Understanding drugs

October 20, 2011

A friend was trying to comfort me.  She suggested that maybe there would be a new drug treatment soon.  I said there wouldn’t be because, well, there won’t be.

The process is slow.  If a scientist comes across some great discovery today, it will be many years before it is a drug that I could take.  And of course, even then, my doctor may not want to prescribe it or my insurance may not cover it.  But first there needs to be a drug that could help, and there just aren’t very many of those.

It was reassuring to see this article in the newspaper the other day.  Sometimes, like with penicillin, there are fortuitous accidents.  I don’t know about you, but I really don’t want to wait around and hope that someone gets lucky.  A lot of medications are used off-label, meaning they were developed to treat one thing, and ended up working well for something else (think: Viagra.)  And then there are the meds that are being used as they were designed.  I suppose I could do some research to figure out how many of these exist now, but I’m too tired or too lazy or maybe both.  The point is, there are a lot of medications that are not being used as they were designed.  That’s ok, but wouldn’t it be nice if it didn’t have to happen that way, because drug interactions were so well understood that scientists could design medications to treat any condition they chose?

That’s the dream.  Reading this article, it’s good to see that some people are pursuing this approach, and I sincerely hope they can make it work, and soon.  Now I know that doesn’t mean I’d get a drug that would help my conditions specifically.  I’m sure these methods would be used to treat more common illnesses first.  Still, after they treat cancer and AIDS and so many others, maybe, one day, they’ll get around to mine.

There are limited resources, and time continues to alternately crawl and fly by, but it’s encouraging to see progress like this.  Throwing money at research isn’t enough.  Politicians and argue forever about how to allocate funds.  At the end of the day, though, it’s about being smart.  Think about how much farther the dollars would go with greater understanding of the human body.  Think about what could be achieved!

 

[Note: Sign up for free emails of posts by clicking the button in the top right corner of any page.]


The Pedestal Effect

October 17, 2011

I’m so excited to be a guest writer today at ChronicBabe!  Please check out my post on the pedestal effect, and then check out some of the other great stuff ChronicBabe has to offer.

 

[Note: To get free emails of posts to this site, simply sign up in the top right corner of any page.]


Little things are really big

October 15, 2011

I came across this article in the newspaper this morning, about a local grocery store that is the second in the country to add Braille labels to its shelves.  I never noticed the lack of Braille before, but as soon as I saw the headline, I wondered why it’s taken so long to happen.

Braille labels probably seems like a small thing to many people, but for those who need it, it will make a big difference.  But then, that’s true of so many things, isn’t it?  Audible walk signals at intersections, smooth curb cuts, railings on staircases, ramps…. people who don’t need them just pass right by, but for so many others they make life not only easier, but manageable.  It makes me wonder what else we could, and should, be doing.  Did you notice that the Braille grocery store labels came about because of a first grader?  It’s that young perspective that we all need to have, to question everything, to propose solutions.  Maybe we need to get a group of children together to fix the inequities.  Either way, we definitely should not settle for the status quo.  We need to continue to change things for the better.  There’s always room for improvement, so let’s find the most inefficient areas and improve them.

I’m as guilty as anyone of sitting back and letting others do the work.  I contribute in small ways, but I haven’t stepped up in a big way, at least not lately.  I think it’s time for me.  What about you?

[Note: To get free emails of posts to this site, simply sign up in the top right corner of any page.]


Through the eyes of babes

October 9, 2011

I just got a completely new perspective on my illnessess, all from talking to a three-year-old.

If you spend any time with children, you know that they’re naturally curious.  “Why?” is a question that you hear a lot.  I’m spending the day with a good friend and her little girls.  The older one is approaching four years old and she questions everything.  Why do I like drinking water?  Why don’t I like tomatoes?  Why don’t I want to sit down?  Why am I taking medicine?  Why won’t I get down on the ground to play? 

We all know that it can be difficult to explain these things to an adult, but it’s so different trying to explain them to a child.  I can say that I do something because it makes me feel better, but I want to be careful; I don’t want her to think she should do the same thing to feel good.  And if I say that I don’t do something because it makes me feel bad, will she start to think she shouldn’t do it, in case it makes her feel bad?  She doesn’t know what a chronic illness is, and I don’t think she should, not at her age.  Explaining all of my dos and don’ts, should and shouldn’ts, can and can’ts has taken on a whole new meaning.  It forces me to look at my own abilities and limitations in a new way, to think of ways to explain it all to a three-year-old without lying.  It’s an intereting challenge, and one that I am glad to take on, because I think that the new perspective is healthy for me.

If you want to see your health in a new way, trying chatting about it with a child for while.  I can almost guarantee that you won’t see your illnesses in the same way anymore.

 

[Note: To get free emails of posts to this site, simply sign up in the top right corner of any page.]