to think that I shouldn't have to swallow my principles to save the NHS money?

[Tollund]

I was seen by a practice nurse this morning and prescribed antibiotics for my chest infection. When he wrote the prescription I said that if they were capsules with gelatine in them I couldn't take them and would need the medicine instead. He told me that he didn't know if they did or not and didn't have time to research it, and if I really couldn't bring myself to take them I'd have to ask the pharmacist what they would recommend. I've been here before so I said that they wouldn't prescribe anything and I'd end up having to come back to pick up yet another prescription. He said to go and see what they said but he wouldn't prescribe the medicine as it was more expensive. (I'm guessing he doesn't see a lot of Hindus and not sure how far he'd get suggesting that people should take things containing boiled up connective tissue and bones whether they've spent a lifetime avoiding them or not.)

So I went to the pharmacist and exactly what I had said would happen, happened and I've wasted over an hour trying to get them to liaise amongst themselves so I didn't physically need to run between the surgery and chemist to pick up prescriptions myself. (With a chest infection when it's -2!)

AIBU to think that the practice nurse was being a total arse and that I shouldn't be made to run around wasting time because he "was too busy" and clearly thought I was being stupid for not just taking the gelatine?

[Sallyingforth]

Many medicines and antibiotics are prepared using animal byproducts. If you are strictly vegetarian then you will need to analyse not just the coating but the production process as well.
Where do you draw the line?

[Tollund]

It's not really a case of saying "I'll have pork gelatine but not beef" though, is it?

I'm sure each vegetarian has their own reasons for going vegetarian but in my case I was born into it. Then for a period of time from when I was 6 I was brought up by someone who was not my mother who would physically force me to eat meat. I was bullied and terrorised into swallowing parts of dead animals, which was a totally new experience for me, and then I was punished for "making myself sick" when I couldn't physically keep it down.

So yes, as I got older (and the abuse of that kind stopped) I went back to vegetarianism again and have never since eaten any kind of animal product. This is partly due to my concerns over welfare etc, but also because I don't like the thought of having to incorporate the dead flesh or matter of a previously sentient creature into myself, and certainly not against my will. So perhaps it sounds fucked up, or "precious" but I have some fairly big issues around being forced to consume parts of dead creatures, no matter how minimal the parts seem to someone who can't relate to where I'm coming from.

[LeBFG]

Nah felicity, plenty of veggies on here have already said OP is BU. I was a long-standing veggie and have my family still are. We all take the standard issue pills though .

Sorry Pumpkin, I can't agree: It makes accommodations in the case of prosthetics (due to something the patient has no choice in, their ethnicity) and vegetarian dietary requirements (something the patient does have a choice in). As I've said, hospitals have to provide people with veggie options, they have a hard enough time enticing us to eat their food at the best of times . Making a veggie eat a steak is, I reckon in most people's books, an outrageous thing (like giving sprouts everyday to someone who hates sprouts).

I've had good friends who were on the extreme end of meat-is-murder etc. To them, a vegetarian, even a strict one, was still hypocritical position. If meat is murder, so is eating milk products (calves made and slain to make milk) and a host of other things veggies still eat (this was in the end why I started eating meat again - you really rather have to be a vegan if you follow this path...and I couldn't contemplate life without chocolate). So, really, the milligram of gelatin is no big deal. Many veggies probably eat this quantity most days without realising it.

[Tollund]

"If you are of the view that meat is murder, that eating an animal is just as bad as eating a human being, I suspect the amount of animal trace in the product will be academic."

yy, Pumpkin.

[RedToothbrush]

Sorry, but the NHS is struggling is the crappest argument going.

can be applied as an excuse for anything eg:
You don't NEED pain relief in childbirth. We can't afford to fund it on the NHS. If the op wants pain relief fine, but don't expect the NHS to provide it.

Trouble is, that its not that simple in the slightest, and all these cuts in the NHS are being made on purchase price and not on the basis of holistic care and long term care.

One of the major foundations of this is treating people with respect and in a non-judgmental way.

Studies have shown that there are differences in recovery time between patients who are happy and satisfied with care and those who are unhappy that can not be reasonably explained purely by the physical medical attention they receive.

Its something we really, really shouldn't be loosing sight of in debates about the NHS and funding.

It should be about spending a pound well, not spending as few as possible.

[Tollund]

"Many veggies probably eat this quantity most days without realising it." Eh? And I can assure you that I don't!

[specialsubject]

the medication will probably have been tested on animals. So if you are THAT principled, don't take it.

I hope you also don't use cosmetics, don't wear wool or leather and all the other things that go with stringent no harm to animals.

the disabled boy who can't swallow capsules has a case. You do not, go pay for private medicine.

(ill husband waiting ages for NHS treatment due to funding issues - and I won't be alone in this).

[PumpkinPositive]

As I've said, hospitals have to provide people with veggie options, they have a hard enough time enticing us to eat their food at the best of times.

By the same token, wouldn't they have just as hard a time getting a vegan to ingest a medication containing a (murdered) animal? I'm having a hard time seeing the difference.

I don't think it's the amount of animal in the product that makes a difference to a veggie/vegan, it's the fact animal is in there at all.

[PumpkinPositive]

you really rather have to be a vegan if you follow this path...

It's for this reason all my attempts at vegetarianism have ended in disaster.

[honeytea]

Tollund why do you take medicine that has been most probably at some point tested on animals? If your that strict and against the suffering of animals surely you should only ever use prodects that have caused no suffering to any animals. I am sure that the animals used to test the safety of the drugs had more pain caused to them than the cow who was killed for meat anyway.

I assume if you developed diabeties you would refuse to take insulin as it is derived from animals? How far do you take your own values? If it is for your own health you are willing to use medicine that has caused animal suffering but if it is to save the (very stretched) NHS money you are not willing to take the medicine.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Never thought I would ever do this outragedbythepriceoffreddos

But

If you want free medicine when you are ill, then you have to take what you are offered if it will o the job it's required to do.

If you want the luxury of choice, then pay to see a private GP and pay the full price for the medication you want to choose.

You think you shouldn't have to compromise your principles to save the NHS money, I think the NHS shouldn't have to waste money to bow to your principles. They are your choice, so you pay for them.

Exactly what she said.

[PumpkinPositive]

Sorry, but the NHS is struggling is the crappest argument going.

No, I'm sure I saw someone saying veggies don't have a leg to stand on because they must (unwittingly) ingest a few insects here and there.

Or maybe I dreamt that.

[Tollund]

ffs - please read what I wrote at 14:47:25 for an explanation of my aversion to dead things.

I have no idea how far I would take my own values in real terms as fortunately it's never been tested...

[PenelopePipPop]

I am still intrigued and would like to know at what point you would be prepared to set aside your principles in order to achieve the benefits the drugs can offer. As I said the drugs I take are only available as gelatin caps - and they are the only meds which work for me. What call would you take in my position (given the parameter that uncontrolled epilepsy is obviously fucking horrible)?

I don't think it is wholly irrelevant to your original question. I completely agree with you on your original point: Where a readily available and inexpensive alternative consistent with your ethical position can be provided it should. But there will be lots and lots of situations where this does not happen - where there is no readily available and inexpensive alternative on offer. What do you do then?

[honeytea]

I have no idea how far I would take my own values in real terms as fortunately it's never been tested...

it has been tested, you are willing to ingest medicine that has caused suffering to animals because it will make you feel better.

[Tollund]

"If you want free medicine when you are ill" - I fricking pay £7 something for medicine that costs roughly a quid, how am I not paying?

[LeBFG]

Ah, pumpkin, but what about the animal that didn't get in there? Those animals that died to produce the drug...

Tollund, what is a bigger deal to you - promoting the meat industry indirectly by eating diary products or eating a milligram of gelatin?

[honeytea]

Doesn't milk have all sorts of puss and blood in it? Drinking milk you are probably ingesting more cow body than the gelitine in a pill.

[Tollund]

I have no idea what I would do in an assortment of made up hypothetical instances and I overthink enough as it is so am not going to spend hours agonising about that. I do what I can to have a minimal impact within reasonable bounds, and to be honest I don't think that wanting a medicine that is readily available and prescribed and just happens to cost 20p more and doesn't contain dead things is a cardinal sin.

[Tollund]

honeytea - you're talking bollocks (and making assumptions, as fwiw I don't actually drink milk either.)

Right, thanks for all the feedback but I think I'll bow out and take my chest infection to bed. Thanks to pumpkin, Redtoothbrush and others.

[PumpkinPositive]

You think you shouldn't have to compromise your principles to save the NHS money, I think the NHS shouldn't have to waste money to bow to your principles. They are your choice, so you pay for them.

The thing is though, the NHS is willing to "waste" money pandering to its doctors principles.

Cue my friend's sister, who moved to a new area and signed up with a GP. Off she goes to renew her prescription for roaccutane only to be told by GP that due to her principles, she will not be renewing the prescription for the only medication that worked for this woman. Why? Because doctors were obliged to put women of child bearing act on the pill if they prescribe roaccutane, and this doctor had religious objections to the pill. Didn't matter that friend's sister wasn't sexually active, she couldn't get her meds.

So that was a total waste of one appointment, without even taking into account the amount of annual waste of NHS resource by having a GP in a practice who will no under any circumstance prescribe the pill for her patients.

And yet the NHS employed her.

[RedToothbrush]

LeBFG, I agree with the hypocrisy issue and I find the whole debate about whats acceptable and not acceptable as a vegetarism just about lines in the sand and sometimes wilful ignorance. Certainly there are vegans out there that if they knew the truth about bugs in flour, then they probably wouldn't eat anything at all. And I can certainly get on my Bacon Butty Waving platform as much, if not more than the next person if I want to.

BUT in the context of a medical question, I do see things rather differently. I think its an area where you have to suspend what you believe more. The argument you are making here about stretch of commitment to being a vegetarian, is one that you can make similar comments about religion. Logic and reason often come second to belief and very often its something fundamentally important to someones value in themselves and their identity as a person when you have views of this strength. And thats what you should be careful of in a medical context and the position of power that HCP's have over people.

Religion and being vegetarian are very different things, but I do think HCP should be aware of boundaries of sensitivity and be willing to explore whether reassuring a patient or providing them with enough information so they are able to take control of the situation themselves might be a better solution than simply refusing a request. Its worth remembering that there are some people who would compromise their religion a lot more easily than a vegetarian would compromise their beliefs but should we ask them to? Morally, ethically and legally we probably shouldn't do, unless all other avenues have been pursued. Ultimately it just comes down to listening to the patient and treating their beliefs, no matter how unreasonable or crazy they might seem with as much respect as humanly possible.

And I do I think Tollund's most recent remarks about where her views on being vegetarian come from are perhaps the most telling on this thread about why she perhaps should be allowed to have an alternative medication or at the very least be in a position where she is able to make an informed decision rather than have it forced upon her. When you read that, it immediately becomes clear that there's perhaps a little bit more to this and its very much about a mental issue and feeling in control of the situation is so far as she can be.

Thats important.

[PenelopePipPop]

If the made up is directed at me Tollund it is a bit uncalled for. Which bit are you saying I made up exactly?

The point a lot of people are trying to make is that the difference is actually one of degree rather than nature. You are not really making a point of principle. If the difference between the two drugs on offer is minimal you would prefer the gelatin free one to be prescribed. Fair enough. But as soon as the difference is one of significant cost or inconvenience or going untreated would cause you serious distress or discomfort then the animals get it in the neck again. That isn't a principle, that is a price point.

[nickelbabylyinginamanger]

YANBU.

I was forced to take a prescription that had gelatine covers - I had to undo the capsules and pour the powder out - fucking gross taste.

in this day and age, why the hell can't they just make the fucking tablets that don't have gelatine wrapped parcels? (like they perfected in the first 10 years of the 20th century)

and yes, I know what you mean, we are made to be soooo awkward for wanting animal free tablets, but why the hell don't the GPs actually tell us that they're trying to give us the capsules when they do the prescription, so that we can tell them we don't want that form and then they can prescribe the correct form of drug.

[nickelbabylyinginamanger]

and this that say it's choice to be vegetarian - it's also a choice not to be, and it's a choice to be a Muslim or a Jew, but they're given that dispensation.