Pretty good observation of the fact that it is hard to get actually good information on Google. You have to use `reddit.com` or something to actually get it since that's the one place with lots of user-history and good SEO.
Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
331–340 of 438 posts
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#332“ Medicine has become a three-way negotiation between you, your doctor, and The Algorithm.” This characterization makes it sound like a good thing. In reality, the doctor’s responsibility is being pushed to the patient because they are overbooked in the name of economic efficiency. As a patient with complex, non-specific medical condition, I can tell you how miserable this is. I can’t count on doctors _at all_ to mov…
Can confirm. They paint people who google symptoms as kooks or as annoying, but you have to if you ever want to get an actual diagnosis and treatment, because doctors and hospitals are, quite often, worse than Google at figuring out WTF is wrong. Do your best not to end up in a hospital without an advocate (friend, relative) watching out for you. They'll fail to treat you at best, then discharge you with a shrug and…
[deleted]
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not hard to diagnose once you eventually get to a person that can diagnose it. You said it yourself. It is not about difficultly, but time spent with the patient. But I literally showed my doctor the cutaneous lupus in my ear and she said "Oh, some people just get gunk in their ears" and would not send me to a rheumatologist. The slow diagnosis is because the specialists are so reluctant to see people. Right no…
There are too many patients and not enough doctors. This isn't caused by capitalism, capitalism doesn't limit the # of doctors. Becoming socialist doesn't magically allow doctors to see patients for twice as long. If we had socialism more people could afford doctors(a good thing!) but it would make this specific problem worse, because there would be more patients. This is caused by the AMA lobbying to limit the suppl…
The book M.D.: Doctors Talk About Themselves actually interviews someone who discusses this problem, and inadvertently illustrates a problem American policy ran into.
The interviewee says that the Reagan administration tried to drive down the cost of health care by increasing (as opposed to, say, lifting) the quota on production of doctors, with the idea in mind that more supply of doctors would drive down costs. And he goes on to say that the idea backfired by raising medical costs.
In the interviewee's mind, the problem is that doctors can "make their own work" -- with more doctors around, more medical care can be performed than was possible with fewer doctors, and so the cost of health care went up instead of down, making the policy a mistake. That is the beginning and end of his analysis.
No one asks whether the cost of particular treatments went up or down. If total national spending on health care went up, the policy is supposed to have been a failure.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought expert systems were supposed to replace diagnosis, like three decades ago.
In an April's fool story where Eliezer Yudkowsky was pretending to come from a rationalist parallel world (or outer planet), he suggested a medical system with a different way to specialize people. Most notably, he suggested we separate diagnosticians and prognosticators from practicians . The former do their best to guess what you have, send you to the right kind of practician, and estimate your possible outcomes (w…
We have the same problem in education; we've stupidly combined certifications (diplomas) with instruction. This is a huge conflict of interest for the schools.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not hard to diagnose once you eventually get to a person that can diagnose it. You said it yourself. It is not about difficultly, but time spent with the patient. But I literally showed my doctor the cutaneous lupus in my ear and she said "Oh, some people just get gunk in their ears" and would not send me to a rheumatologist. The slow diagnosis is because the specialists are so reluctant to see people. Right no…
> The slow diagnosis is because the specialists are so reluctant to see people. Right now I am on a six month wait to see a rheumatologist. Why? Capitalism. This remark seems somewhat lacking in rigor. I know bagging on capitalism is a common reflex, particularly in medicine, but something more is almost certainly going on. The default thought process for a retailer is to move units. A lawyer wants to rack up billabl…
Specialists are called that for a reason. They are not general practitioners and their time is extremely valuable. Access to them needs to be managed so that they do not waste their time on people who do not need their specialty.
The way it's supposed to work is that the general practitioner rules out a bunch of stuff, and then starts referring to specialists who can diagnose/treat the rare things.
In practice it's not quite perfect, but it's hard for me to think of a better way to deal with it.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#336“ Medicine has become a three-way negotiation between you, your doctor, and The Algorithm.” This characterization makes it sound like a good thing. In reality, the doctor’s responsibility is being pushed to the patient because they are overbooked in the name of economic efficiency. As a patient with complex, non-specific medical condition, I can tell you how miserable this is. I can’t count on doctors _at all_ to mov…
Can confirm. They paint people who google symptoms as kooks or as annoying, but you have to if you ever want to get an actual diagnosis and treatment, because doctors and hospitals are, quite often, worse than Google at figuring out WTF is wrong. Do your best not to end up in a hospital without an advocate (friend, relative) watching out for you. They'll fail to treat you at best, then discharge you with a shrug and…
Feel this.
Spent $500 for a pointless MRI.
I have some specific domain knowledge on my injury (very sport specific) but obviously have not spent 10+ years in school studying hand surgery.
But I did read and send AND tell/ask in my appoint real specifically relevant med publications saying the only way to see what I wanted was an ultra sound under stress.
My PT also said this. But not a 'real md.'
So I had to pay and sit through an uncomfortable MRI for nothing. And never got the ultrasound. Should have just said no thanks.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because having plaque on your teeth will block acids doesn't mean it's actually a good idea not to clean your teeth. I guess if you could show a study showing that leaving plaque/tartar on teeth leads to better health outcomes I might be interested.
The reason it's a good idea to clean your teeth is because if you don't they'll stink and become discolored. It's not because it keeps them healthy, because cleaning your teeth strips some protection from bacteria and acids away from them while deepening the pockets around them, creating a nice place for disease to live. The idea that intensely cleaning your teeth (and keeping them white) is healthy is an intuitive l…
>Fossils have better teeth than we do, but we have prettier, less fragrant teeth.
That's because those fossils had way less access to sugar, which is the main reason we need so much more dental hygiene nowadays.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can confirm. They paint people who google symptoms as kooks or as annoying, but you have to if you ever want to get an actual diagnosis and treatment, because doctors and hospitals are, quite often, worse than Google at figuring out WTF is wrong. Do your best not to end up in a hospital without an advocate (friend, relative) watching out for you. They'll fail to treat you at best, then discharge you with a shrug and…
The interesting part about this is that you'll also likely see a NP or physician's assistant, who, at best, "google" (uptodate) your symptoms if the case isn't obvious. Sometimes doctors will do the intake appointment and fail to tell you that any follow-ups are done with their "trained" NP. And then be billed 400-800$. Such an incredible system! I also gave up going to physicians with a chronic illness. They're in a…
Yep, same.
I only go to doctors for injuries or other clear, specific problems.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#339There are tons of ethical issues in allowing medical ads to consumers as it creates perverse incentives (and just the for profit system in general, but let's not develve into that fight).
I get tons of Testosterone replacement therapy ads. And also 'adhd' ads.
These are real MDs, but they will give scripts to almost anyone. Many online only.
I'm not judging people who want to use. People will use drugs legal or not and it is far better to get real stuff from real MDs.
But advertising it? The whole point is to create / increase demand. This is not passively allowing safer use.
These ads are misleading; TRT ads of young super fit people or getting people hooked on stims for no reason.
How would people feel if there were FB ads targeting people who listen to EDM with dope or E ads? We are also inundated with alcohol already.
All drugs aren't comparable or similar danger profiles, but just shows how prejudice and assumptions from a prohibition system are imho hypocritical. using a more extreme thought experiment can highlight this.
Re: Google almost convinced me to spend $400 on useless laser treatments
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because having plaque on your teeth will block acids doesn't mean it's actually a good idea not to clean your teeth. I guess if you could show a study showing that leaving plaque/tartar on teeth leads to better health outcomes I might be interested.
If you leave the plaque and tartar on the teeth without fixing the fundamental problem (immune health) then there of course will not be better health outcomes. Caries are a sign of an immune disorder or imbalance. As long as dentists only scrape peoples teeth and do not integrate their health into their practice you will keep having plaques and tartar to be remove as your body fight this battle. https://www.lupus.org…
>Caries are a sign of an immune disorder or imbalance
Or just terrible habits like drinking liters of soda everyday. Besides the diabetes, the mix of sugar and acid is terrible for dental health, and contrary to the myth, brushing your teeth will not save them, at all, if one persists in terrible habits.