[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Their expertise is there to guide you, to point you in the way of the information that you need. Personally, I can't imagine a scenario that I'd NOT listen to the doctor, but I shouldn't be prosecuted for it if I do.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you'd be ok with decisions to totally ignore the advice of the doctor and requisition any drug that someone felt like getting? Could be something else I don't know. But if you have the freedom to administer any drug to yourself that you want you certainly aren't required to consult with a physician.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, you're not required to consult with a physician. But why wouldn't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Responding with a question to my qeustion. The only person that gets away with that with me is my wife.

[ QUOTE ]
I mean, just because I no longer REQUIRE a "doctor's note" to get medicines doesn't mean that I won't consult with them to find out what I should be taking. I'm not going to suddenly turn stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right but you don't have to if you don't want to. Neither does anyone else if we do away with prescriptions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what the problem is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I say there was a problem? I made an observation.

What I note about this article whose link was posted by natedogg in his OP:

1) This is a one sided story.

2) The guy wrote prescriptions illegally and got caught.

1) and 2) make it an unremarkable story. Apparently my interest in wanting to know both sides of the story i.e. the prosecutions side and the defendents side is not valid because there can only be one side to this story that I should be interested in.