31–40 of 49 posts
There was a study where knee surgeons just made an incision in the skin and told the patient the procedure was done. The result was about the same rate of success, and a lot less risk of complications. I can't find a date on this article but it's at least from 2010 if not older. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=116879&page=1
> "But the decision to operate should be based on the best science, not on the worst-case scenario. If the best evidence tells us that a procedure is not effective, or that the benefits are outweighed by the risks for some patients, then it should not be done." As long as patients can sue their doctor, no sane doctor will do less than what the patient wants if there is a remote chance the procedure is slightly more e…
There was a study where knee surgeons just made an incision in the skin and told the patient the procedure was done. The result was about the same rate of success, and a lot less risk of complications. I can't find a date on this article but it's at least from 2010 if not older. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=116879&page=1
Isn't it unethical to lie to a patient? Isn't that grounds for a malpractice suit?
There was a study where knee surgeons just made an incision in the skin and told the patient the procedure was done. The result was about the same rate of success, and a lot less risk of complications. I can't find a date on this article but it's at least from 2010 if not older. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=116879&page=1
Isn't it unethical to lie to a patient? Isn't that grounds for a malpractice suit?
A couple of years ago I slipped (herniated) two lumbar disks. Both of the surgeons I consulted begged me NOT to get surgery (one with tears in his eyes). I'm ever so grateful that there are surgeons out there who will push back. Contrast that with when I went to an orthopedic specialist about knee pain from running. In less than two minutes of consultation he told me he wanted to snip my tight IT bands. My jaw was on…
Acupuncture, there has been so much FUD spread about alternative medicine that I have no idea what to trust anymore. It isn't even covered by most insurance. What is real, who to trust.
The control treatment is typically use of acupuncture needles in areas not specifically specified by codified acupuncture standards (it is a thing... you can go to school for this stuff remember), or the use of sham needles, which still penetrate by like half a inch or something.
All most of the studies you will find that both arms (control and 'real' acupuncture) both show similar improvements in outcome. A valid (and I think the right one) conclusion to draw from these studies is that while the internal logic of acupuncture doesn't do anything, the mechanical action of poking needles into the body has non-trivial benefits.
If you can't get acupuncture covered by insurance, you can look into dry needling (its mechanically the same thing...). A quick google search tells me that some states will allow chiropractors and physiotherapists to perform dry needling and may fall under different insurance buckets.
edit: sorry, I forgot to add this in. obviously poking needles into muscles won't do anything for stuff that isn't rooted in muscles/other connective tissue. Won't do shit for your asthma or allergies for example...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is much lower. http://healthland.time.com/2011/08/04/under-the-knife-study-... "People have always been afraid of general anesthesia. Many fear they won’t wake up from this “artificial sleep” — actually more of a coma, albeit drug-induced and reversible. In the 1940s, for every one million patients operated on under full anesthesia, 640 died. By the end of the 1980s, fatalities were down to four per every million,…
Within a year? But how many is caused directly by anesthesia?
> "But the decision to operate should be based on the best science, not on the worst-case scenario. If the best evidence tells us that a procedure is not effective, or that the benefits are outweighed by the risks for some patients, then it should not be done." As long as patients can sue their doctor, no sane doctor will do less than what the patient wants if there is a remote chance the procedure is slightly more e…
There have been (unfortunately) large pharma companies over the years who manufacture generics, which are later found out to be not even close to manufacturing the real thing, or whose manufacturing processes are extremely unsafe.
Ranbaxy and GVK Biosciences are examples that spring to mind from not too long ago. There may have been others since. :(
Appendectomy: The possibility of dying from a ruptured appendix is enough for surgeons to recommend this procedure but several studies have shown that antibiotics alone are also effective. The recurrence rate is higher with antibiotics, but the surgical complications are lower. I can think of a reason why the recurrence rate for appendectomy is lower than for antibiotics. ;-)
Much probably turns on the progression of the disease at the point of diagnosis. An infection only detected as an elevated white cell count in a clinic, without any localized pain/swelling, may be treatable with antibiotics. And that is probably safer than the knife. But an ER patient howling in pain with an appendix swollen and about to burst is no candidate for pills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much probably turns on the progression of the disease at the point of diagnosis. An infection only detected as an elevated white cell count in a clinic, without any localized pain/swelling, may be treatable with antibiotics. And that is probably safer than the knife. But an ER patient howling in pain with an appendix swollen and about to burst is no candidate for pills.
This is a pretty stupid example imo, it isn't really workable in practice. You can die from a ruptured appendix and the surgery isn't terribly involved. Whereas people come in constantly with elevated WBCs; it'd require a high index of suspicion to treat for appendicitis with antibiotics in every circumstance. You would probably end up doing more harm than good that way because antibiotics are not benign drugs.
I imagine there are some people for whom surgery isn't an option. I'm not sure what that condition might be given the routine nature of the procedure, but they might be out there.
There was a study where knee surgeons just made an incision in the skin and told the patient the procedure was done. The result was about the same rate of success, and a lot less risk of complications. I can't find a date on this article but it's at least from 2010 if not older. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=116879&page=1
Isn't it unethical to lie to a patient? Isn't that grounds for a malpractice suit?