies that have shifted some of their operations there. And these are not just those telemarketing or tech support jobs. Almost all sectors of the service industry is present: accounting, stock market reporting, educational services, customer realtions, advertising, you name it. And Gurgaon is just one of these centers, there are such business complexes all over India. NOIDA. Hitec City, Hyderabad. Bangalore. And other so-called Third World countries are building such centers as well. In addition to services, even some research & development is being outsourced. (And R & D jobs even those remaining in America are ver specialized, they need a master's or Doctorate degree, only a small fraction of the workforce will be eligible for those even if they aren't outsourced).
I won't go into the reasons for outsourcing in detail - we know it is due to cheaper labor, absence of frivolous lawsuits (& wastage of time) over harassment, less absurd environmental regulations & so on. In America a guy makes an off-color joke & the next thing you know someone complains, there is an HR inevstigation, a Disciplinary Action committee, a 6-figure lawsuit, & often the termination or suspension of an experienced employee. Sometimes when I hear about these lawsuits I wonder whether these women grew up under Taliban regime to be so easily offended! Same with racial harassment lawsuits, a well-meaning comment (like calling a Black person articulate) somehow becomes a racist statement! It seems businesses feel even the unions, the corruption, and the slowness of Third World countries are preferable to the lawsuit culture of America.
So the manufacturing sector is out. The service sector is severely endangered. Additionally, technology has made many low-skilled white collar & pink collar jobs obsolete. So where will the jobs come from in America? Oh, I hear nursing is a sector where jobs are plentiful. Oh Great! Out job growth depends upon how much we get sick! And who will pay for nursing care if the Middle Class is disappearing?
Two commentators, Lou Dobbs & Pat Buchanan, have actually identified the dangers of outsourcing jobs en masse to other countries, both economic, as well as security issues & permanent loss of skills. They are 'old-fashioned' conservatives and not the world-changing neocons. Unfortunately, as in many cases, they are slapped on with the labels 'protectionist' & even 'racist'. We would rather get screwed all over than be OMG a nasty protectionist!
Our politicians talk about creating jobs...the neocons have only one mantra - tax cuts, more money for business, especially small business, so they'll hire more people. The liberals believe more government intervention. Spend more money,stimulate the economy.
And both groups ignore the essential question: where will the jobs come from? I doubt having more money in the corporate coffers will necessarily result in more hiring. Corporations have amassed huge amounts of cash. They have also learned how to get by with less people. Maybe some small businesses would be more willing to take risks and expand if they had to pay less taxes, but in the end, even in a tough economy, somebody will take the risk & spend the money if they feel the return on investment will be high. The reason small businesses aren't hiring is not taxes but a pessimistic view of the economy. If he return on investment isn't high, even small businesses wil horde the cash if taxes are lower rather than hiring more employees.
And more government spending may result in a transient increase in hiring, but many of these jobs are temporary & unnecessary, & getting into more & more debt to create bloated jobs isn't a great idea either.
Among the major job-creaing sectors in America, manufacturing is on the decline. China has taken over American manufacturing. It will only shrink.
That leaves 3 other (non-governmental) sectors: service; research & development; special talent jobs (athletes, TV anchors, musicians, artists etc) - I'll leave the last segment out because its contribution is miniscule to the whole job market.
I was recently in India. I visited a city called Gurgaon. It is more a mega business park than a city, & most of these offices are either outsourcing companies or offices of foreign companies that have shifted some of their operations there. And these are not just those telemarketing or tech support jobs. Almost all sectors of the service industry is present: accounting, stock market reporting, educational services, customer realtions, advertising, you name it. And Gurgaon is just one of these centers, there are such business complexes all over India. NOIDA. Hitec City, Hyderabad. Bangalore. And other so-called Third World countries are building such centers as well. In addition to services, even some research & development is being outsourced. (And R & D jobs even those remaining in America are ver specialized, they need a master's or Doctorate degree, only a small fraction of the workforce will be eligible for those even if they aren't outsourced).
I won't go into the reasons for outsourcing in detail - we know it is due to cheaper labor, absence of frivolous lawsuits (& wastage of time) over harassment, less absurd environmental regulations & so on. In America a guy makes an off-color joke & the next thing you know someone complains, there is an HR inevstigation, a Disciplinary Action committee, a 6-figure lawsuit, & often the termination or suspension of an experienced employee. Sometimes when I hear about these lawsuits I wonder whether these women grew up under Taliban regime to be so easily offended! Same with racial harassment lawsuits, a well-meaning comment (like calling a Black person articulate) somehow becomes a racist statement! It seems businesses feel even the unions, the corruption, and the slowness of Third World countries are preferable to the lawsuit culture of America.
So the manufacturing sector is out. The service sector is severely endangered. Additionally, technology has made many low-skilled white collar & pink collar jobs obsolete. So where will the jobs come from in America? Oh, I hear nursing is a sector where jobs are plentiful. Oh Great! Out job growth depends upon how much we get sick! And who will pay for nursing care if the Middle Class is disappearing?
Two commentators, Lou Dobbs & Pat Buchanan, have actually identified the dangers of outsourcing jobs en masse to other countries, both economic, as well as security issues & permanent loss of skills. They are 'old-fashioned' conservatives and not the world-changing neocons. Unfortunately, as in many cases, they are slapped on with the labels 'protectionist' & even 'racist'. We would rather get screwed all over than be OMG a nasty protectionist!
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
What Happened to America?
Throughout the last century, we were the envy of the rest of the world. The place everyone around the world wantedto be. And we deserved it. We work harder than people in most countries. We have less vacation time than other countries; we are deep in debt; education and healthcare is very expensive in our country; and we have to compete for jobs with people from all over the world, through outsourcing and insourcing. And after all that it seems our economy is in deep trouble.
Our productivity is great, yes, and we are a great country. People from all over the world still want to come to America. At least that's what we hear.
And yet what is the price we pay for this productivity, and really who is benefitting from it. We are stressed out all the time. Pretty much every person I know is on sleeping pills, anxiety medications, pain medications, blood pressure medications, antidepressants, you name it. No other country in my knowledge uses drugs on a daily basis as we do. We have little or no job security, we move more than people in other countries for jobs, creating disruptions in our family lives, losing any sense of neighborhoods, and sadly, we are hardly the ones gaining from it - the income of most of us, the middle class, is stagnant, while the rich have gotten fabulously rich.
I often watch these TV programs where they show poor people living in India, in Africa, on the streets, with nothing to look forward to beyond mere survival, their children malnourished and often begging, or children working in dangerous jobs just to make their families make ends meet, & I've heard people say "aren't we lucky we were born in America!" And I wonder, why are people with a college education, with skills, born in a stable society so insecure that they have feel lucky they are not at the level of the poorest and most unskilled people of Third World countries. However it is a subliminal way by which the system says to the hapless worker "do not complain, be happy you are working here, otherwise you'll be like those people in Africa, so if you need to work 70 hr week with no vacations, have to come in when you're sick, move from city to city to get a job, miss your family, tough. Oh & you American worker, you have such a great work ethic!" Which is another way to say "OK, here's something to feel good, sucker!"
And the media rarely shows an typical middle class family in say, India, or Brazil, how their lives have improved tremendously over the last few years, they enjoy cheaper but very high quality education, cheaper healthcare, 5-6 weeks vacation time per year, a solid middle class lifestyle, and still have a pretty good productivity. And they are now getting ousourced jobs from US companies! But I've rarely heard people say "Gee, we are so unlucky, look at all these nice things people in many other countries are enjoying" - that would be like being unpatriotic. That would be having bad work ethic. Can't ask those questions!!
What happened to America? We were a nation caring about our people, our neighbors, now we are a market, giving jobs to people in other countries because it is more profitable, who cares what happens to our own countrymen. We at least could say we have the strongest economy in the world, well that hardly the case any more, we just heard if we don't bail out failing banks our economy may collapse. More of our youth are in jail than any other developed & even developing countries. We have college and high school shootings rarely seen in other countries. Our marriages break up at a higher rate than any other country. We are nervous about criticizing even the most atrocious behavior lest we be accused of racism or sexism. And we go to China, a country that was hard-core communist till the 1970s, to borrow money.
I believe in capitalism but with humanity. A theory becoming more important than human reality, than compassion, than empathy is a recipe for disaster. There was a time capitalism had a human face. Employers cared about their workers rather than regarding them as expense or potential lawsuits. Then came the professors & theorists with their free-market thoeries and got a bunch of pathetic politicians (including unfortunately some really powerful ones) under their control. And America suffered.
Our productivity is great, yes, and we are a great country. People from all over the world still want to come to America. At least that's what we hear.
And yet what is the price we pay for this productivity, and really who is benefitting from it. We are stressed out all the time. Pretty much every person I know is on sleeping pills, anxiety medications, pain medications, blood pressure medications, antidepressants, you name it. No other country in my knowledge uses drugs on a daily basis as we do. We have little or no job security, we move more than people in other countries for jobs, creating disruptions in our family lives, losing any sense of neighborhoods, and sadly, we are hardly the ones gaining from it - the income of most of us, the middle class, is stagnant, while the rich have gotten fabulously rich.
I often watch these TV programs where they show poor people living in India, in Africa, on the streets, with nothing to look forward to beyond mere survival, their children malnourished and often begging, or children working in dangerous jobs just to make their families make ends meet, & I've heard people say "aren't we lucky we were born in America!" And I wonder, why are people with a college education, with skills, born in a stable society so insecure that they have feel lucky they are not at the level of the poorest and most unskilled people of Third World countries. However it is a subliminal way by which the system says to the hapless worker "do not complain, be happy you are working here, otherwise you'll be like those people in Africa, so if you need to work 70 hr week with no vacations, have to come in when you're sick, move from city to city to get a job, miss your family, tough. Oh & you American worker, you have such a great work ethic!" Which is another way to say "OK, here's something to feel good, sucker!"
And the media rarely shows an typical middle class family in say, India, or Brazil, how their lives have improved tremendously over the last few years, they enjoy cheaper but very high quality education, cheaper healthcare, 5-6 weeks vacation time per year, a solid middle class lifestyle, and still have a pretty good productivity. And they are now getting ousourced jobs from US companies! But I've rarely heard people say "Gee, we are so unlucky, look at all these nice things people in many other countries are enjoying" - that would be like being unpatriotic. That would be having bad work ethic. Can't ask those questions!!
What happened to America? We were a nation caring about our people, our neighbors, now we are a market, giving jobs to people in other countries because it is more profitable, who cares what happens to our own countrymen. We at least could say we have the strongest economy in the world, well that hardly the case any more, we just heard if we don't bail out failing banks our economy may collapse. More of our youth are in jail than any other developed & even developing countries. We have college and high school shootings rarely seen in other countries. Our marriages break up at a higher rate than any other country. We are nervous about criticizing even the most atrocious behavior lest we be accused of racism or sexism. And we go to China, a country that was hard-core communist till the 1970s, to borrow money.
I believe in capitalism but with humanity. A theory becoming more important than human reality, than compassion, than empathy is a recipe for disaster. There was a time capitalism had a human face. Employers cared about their workers rather than regarding them as expense or potential lawsuits. Then came the professors & theorists with their free-market thoeries and got a bunch of pathetic politicians (including unfortunately some really powerful ones) under their control. And America suffered.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Why I abhor Pharmacists
We all know what doctors do; they diagnose diseases & decide on a treatment plan.
We all know what nurses do, they administer medication, apply dressings, chart patient info & attend to day-to-day patient necessities.
We all know what radiology technologists, physical therapists or midwifes do.
All these healthcare professionals have skills the average person doesn't have or cannot acquire without going through a rigorous educational program.
And then we have pharmacists. Those guys in white coats in retail drugstores who take your prescription, count the number of pills, give it to you & you're done. Somehow they claim to be healthcare professionals.
I hardly know what great skills these guys have. OK, they can count upto 90 (& not always correctly, I've on several occasions gotten the wrong number of pills). And apparently they can read, but even there I've my doubts, so many times we hear wrong medicine being dispensed because the pharmacist couldn't read properly. One particularly funny case is the Alzheimer's drug galantamine, intially its trade name was Reminyl, after several pharmacists in the US wrongly dispensed Amaryl (a diabetes drug) by misreading Reminyl, the manufacturer changed the name to Razadyne only in the USA (I guess pharamcists in other countries are more literate, or at least take the time to check if they aren't sure). Guess what? Now they are confusing Razadyne with Rozerem, a sleep drug!!
As someone who believes in bodily autonomy, I believe there should be no such thing as a presciption drug with the possible exception of narcotics or other drugs that may induce one to harm others. Otherwise, if I suddenly have an epiphany to take a calcium-channel blocker, an incontinence drug or a muscle relexant, it is my body, my money & I should have the right to do so. In fact in many countries one can get most drugs without a prescription & no, their streets are not littered with corpses of those who took an excess of, say, pimozide! Drugs are expensive, & little pleasurable effect would be obtained by taking most of them. In fact the no-prescription rule may save lives; I once asked a pharmacist what he would do if I walked in with acute angina & wanted nitro, he glibly said if I didn't have a prescription for nitro he would call 911 but wont give me any medication even if that meant the difference between life & death...he couldn't risk his license. Therein lies the problem - the regard the license more important than the real person. So much for being healthcare professionals!
"But we counsel patients of medication" say these pill-dispensing princes behind the pharmacy counter, "and we check drug interactions!" I have in my entire life never seen anyone stop and ask the pharmacist any health-related question, in fact since it takes a whole 30 minutes or more for them to count 30 tablets, most people are all too eager to leave once they get their medicine. Myabe in Wisconsin, where the law says so, resulting in many irritated, impatient customers. As to drug interactions, there are now so many free drug interactions checkers on the internet (& pretty reliable ones) one doesn't need a pharmacist - chances are he/she is using the same program. That doesn't mean people can't go to their doctors & get prescriptions in circumstances they feel the need to, nobody is saying that option wont exist-just that it shouldn't be a necessity.
Now I am not that familiar with inhospital pharmacists - maybe they do some good, when they're not killing patients with overdoses of heparin, that is. And I guess they also compound drugs, although judging from the fact many college dropouts can make illegal drugs in their kitchen sink (however reprehensible that may be), it doesn't sound like a complex skill.
And finally, and this is the most laughable, when pharmacists demand to be called Doctor becuase they have that PharmD! Now, I have no problems with a PhD in Comparative Literature or Poultry Science being called Dr so-&-so in an academic or professional setting, but in the healthcare environment, Doctor means physician. MD, DO & other professionals who diagnose & treat, like chiropractors, optometrists, podiatrists, dentists. Not PharmD, not Doctor of Nutrition, not Doctor of Aromatherapy.
We all know what nurses do, they administer medication, apply dressings, chart patient info & attend to day-to-day patient necessities.
We all know what radiology technologists, physical therapists or midwifes do.
All these healthcare professionals have skills the average person doesn't have or cannot acquire without going through a rigorous educational program.
And then we have pharmacists. Those guys in white coats in retail drugstores who take your prescription, count the number of pills, give it to you & you're done. Somehow they claim to be healthcare professionals.
I hardly know what great skills these guys have. OK, they can count upto 90 (& not always correctly, I've on several occasions gotten the wrong number of pills). And apparently they can read, but even there I've my doubts, so many times we hear wrong medicine being dispensed because the pharmacist couldn't read properly. One particularly funny case is the Alzheimer's drug galantamine, intially its trade name was Reminyl, after several pharmacists in the US wrongly dispensed Amaryl (a diabetes drug) by misreading Reminyl, the manufacturer changed the name to Razadyne only in the USA (I guess pharamcists in other countries are more literate, or at least take the time to check if they aren't sure). Guess what? Now they are confusing Razadyne with Rozerem, a sleep drug!!
As someone who believes in bodily autonomy, I believe there should be no such thing as a presciption drug with the possible exception of narcotics or other drugs that may induce one to harm others. Otherwise, if I suddenly have an epiphany to take a calcium-channel blocker, an incontinence drug or a muscle relexant, it is my body, my money & I should have the right to do so. In fact in many countries one can get most drugs without a prescription & no, their streets are not littered with corpses of those who took an excess of, say, pimozide! Drugs are expensive, & little pleasurable effect would be obtained by taking most of them. In fact the no-prescription rule may save lives; I once asked a pharmacist what he would do if I walked in with acute angina & wanted nitro, he glibly said if I didn't have a prescription for nitro he would call 911 but wont give me any medication even if that meant the difference between life & death...he couldn't risk his license. Therein lies the problem - the regard the license more important than the real person. So much for being healthcare professionals!
"But we counsel patients of medication" say these pill-dispensing princes behind the pharmacy counter, "and we check drug interactions!" I have in my entire life never seen anyone stop and ask the pharmacist any health-related question, in fact since it takes a whole 30 minutes or more for them to count 30 tablets, most people are all too eager to leave once they get their medicine. Myabe in Wisconsin, where the law says so, resulting in many irritated, impatient customers. As to drug interactions, there are now so many free drug interactions checkers on the internet (& pretty reliable ones) one doesn't need a pharmacist - chances are he/she is using the same program. That doesn't mean people can't go to their doctors & get prescriptions in circumstances they feel the need to, nobody is saying that option wont exist-just that it shouldn't be a necessity.
Now I am not that familiar with inhospital pharmacists - maybe they do some good, when they're not killing patients with overdoses of heparin, that is. And I guess they also compound drugs, although judging from the fact many college dropouts can make illegal drugs in their kitchen sink (however reprehensible that may be), it doesn't sound like a complex skill.
And finally, and this is the most laughable, when pharmacists demand to be called Doctor becuase they have that PharmD! Now, I have no problems with a PhD in Comparative Literature or Poultry Science being called Dr so-&-so in an academic or professional setting, but in the healthcare environment, Doctor means physician. MD, DO & other professionals who diagnose & treat, like chiropractors, optometrists, podiatrists, dentists. Not PharmD, not Doctor of Nutrition, not Doctor of Aromatherapy.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Healthcare: Right or Privilege?
I don't care really. It doesn't matter what it is. But, taking care of the health of its people is what a civilized nation does. It is one of the marks of being civilized.
One can extend the question: does a disabled person have the right to accomodations? Does a person whose house is burning down have the right to firefighters? Does a person who has just been stabbed have the right to be helped by passersby? Does one really care? We do these because we are civilized. And human.
Honestly in many ways most of our rights are how we defined them to be. One can say every human being has the right to life but then it gets dicey. The rights to equality between races & between genders have been recognized in America only for a relatively short period of time, and still not accepted in many countries & cultures.
The real problem is not so much whether it's a right but how to pay for it. If healthcare didn't cost so much, nobody would have cared. Then comes the next question, why is healthcare in the US so expensive? There is this thing gaining popularity called Medical Tourism, citizens of industrialized Western countries are traveling to Thailand, India, Costa Rica, Poland & other 'less developed' countries for medical treatment. And most seem satisfied with the care they get. And guess what! Most of the technology, medications and procedures where developed in the West, somettimes indirectly with the help of taxpayer's money, & yet it is prohibitively expensive in the West & affordable in 'poor' countries!!
One can extend the question: does a disabled person have the right to accomodations? Does a person whose house is burning down have the right to firefighters? Does a person who has just been stabbed have the right to be helped by passersby? Does one really care? We do these because we are civilized. And human.
Honestly in many ways most of our rights are how we defined them to be. One can say every human being has the right to life but then it gets dicey. The rights to equality between races & between genders have been recognized in America only for a relatively short period of time, and still not accepted in many countries & cultures.
The real problem is not so much whether it's a right but how to pay for it. If healthcare didn't cost so much, nobody would have cared. Then comes the next question, why is healthcare in the US so expensive? There is this thing gaining popularity called Medical Tourism, citizens of industrialized Western countries are traveling to Thailand, India, Costa Rica, Poland & other 'less developed' countries for medical treatment. And most seem satisfied with the care they get. And guess what! Most of the technology, medications and procedures where developed in the West, somettimes indirectly with the help of taxpayer's money, & yet it is prohibitively expensive in the West & affordable in 'poor' countries!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)