If an elder ends up in a "nursing home" visit often and make yourself known or the end will be painful and near for the inmate. It's funny how people will say "mom needs to be in a "care" facility" because they cannot take care of her 24/7 (as if she needs 24/7) and then can make an hour a day to visit. (You don't need to be there more than ten minutes to keep the screws on their toes.)
My mother was in one of these lovely on top, hell-hole down below places when she fell ill and was sent to the hole. I came back from travel to visit and her first words were "I thirst." She looked horrible.
I got her water and other liquids, and inquired of the nurse what her condition was. As a younger sibling, I was not on the list of approved discussants. Clearly her treatment was killing her. I made a nuisance of myself and managed to see the pills my mother was being given, and I later inquired obliquely as to the same pill on the pill cart being given to another. Out of context, the nurse simply said "Aricept." I went home and looked it up. It is for dementia, Alzheimers.
Odd, I thought, as a medical lab scientist working in University laboratories, my mother had 40 years earlier volunteered for a longitudinal study on Alzheimers. No drugs, just habits and outcomes. Every year she was subject to a battery of measurements as a part of this study. And every year they told her she was fine, no symptoms. So how come the pills?
Aha! Alzheimers cannot be diagnosed until after death, you see, in an autopsy. So we cannot know if she really has it until she is dead and autopsied. Now shut up. OK, but if she has no symptoms, why the treatment? HEPA secrecy laws forbid anyone to answer my questions. Incidentally, Aricept side effects are appetite suppressant. And if not being fed, well, liquids come with the food. Medical secrecy laws are to protect the powers that be, not their victims.
By literally nursing my mother back to health in spite of the top-flight health facility she paid for, I was able to get her coherent enough to order the staff to let me look at the records. I tell you secrecy is meant to protect the state, the drug companies and malefactors. The records named names, and I raised a stink, the Aricept stopped. My mother recovered.
They had sold off her apartment to another so now they had a conflict of interest in keeping her in the hole. They promised to move her to the new highrise, and she died on the day she was to move.
Do I think there is a concerted effort to kill off the elderly? Of course! Make as much money as can be made off others' suffering, and then kill them off.
Yes, under capitalism, drug companies are out to make a buck killing the undesirables. It is the only system that is willing to kill its customers (but outside of capitalism these people would not be customers.) Future historians will look back on 20th century medicine as the most cruel and brutal in history.
We need a web-based system of matching the young with the old living in their own homes, for the benefit of both. That would probably be a good business. Remember, what goes around comes around.
Deregulate medicine, so we can have competition, and lowering costs while ever improving patient and doctor satisfaction.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
My mother was in one of these lovely on top, hell-hole down below places when she fell ill and was sent to the hole. I came back from travel to visit and her first words were "I thirst." She looked horrible.
I got her water and other liquids, and inquired of the nurse what her condition was. As a younger sibling, I was not on the list of approved discussants. Clearly her treatment was killing her. I made a nuisance of myself and managed to see the pills my mother was being given, and I later inquired obliquely as to the same pill on the pill cart being given to another. Out of context, the nurse simply said "Aricept." I went home and looked it up. It is for dementia, Alzheimers.
Odd, I thought, as a medical lab scientist working in University laboratories, my mother had 40 years earlier volunteered for a longitudinal study on Alzheimers. No drugs, just habits and outcomes. Every year she was subject to a battery of measurements as a part of this study. And every year they told her she was fine, no symptoms. So how come the pills?
Aha! Alzheimers cannot be diagnosed until after death, you see, in an autopsy. So we cannot know if she really has it until she is dead and autopsied. Now shut up. OK, but if she has no symptoms, why the treatment? HEPA secrecy laws forbid anyone to answer my questions. Incidentally, Aricept side effects are appetite suppressant. And if not being fed, well, liquids come with the food. Medical secrecy laws are to protect the powers that be, not their victims.
By literally nursing my mother back to health in spite of the top-flight health facility she paid for, I was able to get her coherent enough to order the staff to let me look at the records. I tell you secrecy is meant to protect the state, the drug companies and malefactors. The records named names, and I raised a stink, the Aricept stopped. My mother recovered.
They had sold off her apartment to another so now they had a conflict of interest in keeping her in the hole. They promised to move her to the new highrise, and she died on the day she was to move.
Do I think there is a concerted effort to kill off the elderly? Of course! Make as much money as can be made off others' suffering, and then kill them off.
Yet pharmacy records revealed that most of these patients, almost 54 percent, received at least one of what the researchers delicately called “medications of questionable benefit.” More than a third were given a cholinesterase inhibitor (Aricept is the best known) and a quarter received memantine (Namenda), both commonly prescribed for dementia. More than 20 percent were on statins to lower cholesterol, and 7 percent were on blood thinners.We tolerate this because we benefit from the elders being hurried along. Matters are arranged so we cannot know. "It won't be long now" came the words. She'll be gone in weeks. My mother grew and changed her last four years more than in her entire life, it was amazing to encounter. I am glad I stopped in our instance what is widespread.
Yes, under capitalism, drug companies are out to make a buck killing the undesirables. It is the only system that is willing to kill its customers (but outside of capitalism these people would not be customers.) Future historians will look back on 20th century medicine as the most cruel and brutal in history.
We need a web-based system of matching the young with the old living in their own homes, for the benefit of both. That would probably be a good business. Remember, what goes around comes around.
Deregulate medicine, so we can have competition, and lowering costs while ever improving patient and doctor satisfaction.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
1 comments:
Sorry for your loss. From what you said here (which I agree) I would ask this. Could these drugs and 'nursing home' culture be a hidden way our government is dealing with the financial crisis ahead for social security? Instead of dealing with it, they can eliminate, silently, those drawing on the money. If they are gone then they do not need to pay for it. To eliminate their debt then they eliminate their creditors.
Brutal indeed
Post a Comment