221–230 of 241 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what's the alternative in practice; having no recourse if a negligent doctor maims or kills you?
There's a big difference between negligence and making a good-faith decision based on training and experience that later turns out to be wrong. Actual negligence should, of course, absolutely be punished.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shouldn't you at least do regular blood panels to check for prediabetes and the like?
If a person is otherwise healthy, no. Or at least, there is no medical indication to do so. But a person with pre diabetes is not generally otherwise healthy. T2DM is not a condition of a healthy person, it is a lifestyle disease caused by lack of exercise, poor diet and obesity. This person should see a doctor, but they’re not a healthy person. They should be aiming to exercise and reduce body mass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I know a doctor who was heading the liver transplant list. Patients would come in, be diagnosed and told they need to live healthier, do this and do that as part of the preventative measures. Clear medical advice. Habitual change is the hardest in my view and this is also how this story continues. Over the course of time these patients will visit regularly. Their condition is worsening and the preventative medi…
When it becomes evident that "clear medical advice" isn't working, then maybe we should dig another level deeper and find out WHY it isn't working. Shifting the blame to the patients when you have most that are failing is, in my opinion, bad medicine.
For example, drunk driving or shootings aren't medical problems, but cause them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Quebec at least, a doctor's prescription is required for all blood tests even at private labs.
Crazy how different it is vs the States - check out for instance what you can get immediately at this pretty popular chain: https://www.anylabtestnow.com/general-health/ Hundreds of different ones. Granted you still need some level of medical expertise to be able to accurately interpret results on a lot of them but a smart enough layman could probably self diagnose some illnesses with enough homework.
I would be easy for me to interpret the results as my doctor is clear that [number] should not fall under [threshold]. It even comes back highlighted in red on the result sheet if it falls under that number. And I have clear instruction on what to do if that happens.
But nope.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well also, condolences to Edward Shumaker, who he murdered, and Edward's family. [0] [0] https://www.wionews.com/world/patient-in-ground-breaking-hea...
His assault definitely contributed to Shumaker’s early death but he didn’t “murder” him.
That sounds like murder to me. Call it what it is. A slow death committed with the intention of a fast death doesn't make it not a murder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Aren’t all of the above equally capable of carrying and transmitting the virus? No. If I had Covid a month ago and recovered then baring a compromised immune system or new variant I am not going to get it again this month. So I am not "equally capable of carrying and transmitting the virus" compared to someone who "had neither a vaccine or covid" .
> I am not going to get it again this month. I understand that you would have antibodies and it be very unlikely if you carry the virus it would be unlikely to overwhelm your immune system in that time, but you can still carry/spread it right? More directly related to the policy in question they can test you for antibodies, and maybe it is immaterial, but do they distinguish if you had covid 1 month ago vs 3 months v…
Once you have recovered? I don't think so, at least not if you have a healthy immune system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Aren’t all of the above equally capable of carrying and transmitting the virus? No. If I had Covid a month ago and recovered then baring a compromised immune system or new variant I am not going to get it again this month. So I am not "equally capable of carrying and transmitting the virus" compared to someone who "had neither a vaccine or covid" .
> I am not going to get it again this month. I understand that you would have antibodies and it be very unlikely if you carry the virus it would be unlikely to overwhelm your immune system in that time, but you can still carry/spread it right? More directly related to the policy in question they can test you for antibodies, and maybe it is immaterial, but do they distinguish if you had covid 1 month ago vs 3 months v…
Having anti-bodies reduces the viral load in your body, which also means that there are fewer viral fragments exiting your body
The policies are to reduce spread, not eliminate it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He says he is committed to and I assume he has good intentions. He isn’t drinking or smoking, but water intake, salt intake, and red meat have been more challenging for his willpower/discipline. Also, I have no idea if matters or not but he is wealthy (low eight digits) as well.
Honestly I can't find any fault here. Giving up the drinking and smoking has probably been monumentally difficult, and it's amazing that he's been able to do that. That alone tells me he is committed to getting healthier. The diet stuff... honestly, nutrition "science" is full of contradictions. Sure, too much of anything is probably bad for you, but I don't think diet concerns should be a blocker for receiving a tra…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Choosing someone not next to their deathbed is very likely something that would never get approved by an ethics board.
I do wonder, however, if there were potential patients available, who were near death solely due to the need for a heart transplant (and were near-certain not to get a conventional human transplant in time), and not also because of a host of other issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a slide in a lecture somewhere noting that no one would ever die of a healthcare-associated infection if, when admitted to the hospital, they were put in a room full of ozone or hydrogen peroxide fog and intense UV light, while never being seen by a nurse or doctor.
Dying from lung damage is discounted in that scenario.