It may not be obvious to many people, but the recent heparin deaths show the need to end our current prescription system.

I have argued this before, the endless benefits that will accrue from ending the government's regulation of all things medical, but in the heparin case I have a new argument.

The question is, how many of my readers will want to buy any pharmaceuticals made in China? Well, too bad, it's not your choice. Thanks to our prescription system you have two choices, name brand or generic. Now, if you recognize the name brand as a company that manufactures in China, you can choose the generic, but that's it. Your generic could come from anywhere.

But, because the law has established the pharmacist as gatekeeper to all things pharmaceutical, you cannot check out various alternate "generic" brands, you cannot do the research, you have no control at all.

And, woe unto you if your doctor prescribed name brand only. You no longer have a legal right to get the generic. Because the law says you lack the knowledge to decide such things for yourself, you must take what the doctor orders, even if it is Chinese heparin.

It is finally time to treat medication as we do any other product. You go to a store and buy what you wish, choosing from competing brands*. You will obviously want a doctor's advice when picking treatments for unfamiliar diseases, but not always**. You can buy aspirin or antacid on your own, I think a diabetic can pick out their own insulin after taking the same dose for twenty years, and I certainly think a woman knows which birth control pills she takes without seeing a gynecologist every six months.

But there is one huge advantage to the opening up of a competitive, free market in drugs, it will allow you to choose what you take. If you are frightened by Chinese drugs, you don't need to hope your doctor or your pharmacist is willing to help you avoid them, you can choose to do so yourself.

Well, ending prescriptions is not the only step needed. As I mentioned in my notes, we will need some patent reform as well***. But the first step is to open up the market and end the ridiculous controlling system we have now. Once we accept that people have the right to buy and sell commodities without the government interfering it will go a long way to clearing out market abuses.

And if we accept the benefits of a free market in pharmaceuticals, it may go a long way to ridding ourselves of government interference in other fields as well.

----------------------------------------------

* Yes, there is a need for patent reform in pharmaceutical as well. For example, the practice of making a minute change and getting new patent needs to be reexamined. However, when the barriers to comparison shopping drop, there will also be more push for patent reform. We rarely see such patent abuse in competitive fields, it is only in the cartelized, over-regulated pharmaceutical market that such practices could continue unchallenged, as there is no incentive for a challenger to fight, as the market entry barriers, due to regulation, are so high.

** A perfect example (besides my horror stories about my pain medication) can be found in the recurrent sinus infections I had throughout the late 80's. I had no health insurance at the time, so I ended up going to walk-in clinics. Every time I would tlel the doctor I had frequent sinus infections and needed 10 days of amoxicillin. Every time I was sent home with decongestants. I would return, go home with more decongestants. The third trip they would prescribe 10 days of amoxicillin. It happened so often I started to make jokes about it. Though one time the insistence that I did not know what I had led tot he infection moving into my lungs, which left me feeling a bit less amused about the whole thing. (And, yes, I am well aware of the over use of antibiotics, but I would point out that antibiotics have been prescription only for some time, so I think doctors not patients are to blame for that. So I fail to see how prescription control stops it.)

*** I am not advocating anything silly like eliminating patent protection. Drug companies obviously need patent protection to encourage development. On the other hand, because it is such a closed market, they tend to be able to do things which they could not do in a free market. Your doctor may be convinced to prescribe only the latest drug, but without prescriptions you would be free to choose the older version no longer under patent. With prescriptions that option is closed to you unless you persuade your doctor. You should not have to persuade someone else in order to purchase something.