Reply to w30bob
Hello Bob.
I do like your post and agree with all you have to say on the subject, especially the suggestion to try what the manufacturer’s recommend. The manufacturers do try to be as helpful as they can be and one even sent me wafers that overdid the adhesive strength to such an extent that I had a job to remove them when necessary.
Once I exhausted all those options and still did not find a solution to suit my needs, then I looked to resolve the problems via experimentation and DIY. After many failures of my own I began to realise how much research and development is needed to manufacture these products, especially for a wide and diverse stoma population with a myriad of personal issues to resolve.
Eventually, I designed some baseplates to cater satisfactorily to my own needs and simply stuck the manufactured wafers to those. (They tend to stick quite well to inanimate materials even if they are not so good on some human skins)
Here we come to the bit where I needed to stick my baseplates to my own skin. I was using Hollister 7730 satisfactorily for years, until recently when they withdrew the product. I then needed to go searching again for something similar. Suppliers of stoma gear did not have the answers to my questions, so I widened my search into the realm of ‘prosthetics’. My reasoning was that stoma devices could be viewed as prosthetics and some of these things would need sticking onto the skin.
Eventually I found a few products that did the trick and then whittled it down to one that seemed to be marginally more effective than the others. This has the trade name of ‘PROBOND’. Not only did it do the job, but it came in a little bottle with a paintbrush-type applicator, which was much more suited to the job than the 7733 spray-on method.
It is my belief that the major manufacturers are doing a great job in R&D and have improved their products no end over the years. However, the bottom line is that they are in it to make a profit and sometimes it is just not worth the investment to manufacture things that very few people will want to use that the potential profits are predictably not there.
This is where the DIY approach comes into its own. I make stuff myself, but in our town, we have a charitable workshop where things are made (and repaired) free of charge for those people who either do not have the skills or are in need and cannot afford to have someone make stuff for them. It is quite surprising how many different medical appliances/devices are not suitable or adequate for the end user, yet they are inordinately expensive to develop and produce for individuals in need.
There are many people who are presently involved in research and development of things to help others, which are not profit motivated. They are inventing and making stuff for those who have needs that are not presently being catered for by the mainstream, and even if they were, the folks who cannot afford to purchase the products will still be in need.
The world could do with more altruistic inventors who are not simply motivated by the ‘financial-profit-motive’ but wish to use their talents for the benefit of anyone and everyone who may have a need.
I understand that various people and organisations, over many centuries, have claimed the phrase: “From each according to their ability – to each according to their need”. Not a bad catchy phrase to guide a caring society?
Best wishes
Bill