Ethics concerns about pharmacy

[tyrosinase]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I am not in any way trying to start a flame war here... looking for genuine advice only please. 🙂

I am extremely interested in pharmacy, but am concerned about having to dispense drugs that would violate my conscience. It has long been my goal of becoming a pharmacist, but only recently did I learn that contraceptives may have some effects after fertilization (should it occur as a breakthrough event), which is a concern to me. Since then, I feel my life and dreams are shattered because I know from working as a retail pharmacy tech that these are dispensed many times a day and cannot be avoided, in retail anyway.

Are there other venues of pharmacy besides retail where these drugs are not used? Hospital, compounding, etc?

I know that many do not share my viewpoint, but how would I deal with this? I have already looked into other fields, and am even currently in nursing school, but am really unhappy and depressed about abandoning my dreams. 🙁 I love pharmacy, even retail, and feel it is a great fit for me otherwise, so to have to change careers because of this is very hard for me. :cry:

 

[Pharmacy Kid]

There is no strong evidence that Levonorgestrel (found in emergency contraception) prevents implantation of an embryo.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19281662

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/201...g-after-pills-dont-cause-abortion-studies-say

http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecwork.html

 

[apteryx]

Well, you can give up pharmacy because you feel it violates your beliefs.

Then maybe you can take a look at the thousands and thousands of children being used in sweatshops to produce the clothing that you wear everyday and decide that by buying those products, you're directly contributing to what some call modern-day slavery.

Then realize that many of the food products you use everyday are made by horrible companies like Nestle Corp, who actively commit genocide by the strategic use of infant formula in 3rd world countries.

Then you can take a step back and realize that horrible things are happening every day that you are unwillingly a part of, unless you live on an island with Tom Hanks and Wilson, and realize that maybe these drugs aren't really that big of a deal if you're in pharmacy anyway.


Don't know what to tell you. Go sell some herbal medicines? You'll be dealing with people taking these meds at some point. Did you know many meds you dispense sometimes cause people to die as an adverse effect, much like the contraceptive meds in question? I don't see a way to live comfortably in the Western world and not find some way you're infringing on the rights and liberties of those less fortunate.

Hope that helps...?

 

[BenJammin]

Nothing says irony quite like someone refusing to sell Plan B for moral reasons while wearing Nike shoes made by workers in very immoral conditions.

 

[rph3664]

My own personal experience with Plan B is that it's dispensed nowhere near as much as lay people think it is. It's VERY expensive and has horrendous side effects; no sane person would use it as Plan A, that's for sure.

Long term care would be an environment where you would not have to deal with this. Unless you worked in a place that serviced group homes for the mentally ill or the MR/DD population, very few of your patients would be of reproductive age, and should a sexual assault occur or be suspected, they would be taken to the ER anyway and receive it there. There are some independent pharmacies that do not stock this or that drug, and you might choose to work there.

 

[xiphoid2010]

My own personal experience with Plan B is that it's dispensed nowhere near as much as lay people think it is. It's VERY expensive and has horrendous side effects; no sane person would use it as Plan A, that's for sure.

Long term care would be an environment where you would not have to deal with this. Unless you worked in a place that serviced group homes for the mentally ill or the MR/DD population, very few of your patients would be of reproductive age, and should a sexual assault occur or be suspected, they would be taken to the ER anyway and receive it there. There are some independent pharmacies that do not stock this or that drug, and you might choose to work there.

don't forget nuclear. "yes, I would like 1 dose of levonorgestrol-I131 please."

 

[npage148]

All birth control can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, not dispensing that either?

Don't want to do they job? Pick a new job

 

[Carboxide]

Since this is almost always a religious issue...remember, it is not your job to keep other people from sinning. It is only your job to keep YOURSELF from sinning.

 

[PharmDstudent]

I am not in any way trying to start a flame war here... looking for genuine advice only please. 🙂

I am extremely interested in pharmacy, but am concerned about having to dispense drugs that would violate my conscience. It has long been my goal of becoming a pharmacist, but only recently did I learn that contraceptives may have some effects after fertilization (should it occur as a breakthrough event), which is a concern to me. Since then, I feel my life and dreams are shattered because I know from working as a retail pharmacy tech that these are dispensed many times a day and cannot be avoided, in retail anyway.

Are there other venues of pharmacy besides retail where these drugs are not used? Hospital, compounding, etc?

I know that many do not share my viewpoint, but how would I deal with this? I have already looked into other fields, and am even currently in nursing school, but am really unhappy and depressed about abandoning my dreams. 🙁 I love pharmacy, even retail, and feel it is a great fit for me otherwise, so to have to change careers because of this is very hard for me. :cry:

Simple... work as an inpatient pharmacist at a Catholic hospital. Problem solved. Oh, and you're welcome!

 

[Ackj]

You could do palliative care, can't imagine them using contraceptives. You might hit some other ethical problems in that area though.

 

[BidingMyTime]

As other's have mentioned, there are areas of pharmacy you can work that would not require you to dispense birth control and/or Plan B:

1) Catholic hospital....and probably most hospitals (generally if pt's are on birth control, they will bring in their own pack to use, not get one from the pharmacy)
2) own your own pharmacy-then you set the rules....or find an independent pharmacy to work with where the owner feels the same as you
3) consulting pharmacy (to nursing homes)
4) nuclear pharmacy
5) use your pharmacy degree for related fields (ie research, drug detailing, etc.)

 

[BenJammin]

People are basing their careers around birth control...unbelievable.

 

[zelman]

My own personal experience with Plan B is that it's dispensed nowhere near as much as lay people think it is. It's VERY expensive and has horrendous side effects; no sane person would use it as Plan A, that's for sure...

You don't work in a college town, do you?

 

[mursepharmd]

when I floated in a big college town store all i did was fill birth control and valtrex refills. And non stop Plan B sales.

OP i think you should look for a store in a senior community, that way they never carry OCs or Plan b

 

[Dalteparin]

Simple... work as an inpatient pharmacist at a Catholic hospital. Problem solved. Oh, and you're welcome!

Actually, most hospitals don't stock birth control pills. If you think about it, most of the women of childbearing age who come to a hospital are there to bear a child, and thus haven't been using contraception lately. Most of the other women in the hospital are post-menopausal and don't need contraception, so it doesn't make a lot of financial sense for a hospital to stock BCPs for the few women who come in taking them. Sometimes you will be asked to identify patients' own birth control pills for hospital use, but that's only to prove that they actually brought in the pill and not something illegal.

A lot of hospitals do stock Plan B for rape victims in the ER, but if you're not the ER pharmacist, chances are you can avoid dealing with it.

 

[zelman]

I am not in any way trying to start a flame war here... looking for genuine advice only please. 🙂

I am extremely interested in pharmacy, but am concerned about having to dispense drugs that would violate my conscience. It has long been my goal of becoming a pharmacist, but only recently did I learn that contraceptives may have some effects after fertilization (should it occur as a breakthrough event), which is a concern to me. Since then, I feel my life and dreams are shattered because I know from working as a retail pharmacy tech that these are dispensed many times a day and cannot be avoided, in retail anyway.

Are there other venues of pharmacy besides retail where these drugs are not used? Hospital, compounding, etc?

I know that many do not share my viewpoint, but how would I deal with this? I have already looked into other fields, and am even currently in nursing school, but am really unhappy and depressed about abandoning my dreams. 🙁 I love pharmacy, even retail, and feel it is a great fit for me otherwise, so to have to change careers because of this is very hard for me. :cry:

ACE Inhibitors, methotrexate and other anti-neoplastics will straight up kill rapidly reproducing cells like zygotes (well, ace inhibitors slightly later in development). I hope you don't have any patients with hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis or cancer in the medical field you select.

 

[Digsbe]

Instead of mocking their beliefs why not provide an answer?

There are other avenues, but as others have said in retail you will be dispensing lots of oral contraception. Although Plan B is fully OTC now from what I understand, that's not something you are responsible for.

If it violates your conscience and you know you can't go with such an act then don't do a job for the money if it means going against what you strongly believe is right and wrong. You could go into areas of clinical pharmacy that don't really dispense, you could go into industry, you can work for an insurance company, you can go into nuclear or compounding, you could work in a care facility or infusion center, you could go into academia and teach or do research, you could also run your own independent and refuse to stock/fill oral contraceptives or drugs that you think are unethical/immoral.

 

[zelman]

Instead of mocking their beliefs why not provide an answer?

There are other avenues, but as others have said in retail you will be dispensing lots of oral contraception. Although Plan B is fully OTC now from what I understand, that's not something you are responsible for.

If it violates your conscience and you know you can't go with such an act then don't do a job for the money if it means going against what you strongly believe is right and wrong. You could go into areas of clinical pharmacy that don't really dispense, you could go into industry, you can work for an insurance company, you can go into nuclear or compounding, you could work in a care facility or infusion center, you could go into academia and teach or do research, you could also run your own independent and refuse to stock/fill oral contraceptives or drugs that you think are unethical/immoral.

The thing is, tyrosinase wanted to get into pharmacy based on experience in retail. Suggesting a job as a computer programmer for meditech is essentially the same as suggesting they become a plumber. It is completely unrelated.

Also, the original post indicates no opposition to contraception, only accidental abortifacients. Providing almost any good or service cannot live up to this moral obligation. If I choose to devote my life to being more like Jesus and become a carpenter, every staircase I build would be a potential failure to uphold my beliefs.

As blurry a line as the beginning of life is in current debates, this might be setting a new record in blurriness.

 

[farmadiazepine]

You need to stfu. This is the dumbest thing thing ever. Props to the person who brought up the NIke shoes.

 

[BeLikeBueller]

You need to stfu. This is the dumbest thing thing ever. Props to the person who brought up the NIke shoes.

Clearly your mother never taught you the age old adage of, "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all." Considering this is a belief that is held by a lot of the patients we serve, it would seem like a little more cultural competency would be in order. 😕

To the OP, the major way that contraceptives work is by inhibiting ovulation (which means that fertility literally cannot occur). However, they can also prevent implantation as well. With regards to emergency contraception, as others have stated, the evidence suggests that it does not have any post-fertilization effects.

That being said, only you can determine if this is something that conflicts with your beliefs or not. There are alternate practice settings as mentioned above, although on rotation you will likely encounter this scenario more than once.

 

[mursepharmd]

I dont have anything against any kind of religion and Im all for it if it makes you a better person, but most people don't realize it is just a form of control of the population instituted by those in power hundreds of years ago; also to justify their actions (holy wars) and as a means to collect money (donations and taxation)

Dont really want to get into a debate about this, there are documentaries on youtube that explains the history of religion (zeitgeist history of religion), even bill maher's movie religulous gives you insight. I mean, if you believe in your religion too much why even be a science major?

Why do you think preachers are rich, driving nice cars and live in nice homes? They have realized they can take advantage of sheep by preaching the "gospel" of God, thereby instituting control and getting donations on top of that. All these churches getting huge amounts of donations to spread the word, as well as fight lawsuits and pay off families that their priests molested

 

[Sardinia]

My own personal experience with Plan B is that it's dispensed nowhere near as much as lay people think it is. It's VERY expensive and has horrendous side effects; no sane person would use it as Plan A, that's for sure.

I thought Plan A was your next choice.

 

[BeLikeBueller]

I dont have anything against any kind of religion and Im all for it if it makes you a better person, but most people don't realize it is just a form of control of the population instituted by those in power hundreds of years ago; also to justify their actions (holy wars) and as a means to collect money (donations and taxation)

Dont really want to get into a debate about this, there are documentaries on youtube that explains the history of religion (zeitgeist history of religion), even bill maher's movie religulous gives you insight. I mean, if you believe in your religion too much why even be a science major?

Why do you think preachers are rich, driving nice cars and live in nice homes? They have realized they can take advantage of sheep by preaching the "gospel" of God, thereby instituting control and getting donations on top of that. All these churches getting huge amounts of donations to spread the word, as well as fight lawsuits and pay off families that their priests molested

I was doing my best to refrain from entering into an actual discussion about religion here, because I feel like there is a more appropriate time and place to discuss such matters, but I will just say that for me personally, science and the Christian faith are not mutually exclusive (I cannot speak to other faiths, so I will reserve that post for someone more experienced than myself). In fact, I believe that science and the Christian faith are very much complimentary of one another.

My favorite is this: "Well the Bible says that eating shellfish is a sin." *Collective gasp* What a backwards religion!

Does anyone remember studying Vibrio vulnificus in microbiology or ID? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? What about V. cholera?

The book of Leviticus (in the Christian Bible, just FYI), is the world's greatest historical public health document. It told people to do things like wash their hands, don't touch open wounds, bury your feces away from where you live, etc., etc. All of this seems common sense for us, sure, but you have to remember that this is all based on the "germ theory of disease," which was first postulated in the 1860s. That's right, only about 150 years ago. i.e., your great, great, great grandparents had no clue what germs were. This is evidenced by the fact that people were still dumping waste pots (basically their toilet contents) into the streets during the industrial revolution. 😱 In contrast, when was Leviticus written? Around 1440 BC, or in other words, about 3,050 years prior to the invention of the microscope, a full 3,300 years prior to the "germ theory of disease," and about 3,370 years prior to the discovery of penicillin. 😎

For a more "complete" look at some of the public health issues discussed in Leviticus, go here --> http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v26/n1/hygiene

As for your comments on the shameful 🙂mad🙂 practices of some "preachers," well, I agree with you there. But I can assure you that is not what the Christian faith is about, and I hope that you don't use this an excuse to discount the entire faith.

I'll give you a pharmacy related example...Some pharmacists open up "pill mills" for the sole purpose of making money. This is wrong, but it does not mean that you can logically conclude that all pharmacists are running pill mills. It also does not mean that you can logically conclude that the profession of pharmacy is centered around running pill mills.

That being said, I don't think this is the time or place to necessarily discuss the validity of religion. If someone wants to open up a new thread, I'll be happy to join the discussion there, but I wanted to provide a "reasoned" approach in contrast to some of the dismissive comments above.

 

[manders31]

I think others have already given you replies on other places where you could work.

I think when deciding on a career in medicine it is important to realize that you will be serving people of all beliefs. It is important to remain true to yourself but you can not force others to believe the same way you do.

There are many medicines that can have a negative impact on a fetus. Are you going to be worried about this during all of your future studies if you pursue pharmacy school? Will you be able to dispense those medicines to young women?

There is no way you can predict every ethical issue that you may encounter in your career. If your only answer is to not dispense those meds to that particular patient then unfortunately pharmacy may not be the choice for you.

I would seek the advice of your spiritual adviser before changing career paths though. This must really upset you if you wrote about it here and they will be a much better help than random strangers on the internet.

 

[Ackj]

Since this is almost always a religious issue...remember, it is not your job to keep other people from sinning. It is only your job to keep YOURSELF from sinning.

Actually I'm supposed to convert you to my religion, and if you refuse, I am obligated to kill you. Sorry bud.

 

[Protongenic]

Actually, most hospitals don't stock birth control pills. If you think about it, most of the women of childbearing age who come to a hospital are there to bear a child, and thus haven't been using contraception lately. Most of the other women in the hospital are post-menopausal and don't need contraception, so it doesn't make a lot of financial sense for a hospital to stock BCPs for the few women who come in taking them. Sometimes you will be asked to identify patients' own birth control pills for hospital use, but that's only to prove that they actually brought in the pill and not something illegal.

A lot of hospitals do stock Plan B for rape victims in the ER, but if you're not the ER pharmacist, chances are you can avoid dealing with it.

This is a very good point and this definitely was the case in a few small/mid-sized community teaching hospitals in which I used to intern during pharmacy school.

On the other hand, in larger hospitals (or any hospital for that matter) with acute inpatient hem/onc services, sometimes patients would be placed on birth controls if they're receiving myelosuppressant chemotherapies during their menses, as a mean to impede risk of hemorrhage. Just a thought...

OP, good luck with your quest in finding your path.

 

[spacecowgirl]

We don't stock BCPs but we do approve patient's own (tacit approval?). We dispense misoprostol for OB use. We dispense Plan B for rape.

Not going to avoid it even in small-town USA. Might want to find a different line of work. The market is saturated anyway.

 

[Amicable Angora]

Well, you can give up pharmacy because you feel it violates your beliefs.

Then maybe you can take a look at the thousands and thousands of children being used in sweatshops to produce the clothing that you wear everyday and decide that by buying those products, you're directly contributing to what some call modern-day slavery.

Then realize that many of the food products you use everyday are made by horrible companies like Nestle Corp, who actively commit genocide by the strategic use of infant formula in 3rd world countries.

Then you can take a step back and realize that horrible things are happening every day that you are unwillingly a part of, unless you live on an island with Tom Hanks and Wilson, and realize that maybe these drugs aren't really that big of a deal if you're in pharmacy anyway.


Don't know what to tell you. Go sell some herbal medicines? You'll be dealing with people taking these meds at some point. Did you know many meds you dispense sometimes cause people to die as an adverse effect, much like the contraceptive meds in question? I don't see a way to live comfortably in the Western world and not find some way you're infringing on the rights and liberties of those less fortunate.

Hope that helps...?

Nothing says irony quite like someone refusing to sell Plan B for moral reasons while wearing Nike shoes made by workers in very immoral conditions.

I think others have already given you replies on other places where you could work.

I think when deciding on a career in medicine it is important to realize that you will be serving people of all beliefs. It is important to remain true to yourself but you can not force others to believe the same way you do.

There are many medicines that can have a negative impact on a fetus. Are you going to be worried about this during all of your future studies if you pursue pharmacy school? Will you be able to dispense those medicines to young women?

There is no way you can predict every ethical issue that you may encounter in your career. If your only answer is to not dispense those meds to that particular patient then unfortunately pharmacy may not be the choice for you.

I would seek the advice of your spiritual adviser before changing career paths though. This must really upset you if you wrote about it here and they will be a much better help than random strangers on the internet.

All golden.

 

[radio frequency]

Since this is almost always a religious issue...remember, it is not your job to keep other people from sinning. It is only your job to keep YOURSELF from sinning.

👍👍

 

[Old Timer]

I was doing my best to refrain from entering into an actual discussion about religion here, because I feel like there is a more appropriate time and place to discuss such matters, but I will just say that for me personally, science and the Christian faith are not mutually exclusive (I cannot speak to other faiths, so I will reserve that post for someone more experienced than myself). In fact, I believe that science and the Christian faith are very much complimentary of one another.

Depends on your religious POV. If you believe the Bible is literally and historically true, then science and religion are always going to be incompatible.

The book of Leviticus (in the Christian Bible, just FYI), is the world's greatest historical public health document. It told people to do things like wash their hands, don't touch open wounds, bury your feces away from where you live, etc., etc. All of this seems common sense for us, sure, but you have to remember that this is all based on the "germ theory of disease," which was first postulated in the 1860s. That's right, only about 150 years ago. i.e., your great, great, great grandparents had no clue what germs were. This is evidenced by the fact that people were still dumping waste pots (basically their toilet contents) into the streets during the industrial revolution. 😱 In contrast, when was Leviticus written? Around 1440 BC, or in other words, about 3,050 years prior to the invention of the microscope, a full 3,300 years prior to the "germ theory of disease," and about 3,370 years prior to the discovery of penicillin. 😎

For a more "complete" look at some of the public health issues discussed in Leviticus, go here --> http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v26/n1/hygiene

You are completely and totally wrong. The Book of Leviticus is in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) not the Christian Bible (new Testament). In Hebrew it is called Vayikra as the first sentence in Hebrew starts Vayikra el Moshe He Called to Moses.....

Your next error is the assumption that these rules have ANYTHING to do with health. This part of the Torah is called the Holiness code and it has NOTHING to do with health. It has to do with the requirements of the Israelites to be holy (separate, unique, distinct). These laws are all about separation. Judaism has an almost fetish with concept of separation, but that is a whole different conversation. This culminates with the Golden Rule (19:18): "Love your neighbor as yourself." This is mathematically in the center of the Torah and is called Lev ha-Torah (the heart of the Torah). You can find nowhere in the text that says the laws listed here are for any other purpose than because God said so as a way to be holy.

 

[BeLikeBueller]

Depends on your religious POV. If you believe the Bible is literally and historically true, then science and religion are always going to be incompatible.



You are completely and totally wrong. The Book of Leviticus is in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) not the Christian Bible (new Testament). In Hebrew it is called Vayikra as the first sentence in Hebrew starts Vayikra el Moshe He Called to Moses.....

Your next error is the assumption that these rules have ANYTHING to do with health. This part of the Torah is called the Holiness code and it has NOTHING to do with health. It has to do with the requirements of the Israelites to be holy (separate, unique, distinct). These laws are all about separation. Judaism has an almost fetish with concept of separation, but that is a whole different conversation. This culminates with the Golden Rule (19:18): "Love your neighbor as yourself." This is mathematically in the center of the Torah and is called Lev ha-Torah (the heart of the Torah). You can find nowhere in the text that says the laws listed here are for any other purpose than because God said so as a way to be holy.

It's funny you mention that, I almost thought about editing to add in about that being a Christian/Hebrew belief, but decided against as I figured most people understand that Christianity flows out of Judaism, and that if something was in the Old Testament, it was accepted by both groups. Also, just FYI, Christians consider the Old Testament to be a part of their Bible as well. While individuals that practice Judaism accept only the Old Testament, Christians accept both the Old and New Testament.

Still, I think to suggest that these precepts are not largely based around topics of public health is to ignore a significant body of evidence. Even the Hebrew word that is used to describe individuals that break these commands is a word that we translate as "unclean." This is despite the fact that in Leviticus 10:10, two words translated as unholy and unclean, respectively, are both used in the same sentence, so it is clear the vernacular of unholy existed and could have easily been substituted in these cases. Even so, it's a pretty big coincidence that so many of those precepts have modern day public health ramifications if public health wasn't part of the reason they were issued, isn't it? It would seem improbable to me that so many would have such specific ties to health if that were not a major issue here.

And for me, it fits very well with my belief that God wants the best for us. That's why He wouldn't want us to get vibrio, or drink spoiled water, or contract easily preventable infectious diseases, since it was 3,300 years before anyone would even be able to figure out why we got sick, much less discover an antibiotic that could treat it. Any of the diseases that these public health laws in Leviticus prevented could easily have resulted in death at that time.

And other than the fact that science cannot prove God (nor anything else, actually, since a scientific experiment is only capable of disproving), I really don't see how religion is incompatible with science.

But again you should bring this up in another thread if you wish to rebuttal, because this is not helping the OP with their dilemma, which is why we should ultimately be on this thread in the first place.

 

[Old Timer]

Still, I think to suggest that these precepts are not largely based around topics of public health is to ignore a significant body of evidence. Even the Hebrew word that is used to describe individuals that break these commands is a word that we translate as "unclean." This is despite the fact that in Leviticus 10:10, two words translated as unholy and unclean, respectively, are both used in the same sentence, so it is clear the vernacular of unholy existed and could have easily been substituted in these cases. Even so, it's a pretty big coincidence that so many of those precepts have modern day public health ramifications if public health wasn't part of the reason they were issued, isn't it? It would seem improbable to me that so many would have such specific ties to health if that were not a major issue here.

You will need some evidence to back up your ludicrous claims. There is no relationship to health. It is nowhere in the text. Un-clean is not a physical thing as in dirt, it's a spiritual thing. I suggest you get around to your nearest Synagogue and make an appointment with the Rabbi.
Or you could spend some time looking at
this
or
this
or
this

In short you are simply mistaken. While some of these laws provide health benefit, many do not, secondly, you can find not one scriptural claim to back up your assertion and finally, the germ theory was unknown at the time the laws were codified.

I hope you are a better pharmacy student than you are a biblical scholar or your career will be short lived.

 

[mursepharmd]

Dang you got schooled son

 

[zelman]

...I hope you are a better pharmacy student than you are a biblical scholar...

I would expect that 99.999% of pharmacy students are.

 

[BeLikeBueller]

You will need some evidence to back up your ludicrous claims. There is no relationship to health. It is nowhere in the text. Un-clean is not a physical thing as in dirt, it's a spiritual thing. I suggest you get around to your nearest Synagogue and make an appointment with the Rabbi.
Or you could spend some time looking at
this
or
this
or
this

In short you are simply mistaken. While some of these laws provide health benefit, many do not, secondly, you can find not one scriptural claim to back up your assertion and finally, the germ theory was unknown at the time the laws were codified.

I hope you are a better pharmacy student than you are a biblical scholar or your career will be short lived.

With all due respect, your obsession with somehow making this an issue of Judaism and previously suggesting that Leviticus is not part of the Christian Bible indicates that you are not a Biblical scholar of any great magnitude yourself. If nothing else, I have trouble fathoming how you do not understand the concept that Leviticus is also present in the Christian Bible as well, since this is a very simplistic concept. If you can not come to terms with something such as that, then I could easily see how you would reject the idea that washing your hands, not touching dead bodies, burying your bodily wastes outside of camp, not touching any open wounds or sores on people with leprosy, not touching the "bodily discharge" of others (predominantly from open wounds or sores), not drinking from water sources where a dead animal is found, and avoiding touching dead animal carcases would have nothing to do with health.

That being said, I sincerely hope that if any of your patients come to you with questions of whether or not they should wash their hands or drink from water where dead animals were found, you do not dismiss these questions as some "fetishistic" pursuit of holiness. Hopefully you address these as an opportunity to promote the health of your patients, but who knows...

That being said however, I am not trying to convince you, oldtimer, to join any religious faith. I am not trying to convince mursepharmd (who was surprisingly silent, I might add, until you attempted to back him/her up ... him, I suspect if "murse" still = male nurse) to join any religious faith. However, mursepharmd and several others on this board have made derogatory statements regarding the OP and his religious convictions. That is why I was adding my perspective that religion and science can coexist. Whether or not you choose to accept that is your business.

I'm not trying to force you to do anything. I respect your beliefs and I respect that you oppose my beliefs. However, in light of the fact that I am not trying to proselytize you and was only trying to provide a supportive voice for the OP, I ask that you respect my beliefs as well.

Unless your discussion has any sort of relevance to the OP's original question, I would ask that you direct all further comments here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=1038072

 

[WVUPharm2007]

So I'm in Montreal. The poutine is delightful and nobody speaks English. It's wonderful not not having to hear other people think out loud for a while. Why the hell did I log onto this site? Threads like this...yikes...

 

[WVUPharm2007]

You will need some evidence to back up your ludicrous claims. There is no relationship to health. It is nowhere in the text. Un-clean is not a physical thing as in dirt, it's a spiritual thing. I suggest you get around to your nearest Synagogue and make an appointment with the Rabbi.
Or you could spend some time looking at
this
or
this
or
this

In short you are simply mistaken. While some of these laws provide health benefit, many do not, secondly, you can find not one scriptural claim to back up your assertion and finally, the germ theory was unknown at the time the laws were codified.

I hope you are a better pharmacy student than you are a biblical scholar or your career will be short lived.

Protestants believe in the "sainthood of all believers." So they can interpret the bible however they want. The dude can believe whatever the hypothetical holy ghost tells him to believe.

Of course I think all of you are cray cray, but whatever...point is, they already thought circles around all that.

 

[Dalteparin]

ACE Inhibitors, methotrexate and other anti-neoplastics will straight up kill rapidly reproducing cells like zygotes (well, ace inhibitors slightly later in development). I hope you don't have any patients with hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis or cancer in the medical field you select.

And any responsible pharmacists will ensure that a female patient of childbearing age is not pregnant before dispensing these drugs. Regardless of their religious beliefs, no pharmacist wants to get sued because some baby was born with flippers. 🙂

 

[zelman]

And any responsible pharmacists will ensure that a female patient of childbearing age is not pregnant before dispensing these drugs. Regardless of their religious beliefs, no pharmacist wants to get sued because some baby was born with flippers. 🙂

Re-read the original post. The concern is regarding the health of fertilized eggs in women taking oral contraceptives. We would all assume them to not be pregnant.

 

[Old Timer]

With all due respect, your obsession with somehow making this an issue of Judaism and previously suggesting that Leviticus is not part of the Christian Bible indicates that you are not a Biblical scholar of any great magnitude yourself. If nothing else, I have trouble fathoming how you do not understand the concept that Leviticus is also present in the Christian Bible as well, since this is a very simplistic concept.

It is a clearly a Jewish issue as Christianity doesn't really follow Jewish law especially all of the laws of Leviticus. Since Jesus abolished all of these laws, I guess Christians don't need to wash their hands to be healthy.......

If you can not come to terms with something such as that, then I could easily see how you would reject the idea that washing your hands, not touching dead bodies, burying your bodily wastes outside of camp, not touching any open wounds or sores on people with leprosy, not touching the "bodily discharge" of others (predominantly from open wounds or sores), not drinking from water sources where a dead animal is found, and avoiding touching dead animal carcases would have nothing to do with health.

I didn't say any of these things have nothing to do with health. What I said is the God or whoever wrote Leviticus did not put them in there for health reasons. In this case the health benefit is ancillary. I assume you took the time to read the links I posted previously.

That being said, I sincerely hope that if any of your patients come to you with questions of whether or not they should wash their hands or drink from water where dead animals were found, you do not dismiss these questions as some "fetishistic" pursuit of holiness. Hopefully you address these as an opportunity to promote the health of your patients, but who knows...

For more than 30 years I have helped patient's, but when I do, I tend to source JAMA, NEJM rather than Leviticus......

That being said however, I am not trying to convince you, oldtimer, to join any religious faith. I am not trying to convince mursepharmd (who was surprisingly silent, I might add, until you attempted to back him/her up ... him, I suspect if "murse" still = male nurse) to join any religious faith. However, mursepharmd and several others on this board have made derogatory statements regarding the OP and his religious convictions. That is why I was adding my perspective that religion and science can coexist. Whether or not you choose to accept that is your business.

This has nothing to do with what you believe. It has to do with the way things are. Facts are funny that way. You made a factual statement that the Levitcal laws were written with health in mind and this is a FALSE statement as I was able to demonstrate with evidence from reputable sites. I agree that religion and science can co-exisit.

I'm not trying to force you to do anything. I respect your beliefs and I respect that you oppose my beliefs. However, in light of the fact that I am not trying to proselytize you and was only trying to provide a supportive voice for the OP, I ask that you respect my beliefs as well.

Unless your discussion has any sort of relevance to the OP's original question, I would ask that you direct all further comments here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=1038072

Thread get derailed here all of the time. You don't even understand that I agree with you that religion and science can co-exist. I was pointing out a FACTUAL error that you made. Also, as a health practitioner, you must put your own beliefs in hold to care for your patient. If you can't, you should practice in a area where your beliefs don't deny a legal medication/service/treatment to a patient. You are free to believe what you want. You are not free to make me believe it too.

Repeating yourself over and over does not make it so. Please provide documentary evidence that the PURPOSE of the Holiness Code in Leviticus is for the physical health of the Jews. Without it, you are just babbling about a subject of which you have very little understanding...... This is a common thing with the Bible. The Bible is not a book you read, it's a book you study.

 

[Jibby321]

I dont have anything against any kind of religion and Im all for it if it makes you a better person, but most people don't realize it is just a form of control of the population instituted by those in power hundreds of years ago; also to justify their actions (holy wars) and as a means to collect money (donations and taxation)

Dont really want to get into a debate about this, there are documentaries on youtube that explains the history of religion (zeitgeist history of religion), even bill maher's movie religulous gives you insight. I mean, if you believe in your religion too much why even be a science major?

Why do you think preachers are rich, driving nice cars and live in nice homes? They have realized they can take advantage of sheep by preaching the "gospel" of God, thereby instituting control and getting donations on top of that. All these churches getting huge amounts of donations to spread the word, as well as fight lawsuits and pay off families that their priests molested

👍

 

[BeLikeBueller]

It is a clearly a Jewish issue as Christianity doesn't really follow Jewish law especially all of the laws of Leviticus. Since Jesus abolished all of these laws, I guess Christians don't need to wash their hands to be healthy.......

I didn't say any of these things have nothing to do with health. What I said is the God or whoever wrote Leviticus did not put them in there for health reasons. In this case the health benefit is ancillary. I assume you took the time to read the links I posted previously.

For more than 30 years I have helped patient's, but when I do, I tend to source JAMA, NEJM rather than Leviticus......

This has nothing to do with what you believe. It has to do with the way things are. Facts are funny that way. You made a factual statement that the Levitcal laws were written with health in mind and this is a FALSE statement as I was able to demonstrate with evidence from reputable sites. I agree that religion and science can co-exisit.

Thread get derailed here all of the time. You don't even understand that I agree with you that religion and science can co-exist. I was pointing out a FACTUAL error that you made. Also, as a health practitioner, you must put your own beliefs in hold to care for your patient. If you can't, you should practice in a area where your beliefs don't deny a legal medication/service/treatment to a patient. You are free to believe what you want. You are not free to make me believe it too.

Repeating yourself over and over does not make it so. Please provide documentary evidence that the PURPOSE of the Holiness Code in Leviticus is for the physical health of the Jews. Without it, you are just babbling about a subject of which you have very little understanding...... This is a common thing with the Bible. The Bible is not a book you read, it's a book you study.

I think perhaps we have both misunderstood what the other meant (unsurprising since this is the internet 🙄). In any case, for what part I may have misunderstood what you were trying to say, I apologize.

First of all, touche on the JAMA / NJEM thing. I laughed when I read that (that's probably exactly how I would have responded). Still, I think you understood my point that some of those commands have health-based implications.

For myself, I was not trying to state that Leviticus specifically says "from the CDC: public health laws, these will help you stay healthy." However, I do acknowledge that for a lot of these "random" laws, there is an overarching theme of health, which it appears that you agree with as well (I think...possibly?). The links that you posted referred predominantly to food restrictions in Leviticus, which I am not making a comment on, other than the shellfish thing. I just don't have insight into a lot of that, and I'm not claiming to.

My original point was this: in Leviticus, there are a fair number of laws that promote public health (or at the very least have public health implications). The author's intention when they were written is up for grabs. Were they part of a set of laws that were supposed to be followed in order to be "right" with God. Sure, absolutely. Were there additional benefits gained from a health perspective from doing so...in my opinion, yes. So, from that standpoint, you cannot show me an earlier dated text that had a greater potential impact on public health than this, for whatever reason it may have been originally written.

For myself, I suspect that health was a component of some of these. I understand that you may not hold that same view. I am not trying to suggest that it is the sole purpose, as you seem to think. However, I will defer to each individual who reads it as to their opinions, because I will gladly admit that I don't have the insight into the author's intentions that would allow me to make such a definitive claim on the subject.

Also, I have been reading SDN long before I actually joined, and I know threads get hijacked all the time, but I feel like there have been enough religion vs. science hijackings that I really didn't want to get involved in one...le sigh. Also, I think the OP was genuine in their concerns, and I don't want this side-debate to detract from that, inevitable though it may have been, given the nature of the original post.

In any case, for what part I may have misunderstood your original thoughts, I apologize. I hope you also understand that I'm not trying to suggest that Leviticus was solely written as a public health code. I am simply suggesting that there is a strong correlation between some of the laws and our current understanding of the "germ theory of disease."

Friends?

 

[Momus]

Jesus also said "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

What kind of god is so selfish? How about those people who never know about religions or born without knowing different religions? They are all going to hell...? LOL

I think most if not ALL religions are full of crock... a way to gain followers and exploit them.

 

[Unchained]

In their effort to destabilize the family unit which provides a strong foundation in America the progressives have done a fine job of destroying religion here. It is evident in the youthful members of this forum and shockingly the older ones also.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

In their effort to destabilize the family unit which provides a strong foundation in America the progressives have done a fine job of destroying religion here. It is evident in the youthful members of this forum and shockingly the older ones also.

It would be wonderful if religion was destroyed. Actually, all ideologies.

 

[Jibby321]

It would be wonderful if religion was destroyed. Actually, all ideologies.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Dalteparin]

Re-read the original post. The concern is regarding the health of fertilized eggs in women taking oral contraceptives. We would all assume them to not be pregnant.

I did read the original post, and respond to it upthread. I also read your reply, which (to me) appeared to be referring to all female patients. (IDK, maybe I was just tired...)

 

[owlegrad]

In their effort to destabilize the family unit which provides a strong foundation in America the progressives have done a fine job of destroying religion here. It is evident in the youthful members of this forum and shockingly the older ones also.

Is that you Glenn Beck?

 

[Pharmavixen]

In their effort to destabilize the family unit which provides a strong foundation in America the progressives have done a fine job of destroying religion here. It is evident in the youthful members of this forum and shockingly the older ones also.

Srsly?? I've been married for 21 years, my parents for 50, my grandparents for 60 before my grandma passed. Atheists, all of us.

 

[Pharmavixen]

So I'm in Montreal. The poutine is delightful and nobody speaks English. It's wonderful not not having to hear other people think out loud for a while. Why the hell did I log onto this site? Threads like this...yikes...

If you're still there, you need to try some of the poutine varieties. My fave is the Butter Chicken poutine while the blond guy favours Poutine Italien, where they pile on the meat sauce because there isn't enough cholesterol in just the jus de viande and cheese curds.

BTW, if you want them to speak English, do what I do and talk at them in bad French. Nothing gladdens the heart of a Montrealer than showing off how flawlessly bilingual they are.