21–30 of 103 posts
Not to be that guy, but on the Overview page for Patients & Caregivers, in the picture with the two women, it says "treatment regime" - I believe it should be "treatment regimen".
Congrats on an audacious project! Unfortunately, main site not working for me. So, "at least two of our expert researchers will validate test results to rule out any errors"? What does that mean, exactly? As a board certified pathologist, I have some idea what I mean by validation, but what do you mean? Next, the featured testimonial from "Jerry W." sounds fishy - it may be genuine, but it seems like it was written b…
This is the sort of service that a general practitioner should be providing. The vast majority of patients have routine problems. Though these might be distressing to the individuals, the "standard of care" (assuming correct diagnosis) is established practice, and this service would not affect that. For the few with very rare conditions, or with useless primary care physicians, this service might be useful, however t…
Congrats on an audacious project! Unfortunately, main site not working for me. So, "at least two of our expert researchers will validate test results to rule out any errors"? What does that mean, exactly? As a board certified pathologist, I have some idea what I mean by validation, but what do you mean? Next, the featured testimonial from "Jerry W." sounds fishy - it may be genuine, but it seems like it was written b…
Hello. I work for MetaMed, and knew Jerry (not his real name) from long before he became a client - I assure you that that page was in no way written or edited by us. We generally do not include specifics (like real names, medical histories, and so on) to protect patient privacy, which we take extremely seriously.
I see how that issue - name/history/etc. - would make it hard to provide credible success stories.
Site still not working for me, so this may be there:
Perhaps, someday, maybe include a patient story or two with medical history but no name? (With appropriate HIPAA waivers...)
Even better, it would be WAAY awesome if you posted, whenever possible, the results of your research on your site for review by anybody. It may not be in your current business model, but the "giving back" angle might be the edge that pushes you into popularity.
Whenever we run a test in medicine, we ask, "How would the result affect management?" If the result, one way or another, would not change management, the test is not worth running. The site is down so I have to go from the headline, but I'd ask the same question: how would this service affect clinical management? Can you offer an example?
Yet, a lot of unnecessary tests are run daily at every hospital I've seen. But what's worse is that often times doctors are reluctant to find out more about a patient's illness simply because they believe "it wouldn't affect treatment and it's not worth it anyway". It doesn't take a scientist to figure out why this approach can be disastrous. At the same time, high-paying private patients are often considered to be worth finding out the specifics.
The whole system of clinical knowledge and action is broken from this point on. Doctors often do not keep current with advances in medical research, and I encountered a few who are actively opposed to it, asserting that medicine should not go any further than it does today because it's considered "unnatural".
Medicine is in danger of becoming scientifically bankrupt. This startup, while I think it's a great concept, is a symptom of this disease. Practitioners, even in the odd case they're interested in advanced knowledge that is not being passed down from whoever the resident rockstar surgeon is, generally do not have proper access to current knowledge and statistics.
It seems to me this system, where a life is more often than not considered ephemeral and expendable (except if you're a small child or a pregnant woman), this system is broken and cannot in its current form provide the services we will need as our civilization advances. As it is, this system plays into the hands of religion and pseudo science (a trend which doctors are generally comfortable with), and it is one of the dehumanizing factors that make our hospitals places of desperation instead of regeneration.
But I feel pricing model needs a revisit.
For patients with some serious ailments this is all fine but what about less serious issues like..a person with allergies, thyroid, migraine etc. These are kinds of things which bother people but still not enough to spend 5000 for analysis.
Probably a profile based pricing is a good idea? Just a thought.
Most of us have diseases that are horses not zebra - and you have a strong financial incentive to encourage hypochondriacs to keep hearing zebra.
If my condition has Gregory House stumped, sure ill pay you but otherwise that lump on your skin is a cyst not a tumour and that shortness of breath is lack of fitness not a heart failure.
Interesting idea, but site is not really usable on mobile...
This is the sort of service that a general practitioner should be providing. The vast majority of patients have routine problems. Though these might be distressing to the individuals, the "standard of care" (assuming correct diagnosis) is established practice, and this service would not affect that. For the few with very rare conditions, or with useless primary care physicians, this service might be useful, however t…