Table of ContentsAre Business and Medicine Ethically IncompatibleAnalysis of Albert Schweitzer or Ivan Boesky?ThesisFacts and OpinionsIssues and PropagandaLogical FallaciesAnalysis of What Market Values ​​Do in MedicineThesisFacts and OpinionsIssues and propagandaI did not notice any propaganda in this essay.Logical FallaciesSummaryAre Business and Medicine Ethically IncompatibleIn the book Taking Sides, authors Lisa Newton and Maureen Ford present the question Are Business and Medicine Ethically Incompatible in issue five incompatible. Professor of Medicine, Arnold S. Relman's essay, Analyzing What Market Values ​​Do in Medicine, is used to present an argument for their incompatibility. Assistant Professor of Business, essay by Andrew C. Wicks Analysis of Albert Schweitzer or Ivan Boesky? Why We Should Reject the Dichotomy Between Medicine and Business is used to present an argument that no, they are not incompatible. I will analyze these two works, noting credibility, thesis statement, facts and opinions, problems and propaganda, and logical fallacies in each individually. The argument against incompatibility is very convincing; nevertheless, it fails to address the possibilities for misconduct that a medical and business model presents. Without resolving these specific issues, we must be careful before buying into Mr. Wicks' theory that they are not only compatible, but also similar. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay Analysis of Albert Schweitzer or Ivan Boesky? Credibility Andrew C. Wicks, the author, is an assistant professor in the School of Business at the University of Washington. This work was originally published in the Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 14 (1995). His profession and the respect given to his work by the Journal of Business Ethics make him credible on the subject of ethics and business. He states at the beginning of the essay that his approach to this topic is that of an ethicist trained to think about normative issues. Thesis Andrew Wicks lays out the premise on which his essay is built with this thesis statement: My underlying purpose is to help reconceptualize our way of thinking. on medicine and business, and in doing so, reshape how we approach America's health care crisis. Facts and Opinions It is a well-known fact that our health care needs to be reformed by reducing costs, reducing waste, stimulating innovation, recognizing scarcity, and avoiding replication of services. and expensive technologies, educating doctors to be more active gatekeepers of health services, thereby increasing access and minimizing costs. After recognizing the need for renovation and reform, the author refutes the opposition's rejection of the economic model by correcting misinterpreted terms. We are pointedly reminded that self-interest is a different concept from selfishness and greed, and that the former is perfectly compatible with the pursuit of other moral ends, while the latter is not. Wicks is effective in convincing us to share his view that the way people view medical ethics should be somewhat tempered, as should their view of business ethics. He does this by pointing out that very few doctors are capable of the altruistic ethics imposed on them and that very few businessmen are selfish and greedy as some have suggested. The truth about motivations, regardless of profession, lies somewhere between these two viewsextremes, and it would be beneficial for the health system and patients to recognize this reality. With this recognition, we can begin to agree that combining ethics and self-interest is about rehabilitating our extreme views and adopting a new vision or moral code that places trust, respect for others, Decency and fair play as central concepts that can and should be applied to medicine and business, individually and cooperatively. Problems and Propaganda I want to say that this is oversimplified, which is true if you try to apply this moral.code as a solution to specific conflict of interest problems. However, the real problem is that it only addresses an individual aspect of the problem. The author works on the corporate side to develop a softer view of business; it does not address potential conflict of interest issues. Logical fallacies There are double standards as Mr Wicks points out that the opposition's concerns about the cost of marketing drugs create an overly simplistic picture, while his own essay is based on just one point. which inherently oversimplifies the problems of medicine and business model. Moreover, he added some meaningless statements in this work. Among the meaningless statements is this one where he says the only difference between the medical model and the business model is that the medical model encourages overtreatment while the business model encourages undertreatment. This theory-based generalization is not supported by any common knowledge or a single example. Later, he makes the same mistake when he claims that when treatments are offered, they are also denied, implying that there are only a fixed number of specific treatments available to the public. I guess he intended to state that health care money is tight, too tight to provide everyone with all the tests and services. Merk's story was nice to hear, even if it offered nothing to refute the opposition's argument. It was an empty category. The debate is not about whether or not corporations can make human decisions, but rather about who should make decisions about health care or health facilities, doctors or doctors. businessmen; and can physicians be objective clinicians when they have vested interests in healthcare institutions and research programs. A selective sample is taken into account to argue that the doctor benefits when patients receive aggressive and excessive care. While this may be true for some specialties, it is not true for most primary care providers. Third-party payers often give these doctors flat fees based on the number of patients they serve. These fees are the same regardless of the level of care or number of visits a patient receives. Additionally, Mr. Wicks makes a procedural error by talking in a circle; he does this by restating the same argument throughout the essay. Although Wicks notes that this new vision of medicine and business is not a solution to everything when it comes to health care reform, he suggests that this changed mindset will fix many things. However, the only points he sets out to prove are those that concern our view of medical ethics and business ethics. He shifts the burden of proof on all other claims made in this work.Analysis of the Effect of Market Values ​​in MedicineThe author, Arnold S. Relman, is considered credible because he is both a physician andprofessor of medicine. As a professor of medicine, he or she must maintain a thorough knowledge of clinical health care and activities related to the practice of medicine. This essay was written in 1992. Recognizing that to some extent this critical analysis of a nine-year-old essay presents an unfair means of judgment and its own type of logical fallacy, I will nevertheless continue the analysis.ThesisDr . Relman's thesis statement is as follows. Doctors have enjoyed a privileged position in our society, virtually ensuring them a high social status and a good standard of living. These privileges have been granted to them in the expectation that they will remain competent and trustworthy and will faithfully discharge the fiduciary responsibility to patients proclaimed in their codes of ethics. Facts and OpinionsOne fact noted in support of this inconsistency case is the statement made by the American Medical Association in their Principles of Medical Ethics In the practice of medicine, a physician should limit the source of his or her professional income to the medical services actually rendered by him or under his supervision to his patients. Although not a law, this statement, written in 1957, clearly demonstrates the ethical belief of his peers that physicians should not receive financial gains in the field of medicine beyond those received through their own patient care services. Dr. Relman also wanted it to be known that there is a lack of regulations and laws prohibiting physicians from becoming owners, investors and/or contract employees of allied health establishments, services or businesses. This was of little concern many years ago, but has become a concern with advances in technology, the increase in investor-owned healthcare facilities, and incentives and contracts from pharmaceutical companies. Relman begins his argument by prefacing it with the view that professionalism among independent private practitioners thrives when there is more than enough to do. When there is none, competition for patients and concerns about revenue tend to undermine professional values ​​and influence professional judgment. He then goes on to point out that there is currently an excess of healthcare providers and facilities. After implying that there is an open possibility of misconduct, Dr. Relman goes on to state that there is an abundance of sole proprietorship, investor, and contract opportunities available to these physicians. He clearly expresses his opinion that physician-owned medical businesses create a conflict of interest that inhibits physicians' ability to adhere to fiduciary relationships with their patients. Problems and Propaganda Mine is Better manifests in combination with resistance to change such as the history of the Hippocratic Oath, Maimonides Prayer, the International Code of the World Medical Organization, the American Medical Society Guidelines and the Contract de facto with the company are all presented as evidence in support of the incompatibility argument. In reality, these sources show only two things: the historical and traditional ethics of medicine and the adherence to these ethics by many peers and peer organizations. However, I do not believe that the fallacy of an illogical argument based on tradition is present since substantial grounds for concern regarding the mixing of medicine and business are noted throughout the essay. In fact, there is enough cause for concern to question the presence of the mine and resistance to change,.