h a l f b a k e r y
Keep out of reach of children.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Just read that CT scans may show that a large proportion of people taking statins may not need them.
Medical literature is too specific for even specialists to keep up, so the idea is to survey physicians regarding their degree of conviction for current theories/prescriptions, in order to refocus
research and education, among other things.
This could be a feature of medical board exams or annual surveys of any kind. Maybe it already happens.
||Given what Neurosurgeon Ben Carson is currently proving
about his lack of scientific knowledge, what is the point of
||Practically speaking, the most useful thing would be broad
access to actual medical records, such that they can be
analyzed for the effectiveness of treatment. Effort is being
made in this direction, but it conflicts to a certain extent
with medical privacy laws.
||This sounds like a metric that illustrates the
demarcation between medical religion and medical
science. Very much like the principles behind
organisational management, versus real stuff.
||I tell my doctor what I will take and what I refuse to take.
Statins have been refused by me for years now. If they want
a reason, I tell them all the terrible feelings they caused for
the 3 days that I tried taking them. No one should have to
be subject to everything a doctor tells them. There are so
||Reality is not a popularity contest. It is not determined by what people believe, and front-line medical practitioners are not engaged in research, nor, often, have the time to keep abreast of the state of science. They are the engineers of medicine, not the scientists.
||While this survey may be useful in targeting education of practitioners, it is not a useful way of determining future research. Meta-analysis of existing studies is the way to find out what's what, and suggest where future research might go.