I just read Mr. Eppenbaugh's letter to the editor in regards to Mr. Gerard's Op/Ed this past weekend and felt obligated to retort.
In his letter, Mr. Eppenbaugh says, in part, "I have to ask you, Mr. Gerard, why are you against pharmaceutical companies making profits? If you are, you are against the American Dream of being as successful as possible. Besides - what about lost wages for the workers, lost dividends for stockholders."
Not one short paragraph later, Mr. Eppenbaugh reverses his logic by writing, "And your idea of doctors just phoning in a prescription to a pharmacy for PSE is equally bogus. That idea may sound great, until the doctors realize how much more money they can make off the visits of their patients."
With that, I must ask, Mr. Eppenbaugh, why are you against local doctors making profits? You must be against the American Dream of being as successful as possible. Besides, what about lost wages for the nurses, lost revenues for the hospitals (and I'll even end my question with a question mark)?
I am not trying to pick a fight, Mr. Eppenbaugh. I am just pointing out the double-standard in your logic. I also hope that you can see the wisdom in having a family doctor call in the prescription; the state immediately has a character witness for the user of the cold medicine, and the source for the most important ingredient in meth is suddenly scarce.
I might also add that your attack on Mr. Woodward came off as a bit too personal. There are much bigger grabs at your freedom, liberty and money than scheduling of a chemical made in an industrial park in New Jersey. When God created us, he endowed us with life, liberty and the freedom to pursue happiness. Not cheap cold medicine.
