Zhang 1

Kevin Zhang
Roberta Wolfson
Writing 2
6 June 2016
Prescribed Drugs in Medicine and Economics
Prescribed drugs are a big part of many lives and without them, some of us will have to
endure the hardships of illnesses and disorders. However, prescribed drugs can be dangerous and
how much are obtained and to what extent they are used for leads to interesting questions. These
questions are researched by scholars in the field of economics and medicine respectively, but
how each discipline approaches the topic of prescribed drugs is intricately different. A
comparative analysis of Halls medical article, Patterns of Abuse Among Unintentional
Pharmaceutical Overdose Fatalities and Holloways economics article The Effects of Different
Kinds of User Fees on Prescribing Costs in Rural Nepal shows the medical disciplinary
approach of making the information simplistic or sufficient enough for the target audience to
comprehend is more effective than the economics disciplinary approach of creating a more
sophisticated presentation of information. It is important for us to understand how prescribed
drugs can cause fatal overdoses since understanding what a medical scholar has to say on
prescribed drugs can prevent overdosing, which is important for the wellbeing of drug users.
However, the economics approach is too complicated for most individuals outside of the
discipline to understand fully. Thus, the economics approach fails to an extent at making a call
to action amongst society to reduce the economic effects of prescribed drugs, which in turn limits
the improvement of societys wellbeing.

Zhang 2
Holloways economics disciplinary approach at presenting information is in no particular
order of importance, whereas Halls presentation of evidence is more effective because it delivers
the most important primary evidence first then all other results of the study in decreasing order of
importance. In Holloways approach, each new presentation of evidence is based on the prior
presentation of evidence. For instance, the first table that Holloway uses is data about the details
of the user fees for drugs in three districts. Then in the second table, Holloway uses information
from the prior table about item fees to create a table about the mean values for prescribing costs
in Nepali Rupees. By utilizing this method of presenting data, Holloway is able to proceed
quickly from one argument to the next in her paper by logical flow of how the data was
calculated and analyzed. However, this disciplinary approach for relying on delivering
information in its purest form leads to a rise in the prerequisite knowledge of the topic for
understanding the presented information. On the contrary, Halls approach in the paper makes a
smooth transition and meaningful connection between the papers evidence and the purpose of
the study. By delivering the evidence in order of importance, the audience understands the farreaching effects of such a study early on; thus, Hall not only connects the evidence to its purpose
but he also connects to a bigger audience. For example, Hall describes his very first piece of
evidence by saying, This information might help practitioners and public health officials
understand how prescription drugs involved in fatal overdoses are obtained and might help
prevent future overdoses (Hall). Hall asserts that his research will help others in the field
prevent future fatalities, which explains the purpose of Halls evidence in the paper. Not only
does this information benefit his discourse community, but also the practitioners and public
health officials in particular can understand the importance upfront. Unlike the economic
approach, the medical disciplinary approach of presenting the most important information first

Zhang 3
engages the audience immediately so those in the medical field can extend to an audience
beyond the discourse community; thus, fewer overdoses can occur due to stronger understanding
of prescribed drugs.
The integration of evidence is important, where the economics approach loses credibility
for being able to produce new and exciting knowledge because there is an apparent usage of
secondary sources, as oppose to medicines approach where primary sources such as data from
conducted research indicates medicines ability to produce original knowledge. Holloways
usage of secondary sources happens to be the driving force of her paper; thus, secondary sources
undermine some of the credibility behind her paper as new and exciting. For example, when she
discusses user fees in other countries, Holloway says, A review of the economic literature
concerning the effects of user fees in developing countries suggests that effects may be
equivocal (Holloway). Holloways uses secondary sources to guide the trajectory of her main
argument by mentioning her review of economic literature. Despite being able to demonstrate
that she has a strong foundation in prior knowledge of the topic, Holloways usage of secondary
sources undermines her ability to create new knowledge. Without creating new information, the
economists rely on complicated regurgitation of other research to articulate the idea of dangerous
rises in the fees for prescribing drugs. The complicated nature of the economists approach
hinders their call to action because readers do not understand what current and relevant
information is driving the rises in such fees for prescribed drugs. Therefore, Holloways
emphasis on secondary sources turns out to be less effective than Halls approach because only
Holloways discourse community will understand most of the secondary sources she
incorporates. The rest of society is then lost in the excessive information that is neither new nor
seemingly relevant to those not in the field of economics. Conversely, the medical disciplinary

Zhang 4
approach of using evidence revolves around primary evidence, which is important to address. In
order for society to be well off and educated on the overdoses of prescribed drugs, new and
relevant information is required to prevent future fatalities in overdosing. By presenting evidence
as primary evidence, readers will know that the writer conducted research and scholars in the
medical field go even further to simplify the data into explanations that many people can
understand. Hall demonstrates the importance of primary evidence when he describes the
sociodemographic characteristics of unintentional pharmaceutical overdose deaths in West
Virginia from 295 cases, Hall says, Among all decedent, 186 (63.1%) had used contributory
pharmaceuticals without documented prescriptions (i.e., diversion), and 63 (24.4%) had 5 or
more clinicians prescribe them controlled substances in the year prior to death (i.e., doctor
shopping) (Table 2) (Hall). The reference to Table 2 is addressing the primary source that was
obtained from conducting research. The importance of this is that the table allows the evidence
from the research to be the forefront and the driving force in his argument. Thus, Halls medicine
disciplinary approach for evidence is more effective in reaching out to society because the study
for primary evidence furthers the improvement of societys wellbeing because people beyond the
discourse community can understand how primary research affects them. On the other hand,
Holloways economic disciplinary approach for evidence focuses predominantly on prior
knowledge that comes from the discourse community who are the only audiences that are likely
to understand the information most easily because the audience will have difficulty
comprehending without conducting their own research on the secondary sources.
Moving on, medicines approach in delivering evidence from research contains extensive
usage of jargon with allusions to its meaning whereas economics disciplinary approach for using
jargon revolves around the expectation that the audience is acquainted with the words; thus, the

Zhang 5
medicine approach can connect to a broader audience which makes it more effective in terms of
being relevant to society. For instance, when hall discusses the guidelines of medication, he says,
Both guidelines encouraged expanded uses of opioid pain medications after careful patient
evaluation and counseling when other treatments are inadequate (Hall). Opioid is the jargon
that is understood to be a type of pain medication because hall makes an allusion to it with a
phrase after it. This presentation of argumentation is reflective of halls consideration for not
only the discourse community but also for other potential audiences. It is critical to address other
audiences because the more people who know the jargon of prescribed drugs, then the
knowledge of what the drugs can do will help prevent more overdosing. Unlike the economics
approach, Halls allusion to the meaning of opioid is effective at drawing a broader audience
because most who read the paper will learn it is a pain medication. On the other hand,
economics disciplinary approach for presenting research utilizes jargon as well, but Holloway
clearly speaks strictly to her discourse community. Holloway presents evidence with tougher
jargon. For example, when discussing how data was analyzed, Holloway says, Multiple linear
regression (Stata version 5) was used to analyze summary data at the level of the health facility,
thereby accounting for the likelihood of greater similarity of prescribing within facilities than
between them (Holloway). The phrase multiple linear regression would only be applicable to
a member of the economic discipline and she further specifies the type of linear regression by
stating it in parenthesis. However, the words in parenthesis does not shed any further light on
what multiple linear regression could possibly mean to someone with no prior knowledge. The
jargon is so obscure and complicated that any call for action by the economists will result in
confusion; thus, society does not benefit much from such overwhelming information. A reader
outside the discourse community will not have a clue on how multiple linear regression can

Zhang 6
reduce the dangers of increasing fees on prescribed drugs. This is clearly not the intention of
Holloway or of any other economist because it is more difficult to understand how prices are
affecting prescribed drugs than when a medical scholar presents information on the dangers of
prescribed drugs. In short, medicines disciplinary approach makes use of its discourse
community to guide the analysis of the topic, but also maintaining relevance with to society to
further its wellbeing by granting simple access to information on prescribed drugs. Alternatively,
economics approach limits its audience to the immediate discourse community so only they can
take any real course of action in benefiting society.
Both scholars of each discipline approach the same topic but their writing encompasses
different conventions from each discipline. Some of these conventions cover similar written
conventions, such as integration of evidence, but the methods in which each scholar approaches
the conventions differ in the form of disciplinary approaches. Thus, one is more effective than
the other in a certain aspect. For medicine and economics, the formers approach on the topic of
prescribed drugs is more effective at connecting to an audience beyond its immediate discourse
community; thus, medicines approach is able to connect to the rest of society. Halls approach
for reaching a broader audience includes presentation of important evidence first, dominant
usage of primary sources, and subtle explanation of jargon, while Holloways approach utilized
chronological presentation of evidence, more usage of secondary sources, and complex jargon
with no allusion to its possible definition. To look further beyond the simplistic delivery of
information, it is important to have a far-reaching audience on the topic of prescribed drugs
because the ability to understand them and the causes of fatalities due to overdose on prescribed
drugs can be the actions necessary for preventing future fatalities and strengthening societys
wellbeing as a whole.

Zhang 7
Works Cited
Hall, Aron. Patterns of Abuse Among Unintentional Pharmaceutical Overdose Fatalities. The
Journal of the American Medical Association 300.22 (2008): 2613-2620. Web
Holloway, Kathleen. The Effects of Different Kinds of User Fee on Prescribing Costs in Rural
Nepal. Health Policy and Planning 16.4 (2001): 421-427. Web