>>>My son-in-law had serious problems with this...
>
>Can't comment on the anecdote, but I agree that furosemide is an old and cheap drug I remember using every day. ;-) In the first world it's still very useful, but not for some purposes as it is still used elsewhere. For some diagnoses there are better options and every ambulance chaser knows that not providing "appropriate" care is a juicy opportunity for a law suit. Even so, I agree that "good enough" should be available if the patient prefers to save $, but the physician can't tell whether the patient who insists on a less effective Rx, nevertheless will turn around and sue the physician if the result isn't perfect. Juries award bumper settlements because they see insurers as having pots of cash compared to the poor suffering patient and nobody seems to care that the physician gets added to the sh*t list that will affect them whenever they need to renew their license or seek privileges in a hospital.

This case was actually simpler - he has no insurance, and lasix did him far better than whatever else he was taking, simply because there were no side effects (and thus no need for other pills he was taking against those). And yet the doctors' office took care that he doesn't get it.