How to Acquire Antibiotics for Sale

In the old days, no one can acquire antibiotics for sale if they do not have a doctor’s prescription for it.   Most people of those ages do think that it is rightly appropriate to first have a doctor’s prescription or at least his recommendation in order for one to be allowed to get some antibiotics for sale to treat their ailments, but today, due to modern advancements in science, health and technology, this way of thinking is now being overlooked.  The way most of us think about antibiotics today is also different, too.  When we get a bacterial infection, we would usually want to get it treated right away, and that’s what antibiotics for sale without a prescription is all about.

You may be wondering, how can one acquire antibiotics for sale without a prescription by a doctor? If you live in the United States or any similar country, then most of the times it would be difficult for you to be able to buy some antibiotics for sale right at your local pharmacy’s counter.  In reality, there is a way on how to get some antibiotics for sale even without a doctor’s prescription on hand, and there are actually 4 ways: through a pet store, take a trip to Mexico, visit an oriental/ethnic market or convenience store, or you can buy antibiotics for sale via the Internet.

If you are already a pet lover or you have a pet at home, for example, a fish, then any pharmacist will say to you that human antibiotics are usually used to treat fish diseases, and you do not need a prescription just to buy antibiotics for your pet fish.  Some antibiotics for sale available at pet stores where you do not need a prescription are: ampicillin, erythromycin, tetracycline in either tablet or capsule form. Most people would think it’s not a great idea to take vet medicines; however, in chemical form, these drugs are actually the same as what you will get from a local pharmacy meant for human use. Read more…

Obama crashes CMA annual meeting

Well, not really. But with the CMA’s annual meeting set to begin this weekend, the long shadow of the US president is definitely looming over the coming debate on the future of Canada’s healthcare system.

It’s become a tradition in recent years for the CMA to release a discussion document prior to their annual shindig, laying out the leadership’s thoughts on weighty matters of health policy. And it’s also become traditional that this document should be a thinly-veiled call for more privatization, hidden under a few unconvincing nostrums about patient welfare.

But not this year. This year’s document actually calls for the principles of the Canada Health Act to be extended to prescription drugs and long-term care. Nor is there any of the nagging for private insurance and for-profit delivery that we’ve come to associate with these releases.

Is it coincidence that the CMA is changing its tune right after the US acted to curb the worst excesses of private healthcare? Unlikely. Obama’s reforms have changed the landscape.

In recent years, while Canadian patients looked at the US system and wanted to run away from it as fast as possible, CMA leaders looked at America and saw something quite different. They saw the doctors’ fat incomes, and they made it their task to keep up with the Joneses.

But now, we’re treated to the spectacle of the Americans themselves running away from their private system, albeit not very far away. No-one, least of all reform’s opponents, believes that the US will go back on these reforms, even if Republicans gain power. A slew of polls have just shown Obama’s health reforms steadily gaining in popularity south of the border. You can’t stop history. Privatization is in retreat.

The advocates of privatization within the CMA are also on the back foot. The CMA can’t credibly bemoan the “unsustainability” of Canadian healthcare expenditure– a theme they repeat this year – when their proposed role model is a system that was threatening to consume the world’s largest economy. They can’t credibly claim to be speaking for patients when they are the main source of schemes to squeeze more dollars out of the patient’s pocket.

Previous CMA leaders have nevertheless sought, like Obama’s health reform opponents, to portray themselves as the patient’s defenders against a heartless government. But the shoe fit poorly – poll after poll has shown that Canadians overwhelmingly favour government-run, publicly financed healthcare. It’s the CMA leadership that has been the odd man out, and its motives have been all too transparent.

The organization has done itself considerable harm with self-serving and intellectually dishonest arguments unworthy of a scientific body. For example, CMA leaders have argued that Canada needs reform because international monitors rank it poorly in quality of health delivery among developed nations. They make the same point this year, in fact. But they’ve routinely failed to mention that the same rankings score the US – towards which they’ve advocated moving – far below all publicly-funded systems including Canada.

The apparent shift in CMA policy is a step in the right direction. Canada's health system has many problems, but underpaid doctors really isn't one of them. One of the leadership’s new recommendations is a Charter for Patient-centred Care. Because, the CMA now says, the discussion in recent years has drifted too far from what should be the central issue: the needs of the patient. That is certainly true. Physician, heal thyself.
Owen Dyer

3 comments:

sharon ( aka Purley Quirt ) said...

Every lion in the jungle has a thorn in it's paw now.

Who will take it out?

The political / collegial ties that bind?

The devotion of the ?abandoned patient?

Worst case scenario #1: DILUTING physician power to prescribe

Looks like we are back to " blood letting" ....... because the only true power and unlimited access to the patient is through the " power of prescription"

However, that power has now become " the thorn" as we know everyone with internet can find their closest free pharmacy connect in their spam.

What duplicitous interim potential could this gesture of giving accessibilitiy ( one of the tenets of the Canada Health Act) have?

(a)Negate attraction to the spam offerings?
(b)Increase drug-induced illness as amateurs dabble in full self care?

Maybe the true goal is the " aftermath" where the lion released from the thorn once again becomes the best friend of the "one" who removed it????

Is that " best friend" the lion itself?
If so ..... the beat(ing) of the patient/client goes on....
oh well..... patients will still be in the centre of the circle..... dodging rocks..... as they compromise the publicly paid health system even more :(

Worst case scenario #2: EXPANDING physician power to prescribe

The revenue generation for the physician of sending out NP's and PA's into new markets simply requiring a signature from the head that turns the body is profoundly " exponential".......
....... as Pharmacia finally consumes the client physician who becomes merely an extension of it's geometrically growing prescription power over the patient.

....... alas..... Eustace becomes the dragon...... :(

[NOTE: Aslan rescued Eustace with an ethic deeper than profit or power..... now there's a lion!!!!!!!! ]

said...

I am not sure about Obama's follow-through in regards to health care. He pushed the bill out the door so he can have a checkmark in his presidency, but I do not think the average american even understands the benefits they now got.

said...

Very Nice review and I kind connect with what I read.
I agreee with what you said..wish that you keep working the same manner and educating us till the end.