Discussions

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling that says you can’t “own” DNA is a reason to celebrate for both our patients and innovative researchers. America’s highest court has ruled unanimously that “products of nature” cannot be patented. The ruling overturned a lower federal court decision to allow Myriad Genetics’ patent of two human genes—BRCA1 and BRCA2. This is going to have a positive effect on both cancer testing costs and genetic testing more generally.

Should we baby boomers be feeling guilty now that everyone else seems to have finally clued into the developed world’s worst-kept secret: there are lots of us, we didn’t have enough children of our own to replenish the taxpayer base, and we didn’t contribute enough in taxes to cover our future health needs as increasingly frail citizens.

Ken Burns' attempt to put the fate of the profession back in pharmacists' hands wasn't thwarted—the revolution was simply stalled. But he'll never achieve his goal without your support.

With so many options, how do prescribers decide which form of birth control is best suited for each patient?

I read the posting written by Dr. Doug Mark with some sadness. In fact, I will confess the announcement of Craig Bromell as COFPS chief negotiator did not get very much of my attention but something else certainly has: I am much more concerned with the decision by the COFPS to marginalize medical students, and perhaps others as well.

One of the basic flaws in the arguments of Paul Caldwell’s “Show Me the Evidence” article (Medical Post June 25, 2013) is that he seems to think we live in a “billiard ball” universe where one thing causes another. The problem is that we don’t, and the problem with modern medicine generally is that we think that we do. Hence the difficulty I have with his article.