The correct use of drugs

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
 Most people think that the pill is 
 sniper bullet, without a miss striking the target. 
 Actually it's more like shrapnel 
 the projectile, beating by area ... 
 E. M. Tareev

The achievements of medicine in the treatment evoke special interest. This is understandable: in the end, patients judge the doctor not so much by the way he diagnoses the case, how many on the results of treatment. After all, when the patient or his relatives with anxiety interested in diagnosis, they are essentially concerned with another question: is it possible with the disease cope?
Every future doctor for another student lead the Roman saying: who is well diagnoses, the well treats. This problem, however, is more complicated than it seems at first glance. Indeed, the diagnosis is a prerequisite for the appropriate treatment.
And here begin with "but". In most cases the diagnosis of diseases (unlike treatment) based on generally accepted criteria, with which (if the disease does not leak atypical or not is objective difficulties for recognition) a competent physician familiar, regardless of where he received medical education. For example, signs of acute inflammation of the lungs, or stomach ulcers describes the same in all the manuals published or abroad. With treatment more difficult issue. Of course, in medicine, there are non-controversial provisions: for example, the General principles of treatment of the same acute pneumonia (appointment of antibiotics, maintaining cardiovascular activity) or severe bleeding (stop) can't be questioned. At the same time, the treatment of the patient in the broad sense (not only medical) often reflects the views of different scientists and different medical schools.
Here are a few examples.
I am convinced that to say to the sick of the fact that he had a malignant tumor in incurable stage - rough ethical and psychological, and thus and therapeutic error; in the United States for a number of years taken sick about it to inform. In our hospitals with great efficiency and is widely used physiotherapy; in many clinics it is not given to such values. Sometimes diametrically opposite views expressed regarding the appropriateness of the use of certain dietary treatments, medication.
Hence, one should not conclude that for the evaluation of treatment methods, there is no criteria. They are based on modern tested "average" for our time concepts and attitudes taken by the Soviet authorities. It is necessary to make a reservation. In medicine is constantly coming up with new ideas, new methods, and some old ones die off. Naturally, the doctor is obliged to keep pace with the times and to be on top of the requirements of modern medical science and modern patient.
The word "modern patient" is selected not by chance, for, as we have seen, it has its own peculiarities: it differs by the increased level of education and access to health information. This is one of the main prerequisites for the progressive self-treatment.
This problem is so serious that it is necessary to stop more in detail.
In the US, for example, for 5 years (1973-1977,) published more than 600 books on self-treatment. However, against the background of accessibility and the free nature of the Soviet health observed in self seems unnatural. In fact, why to use it, if it is almost always possible to get medical care?
First of all, it should be noted that our contemporary heals itself not only when sick, but when he was still healthy. He does not want to compromise.