Hello there boys n’ girls… I’m back to confound, delight and entertain you once again. Before we dive into the mental muck, I’d like to take a moment and direct your beady little eyes upwards to the dark rectangle located immediately above this entry. I’m participating in a feature that’s offered by Blogger, which enables blog publishers to post small, non-invasive promotional advertisements for various services and/or products. You are, by no means, required to click on any banner you see… but any ad you see that might interest you will gain me a small amount of revenue. As long as it doesn’t adversely detract from my page, I figure I’ll give it a try. Help a poor, disgruntled redneck out… if the notion strikes ya.

Now onto the rant at hand…

Today’s brief and misguided tour into the mire of my collective thoughts happens to center around the medical establishment. In particular, pharmaceutical companies.

“Side Effects”

George Carlin addressed this subject in one of his skits. And, while he did a very good job in conveying the overall sense of counter-promotional redundancy that’s associated with this topic, I would also like to expound on it. Why? Because I’m sure that some of you may not have been so fortunate as to have been enlightened by Mr. Carlin’s take on it.

You see… the pharmaceutical companies today are engaging in a strange practice. It typically happens when they’re not shoving new and inadequately tested medications through FDA loopholes and ending up in subsequent class-action lawsuits. While they may not have any control over this governmentally induced requirement, the whole business of producing prescription drugs is suffering from a bad case of jeering and mocking. What am I talking about? The listing of “side-effects”… that’s what.

We’ve all seen them on television. Commercials for “brand A” this or “brand b” that. They claim that their product will help treat one ailment or another, but they also rattle off a stream of side effects that may or may not afflict you, based on a test case. Test cases involve a set number of people who have similar conditions. They are divided into two groups and half are given the medication while the other half receives a placebo. No, this is not some rude and invasive medical procedure. A placebo is nothing more than a fancy-shmancy medical term for a sugar pill. None of the test case subjects know what they’re getting, so none of them can act in a predetermined way. The idea, then, is that the testers will gain an accurate knowledge of the medication’s real benefits.

However, any and all side effects reported by subjects who took the actual medication must be acknowledged and advertised. These side effects may or may not be a direct result of the medication, and in some cases have absolutely nothing to do with it. However, in an effort to collectively cover their asses and minimize testing costs… most companies will merely list any side effect reported, and be done with it. This ultimately ends up resulting in a hodge-podge list of mostly absurd, and sometimes humorous, descriptions at the end of television advertisements.

Something to the effect of: “Try GAS-MAX for upset stomach relief…. Use only as directed. Side effects may include headache, diarrhea, vomiting, nosebleed, indigestion, sneezing, hang nails, gout, acne, ear infection, cramping, insomnia and constipation. Consult your doctor if symptoms persist. Do not take if you are currently taking medications for liver disease. Women who are pregnant or may become pregnant should not take GAS-MAX as certain complications may occur. Talk with your doctor about GAS-MAX”

Now… you tell me. Would you use GAS-MAX if there were a very real possibility that you could suffer from any number of those “side effects” as direct result? And the last part is what really cracks me up. Almost every woman in America has either been pregnant…is pregnant…or could become pregnant. Citing the fact that most women are at a direct risk of becoming pregnant if they engage in an active sex life, (and with the only real guarantee against it being celibacy) listing a warning like that is rather redundant, in my opinion. Perhaps it would be more accurate to warn against its use if you're currently pregnant or intend to become pregnant.

Disclaimer: Any reference to copyrighted names, persons, places and/or trademarks in this post are purely coincidental and unintentional.