28 August, 2010

The genetic mystique of ‘me’ medicine - The Globe and Mail

The genetic mystique of ‘me’ medicine - The Globe and Mail


  1. "Some genetically personalized treatments may well be signs of progress, such as pharmacogenetics, which promises drug regimes tailored to the patient’s own genome. If this new technology works, it could lessen the direst side effects of chemotherapy for cancer care; oncologists would no longer have to prescribe “one size fits all” regimes if patients who are genetically more receptive to the drug could be differentiated and given lighter regimes."

    Well, now...isn't that interesting! Seems that the industry is finally catching up with me and my questions through the years, as I watched several friends and acquaintances battle cancers. Their reactions to the treatments went from bouncing through it like it didn't exist to being killed by the "cure" before it could take effect. Why has it taken so long for the industry to pose these questions? Something about "acceptable losses," I'm sure...

    "Genetic tests, if properly administered, can save lives, but they also tend to create a feeling that the responsibility for your health rests with you, the individual patient."

    Whom else? Seriously -- who else is responsible for my health if not me?

    "...the legally doubtful view that we own our bodies..."

    Hah! Not only "doubtful, but "legally doubtful?" Dickenson needs to answer the question, then: If I do not own my own body, who does?

  2. Lady Janus: I suspect that you last question is rhetorical given that you would know the answer I would give.

    If I ever get to BC, I hope that I could take you out to dinner. I have appreciated your participation in the blog more than you could know. You bring color, grace and wit to these discussions. That's got to at least be worth a great 'creme brule'!!

    Fr. Tim

  3. Dinner would be wonderful, Tim! Just let me know when you're arriving, and I'll search out the best creme brulee in town! And, since you like fishing, I can arrange a day trip for sockeye or Chinook salmon with my always-gets-his-limit brother-in-law, if you get here in season. In all his fishing years, he has never come in empty!

    But as for the last question, no, I wasn't being rhetorical. I keep coming up against this argument that we "can't" do what we like with out own bodies because "someone-or-other" disapproves, and it's not "socially acceptable." I want to know who actually makes up these rules, and on who else's authority?


Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics