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

We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#31

Post by niels_olson »

maaku wrote: post #4

How do I _prevent_ an autopsy from being performed on me? As a cryonicist, I find what is being advocated for very scary...

You need to die a natural death and have been seen by your physician within the last year and they have to be willing to sign the death certificate. All other bodies become the coroner's jurisdiction. They can waive them, or they may do an external examination only, but once they have jurisdiction, it's out of your hands. Even then, at least in San Diego, the medical examiner reviews all death certificates and they occasionally pull one in due to something sounding fishy.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#32

Post by niels_olson »

goodcanadian wrote: post #10

I find this thought provoking. When my father-in-law died, the coroner declined to do an autopsy as he was over 70. Essentially, for anyone old enough, an autopsy is considered unnecessary as death isn't all that unlikely. In some respects, that is a sensible position. However, my father-in-law's death was slightly mysterious (in the medical sense; no suspicion of foul play) as he was extremely healthy and HIS father…

The coroner may have decided it was better for the family's closure to let it go. Particularly if a physician had already signed the death certificate.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#33

Post by mikhailt »

ars wrote: post #2

The United States is quite large. Even 1 out of 50 is still a very large number. We have plenty of opportunities to learn everything necessary.

1. Many of them are natural causes, third party (murder, suicide, accidents), and so on that are not necessarily caused by diseases or unexpected pathogens of which the doctors want to learn about. Remember the early autopsy reasons in the article: "In the United States, we usually don’t autopsy people unless the cause of death is mysterious or foul play is suspected." 2. What about races, gender, blood types, ages, and so on? The progression of the disease is different in each combination, so when factoring these factors in, 1 out of 50 really isn't that big of a number.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#34

Post by niels_olson »

mikeash wrote: post #23
MichaelCrawford wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there some rational reason you downvoted this? He was taking tylenol for neuralgia. It harmed his liver so bad he had severe jaundice. He was barely able to walk and was completely unable to speak. He died at the age of 68.

Maybe because it's completely off topic?

It isn't really off-topic, but he didn't show the connection. I'm starting to think a lot of what gets perceived as trolling is people trying to make a contribution but failing to show the connection from where the group is to where they are. Then the group comes down hard and then the "troll" gets defensive.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#35

Post by tajen »

goodcanadian wrote: post #10

I find this thought provoking. When my father-in-law died, the coroner declined to do an autopsy as he was over 70. Essentially, for anyone old enough, an autopsy is considered unnecessary as death isn't all that unlikely. In some respects, that is a sensible position. However, my father-in-law's death was slightly mysterious (in the medical sense; no suspicion of foul play) as he was extremely healthy and HIS father…

However, the pyramid of ages shows that our generation had 95% chances of being alive at 70. Followed by a sharp decline.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#36

Post by niels_olson »

trevdarc wrote: post #14

"Doctors, meanwhile, learned humility. If you’re a doctor, it’s one thing to know, as an abstract fact, that 10 or 20 percent of patients who seemed to die of heart attack actually died from pulmonary embolism. It is quite another to have a pathologist dissect one of your patients and tell you No, this woman you took care for 25 years, and whose husband you pass on the street each day, did not die of heart attack; sh…

The rate of suicide among physicians is mainly due to their higher success rate. They have a lower attempt rate compared to the population at large.

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#37

Post by CatDevURandom »

gmarx wrote: post #16

former pathology resident here- disagree. The main reason we do fewer autopsies is because of better diagnostics while the patient is alive. The numbers they provide for significant changes in diagnosis based on autopsy seem pretty high (based only on my own experience). Even the examples they pick for the article are kind of lame- it wasn't St. louis encephalitis, it was west nile! Um...so? Do we have a treatment no…

>> former pathology resident here

The implication being that you did not complete your training. I'm curious -- if you don't mind the derailment -- why not?

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#39

Post by ivank »

peter303 wrote: post #7
maaku wrote: post #4

How do I _prevent_ an autopsy from being performed on me? As a cryonicist, I find what is being advocated for very scary...

It is no longer "you" when your body is dead.

You brain still has all of "you" when you're legally dead though, at least for a few hours, probably longer if cooled properly. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic_death

Re: We Need More Autopsies, to Help Save the Living

#40

Post by sampo »

gmarx wrote: post #16

former pathology resident here- disagree. The main reason we do fewer autopsies is because of better diagnostics while the patient is alive. The numbers they provide for significant changes in diagnosis based on autopsy seem pretty high (based only on my own experience). Even the examples they pick for the article are kind of lame- it wasn't St. louis encephalitis, it was west nile! Um...so? Do we have a treatment no…

> The main reason we do fewer autopsies is because of better diagnostics while the patient is alive.

The article claims that "About 15 to 30 percent of the time, the diagnoses at time of death are wrong".

Post reply on HN