Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

sciencealert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 153 posts

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#41

Post by happy-go-lucky »

hirundo wrote: post #4

I think it's bad policy for the FDA to screen medicines not just for safety but also efficacy. From this study it appears to be frequently unjustified but it gives the drug a seal of approval that has a tendency to replace the judgement of doctors and patients. It's not that the FDA decision makers are corrupt or incompetent. These are wildly complex issues that nobody can get right consistently. Better not to concea…

> For me, prayer would have no effect. For others it could be a life saving intervention.

In the same vein, I often get to read about an emerging approach called precision medicine.

Precision Medicine refers to the tailoring of medical treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient. It does not literally mean the creation of drugs or medical devices that are unique to a patient, but rather the ability to classify individuals into subpopulations that differ in their susceptibility to a particular disease, in the biology or prognosis of those diseases they may develop, or in their response to a specific treatment [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_medicine

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#42

Post by Macross8299 »

dannykwells wrote: post #18

Everyone yelling about how the FDA is corrupt or should only screen for safety are completely ignorant of history and basic facts. Medicine is not like trying out a new coding framework - in some cases, like cancer: i) There is no ability to "try it out for your self" - you are either all in or not ii) There are extreme risks to taking the drug (most cancer drugs are actually somewhat to extreme toxic...just less tox…

>Do they get it wrong? Yes, occasionally. Not frequently. Occasionally. But that also, is science. The FDA follows rigorous statistical procedures, but even pThe issue is that there is a huge lack of transparency. When a third of the studies involved in approval of anti-depressants were withheld from the public [0] and even some withheld at the insistence of the FDA [1], what good do low P-values do?

Hard to trust the science when you're not even allowed to review the papers for yourself.

[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/health/17depress.html

[1]: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9802-2004Sep9...

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#44

Post by geggam »

gumby wrote: post #37
geggam wrote: post #22

Frankly, Me and most of America think the FDA approves things according to the highest bidder. This is one of the biggest contributing factors to the anti vax movement. | The trust in our govt and all govt agencies is simply gone.

You pay hardly anything to the agency -- their fees are a rounding error compared to all your other costs. And while it's valuable for some jobs to have on your resume that you used to work there, so many people have done so over the years that it doesn't raise any salaries; it's merely that for certain regulatory roles it's good to have someone who knows what it's like to receive the filings so you can make them cle…

When employees at the FDA leave and take positions at one of the companies they had a hand in approving something for, at an increased salary. The appearance of impropriety is blatant.

Regardless of it actually happening or not it looks terrible. This should never happen

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#45

Post by js2 »

EndXA wrote: post #3

Abstract: > The ability to identify medical reversals [practices that have been found, through randomized controlled trials, to be no better than a prior or lesser standard of care] and other low-value medical practices is an essential prerequisite for efforts to reduce spending on such practices. Through an analysis of more than 3000 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in three leading medical journals (th…

Supplementary File 2 contains the full list of reversals:

https://elifesciences.org/articles/45183/figures#supp2

I don’t know if this is a permalink due to the hash parameter but I’ll try:

https://elifesciences.org/download/aHR0cHM6Ly9jZG4uZWxpZmVzY...

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#47

Post by hurrdurr2 »

I do remember watching a documentary about medical devices where it describes a FDA loophole; if the device you are trying to introduce is similar to a previous already approved product then the scientific rigor involved is significantly less. I wonder if this has something to do with it.

Re: Nearly 400 medical devices, procedures and practices found ineffective in study

#50

Post by homonculus1 »

geggam wrote: post #35
criley2 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-vax comes from anti-intellectualism, just like your opinion does. Two sides of the same coin. It has nothing to do with "trust in agencies" and everything to do with intellectualism. We live in a society where academics, data, evidence, etc are all maligned. How can you trust in an agency if you aren't willing to trust anyone at all? The cancer is not trust in agencies, it's your culture of anti-intellectualism…

Good way to convince people... Call them stupid ;)

The stupid can't be convinced anyway. All that remains is to point them out to others.
Post reply on HN