This article is from earlier this week, but I still wanted to point it out. The New York Times ran an article on the ethics of giving a child a placebo to soothe the little ills that don't require medication. The article is a pretty thorough examination of the ethics of placebo use in general, as well as the possibly implications of giving placebos to children. The makers of the children's placebo says that conceivably this product could reduce the over-prescribing of antibiotics for childhood ills. But the effectiveness of placebos is pretty unpredictable. And for placebos to be effective, there has to be a certain level of deception. Is that OK? Plus, is it OK to teach children that there is a pill for every ill? It seems that somewhere along the line, children have to learn the body is pretty resilient and that a skinned knee repairs itself.
It is an intriguing read. You can find the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/27/health/27plac.html?ex=1369627200&en=93794384172e0a50&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
"It seems that somewhere along the line, children have to learn the body is pretty resilient and that a skinned knee repairs itself."
Yep. I agree. A parent does not help a child by creating a dependency on pills for everything that goes awry. Let's not raise a generation of hypochondriacs.
Post a Comment