A new book critiques medicine
blogs.scientificamerican.com
A new book critiques medicine
1–10 of 198 posts
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#2Stegenga calls these latter two “magic bullets,” a phrase coined by physician/chemist Paul Ehrlich to describe treatments that target the cause of a disease without disrupting the body’s healthy functions.
Researchers have labored mightily to find more magic bullets, but they remain rare. For example, imatinib, brand name Gleevec, is “an especially effective treatment” for one type of leukemia, Stegenga says. But Gleevec has “severe adverse effects, including nausea, headaches, severe cardiac failure and delayed growth in children.”
Most would prefer these symptoms over death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#3See also: Anatomy of an Epidemic [0], about when pharmaceuticals to treat mental health issues become problems in their own right; and, the chapters on medical intervention in Elephant in the Brain [1], which argue persuasively that much of the medical system functions to deliver social signaling of care, rather than improved health outcomes.
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#4Note that the author is a “science journalist” with a degree in journalism, not medicine or even STEM.
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#5Answer: Yes totally overrated!
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#6Note that the author is a “science journalist” with a degree in journalism, not medicine or even STEM.
So...?
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#7The anti-vaxxers think it is.
We need to be careful how we say this, because then you get generalities like the title and people who shun the basic of medicines such as neccessary vacinations.
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#8Scientific American is getting very non scientific.
A couple of days ago we got the: "Fat Is Not the Problem—Fat Stigma Is", now this article. What follows, "Aliens may have built the Pyramids after all"?
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#9I've long believed that once startups and tech companies get their hands on medical data (patient outcomes, medication treatment outcomes, mal practice rates, surgery outcomes) that a reckoning will take place on the medical industry. The level of legitimacy and respect that doctors and hospitals currently have is far too high, and hinges on branding and the exclusivity of becoming a doctor. Once all of this data becomes available, it will be obvious how worthless and expensive most medical treatments really are. Most prescription drugs do nothing, and the ones that do something are more so just covering the symptoms.
HIPAA laws are hiding patient outcomes and holding this whole sham afloat.
Re: A new book critiques medicine
#10Stegenga calls these latter two “magic bullets,” a phrase coined by physician/chemist Paul Ehrlich to describe treatments that target the cause of a disease without disrupting the body’s healthy functions. Researchers have labored mightily to find more magic bullets, but they remain rare. For example, imatinib, brand name Gleevec, is “an especially effective treatment” for one type of leukemia, Stegenga says. But Gle…
[deleted]