Some of the Dangers of Modern Medicine

Whether due to poor health or to help keep someone healthy, to deliver a child or try to save someone from death, there is one person who is always surely present: a doctor. Trained to care for and save lives, to a doctor, therefore, is entrusted this great responsibility of helping people maintain good health and live long. To be able to help people, though, trust will be a necessary factor; this is probably why when a doctor makes a prescription or recommends that a person undergoes laboratory tests or a surgical procedure the possibility of a refusal is close to nil, especially if the doctor making such prescription or recommendation is one highly esteemed in the medical profession. There is just one element for major caution, though; the fact that a doctor, regardless of how good or famous he or she may be, is still human and, thus, also likely to commit mistakes.

“Death by Medicine,” a study that was first published in 2006, is a compilation of statistical data that revealed alarming information on the negative effects of modern medicine. Besides revealing more than 750,000 deaths in the US every year (all due to poor medical care), the study also showed these yearly estimates: 20 million unnecessary prescriptions for antibiotics in treatment of minor viral infections; up to eight million people being subjected to surgical or invasive medical procedures that are actually not necessary; and, about nine million people being hospitalized despite the lack of real need for it.

One example of a particular prescription medicine that proved harmful to many of those who took it was Actos. This oral medication was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1999 for Type 2 diabetes. Also known under the name Pioglitazone, Actos was formulated to help control the blood sugar level in Type 2 diabetics by increasing their sensitivity to insulin, while decreasing the amount of glucose released by the liver.

Another pharmaceutical product, the actual safety of which is now being questioned, is the da Vinci Surgical System, a multi-armed surgical machine that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in minimally invasive surgical procedures. (Compared to open or invasive procedures, which require incisions that are about 4 inches long, a minimally-invasive surgery requires a number of very tiny incisions which will serve as entry points of the surgical instruments to be used in the procedure).

Both Actos and the da Vinci Surgical System proved effective, performing the purpose for which these were approved, especially during the first five years after they were made available in the market. Later, however, reports that linked both products to adverse effects started to be made, followed by lawsuits filed by patients who actually suffered harm due to the use of either product. Many of those who filed an Actos lawsuit, in particular, have sought compensation (from the drug’s manufacturer).

According to the website of the Actos lawyers at Williams Kherkher, aside from increasing the risk of developing bladder cancer, Actos has also been linked to the following: upper respiratory infection, heart failure, tract infection, lactic acidosis, liver failure, macular edema, muscle pain, diarrhea and, worst of all, death. The ill-effects being linked to the da Vinci Surgical System, on the other hand, include: infections, burns and internal bleeding, one of the mechanical arms accidentally hitting the face of a patient; puncture on the colon during prostatectomy; death of patient after a spleen surgery or during a hysterectomy procedure; and, failure of the robot to function properly right before the start of the surgery.

According to the website of the National Injury Law Center, the da Vinci Surgical Robot continues to be used in hundreds of thousands of procedures, which include thyroid cancer surgeries, removal of gall bladder, gastric bypass, prostate removal surgery and hysterectomy. The Center also includes excessive bleeding, serious injury to the bowels, and punctured blood vessels or ureters, in the list of harms caused by the da Vinci robot.

While the effects of some injuries may be irreversible, seeking the help of highly-qualified lawyers could help the victims seek the compensation which will help them undergo the medical treatment that they need. This compensation should also cover the wages lost by the patient (that is, if the patient were employed, but was rendered incapable of reporting to work for some days due to the harm caused by the said medical products).