Schwer magersüchtige Frau „hätte sterben können“, nachdem eine der größten Online-Apotheken Großbritanniens ihre Impfspritzen zur Gewichtsabnahme verkauft hatte
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/severely-anorexic-woman-sold-weight-loss-drug-5HjdG8k_2/
Von pppppppppppppppppd
15 Kommentare
Seems a bit excessive to force this on the entire country because one patient was able to successfully defraud their pharmacy.
Sure, she could’ve died. But you can also die from paracetamol.
Very sad but this isn’t the fault of the pha. Just like if Amazon sells you a kitchen knife, it’s not your fault if you use it to stab someone.
As sad as Caitlin’s story is, one case of an anorexic person defrauding an online pharmacy shouldn’t mean everyone else trying to lose weight responsibly has to jump through more hoops to get the help they need
I thought they had to check your NHS record to prescribe it even as a private company? That’s why you need to give your GP name?
So everyone has to suffer greater inconvenience and greater intrusions into our private life because a grown adult did what she was always going to do anyway, which is to starve herself.
This is utterly ridiculous. Speaking as someone with a history of anorexia… we are the sneakiest people around. There is no level of checking that anorexics won’t continue to circumvent. This is the illness where people use their *feeding tubes* to purge from and do secret exercise in a hospital bed.
It isn’t fair or reasonable to make it hard for people who need this medication to access it just because of a tiny number of anorexics. Most of us, whether actively sick or in recovery, do realise it’s not for us.
Weight loss jabs work by suppressing appetite, they don’t actually do anything to make you directly lose weight.
I don’t know how they would be to blame for her potential death, this particular case seems like the online pharmacy is getting misdirected anger. Eating disorders aren’t really a case of unconsciously not eating enough.
The logic of the nanny state is that everything in society needs to be babyproofed for the sake of the least competent, or to protect people from themselves who are intent on harming or killing themselves. The death, or near death of one person who is determined to kill themselves or harm themselves is more important than the inconvenience and intrusion on the personal lives of everyone else in society. It’s safetyism run amok.
Will the government make it mandatory to verify id while accessing all weight loss pages?
To everyone who is objecting to a diabetes drug being subjected to checks to ensure people who take it are medically safe to do so… why shouldn’t there be these sort of safeguards in place?
Her mother found the drugs in her room. The headline implies she was hospitalised for some kind of complication.
In the UK we have the mental capacity act which clearly states that unless proven otherwise someone is to be deemed capable of making choices even if those around them disagree. We apply this principle in law where even obviously disturbed individuals are treated as culpable. This is a far from perfect approach but is the necessary corollary of freedom.
At the other end of the spectrum the Mental Health Act makes it clear that suffering from mental illness is in itself insufficient for the state to compel treatment. Compulsory treatment only becomes an option if someone is a clear danger to themselves or others. Being suicidal is not grounds for compulsory treatment and detention.
Between these imperfect laws we have to be deemed to be free to make choices. The alternative is to seek a level of control that is a poor fit with a free society.
It is imperfect and often has awful outcomes, but I don’t see a better alternative.
The regulators have brought in so many checks already for pharmacies to follow. Patients signing up have to share ID, GP summary care records, photographs of themselves (in some cases holding paper with the date and your info written on it), photos of the person stood on the scales with the weight showing, requesting contact with GPs, some do video calls too. And every one has forms to complete about medical history, what meds people are on, warnings about what conditions make someone ineligible. Pharmacies are managing thousands upon thousands of patients, checking all these data points to screen patients.
Put it this way, it is not ‘easy’ to get this medication, like the article suggests.
It also doesn’t help that most GPs now say ‘if you get it privately, your surgery won’t be involved in any part of your care’ essentially. So my pharmacy send my GP a letter every month with my weight, BMI, confirmation that I’ve placed an order for which drug at which strength. But my GP won’t speak to me about it!
To be honest for things like this there’s very little reason to not just require that the first one or two orders be delivered to a physical pharmacy for proper checking. It’s a minor inconvenience and then you can have it delivered to your home address after that.
I’ve used the stuff before and ended up switching to having it delivered to the pharmacy anyway so I didn’t have to mess around with waiting all day for it to be delivered given that it’s temperature sensitive.
The problem is.. There is a massive black market in weight loss medication
Whilst phamarcies 100% should be more diligent in their duty of care and confirming the patient qualifies, putting too much on them will rise the price further and push more people to the black market.
Unless attention is paid to stopping that, it’s pretty pointless making it harder to get via legal means as people will buy elsewhere