Posted by connie on 12/31/2004, 10:36 am, in reply to "Re: Deramaxx, Vioxx, Celebrex--" Yes, probably a lot of the impetus for that comes from clients. People today think that discomfort and suffering are to be avoided at all costs. The nurses were flabbergasted when my mom, age 78, refused pain meds after her hip-replacement surgery last year. She told them that the discomfort was nothing she couldn't tolerate, and that it would go away soon enough. But most people don't have that view. The prescription of meds for *chronic* conditions troubles me more, actually, than the prescription of meds for trauma/recovery. The best option for a chronic condition is to manage it, and there should be awareness of why the chronic condition is what it is, and what the body is signaling. Constant inflammation, for example, can be managed far more effectively through diet, certain exercises (swimming, yoga), and various non-toxic supplements, than it can by suppressing it and stressing the other organs in the body. It goes back to a holistic approach: viewing the body as an organism, not as a collection of independent organs. But nowadays "holistic" is almost as dirty a word as "liberal." However, the last laugh is usually not had by the allopathic community.
4.17.193.130
I even kind of understand this: for so long, there was nothing given for pain after surgeries like spays; I think that what happened then was the drug companies saw an opportunity, and took it; and vets feel like they ought to be doing more to alleviate pain in surgery patients.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread