Whither medical advances? – Express Healthcare

Read the article

Dr. George ThomasKerala, a cardiologist based in Kochi, Kerala, urged a review of the pointless pursuit of life extension at the expense of medicine, where stress is rather a quality of life and prevalence between reasonable lifespans. It suggests that it should be in decline.

All your medicine was useless. Nothing can heal you: Jeremiah 46:11 (Good News Bible)

Not long ago, Dr. Atul Gavande published an article entitled “Epidemic of Unnecessary Care in the Epidemic of Unnecessary Care in.” New YorkerHe writes about “low value care”. But in reality, it was worthless care. There are medical tests or treatments that scientific and professional organizations have consistently determined to be non-profitable or completely harmful. The list includes performing an EEG for simple headaches (EEG is used to diagnose paroxysmal disease rather than headaches) and performing a CT or MRI scan for lower back pain in patients with no signs of neurological problems. (These scans consistently add nothing but the cost to the patient), or insert a coronary stent in a patient with stable heart disease (the possibility of a heart attack or death after 5 years) Not affected by stents). In just one year, 25-42% of Medicare patients received at least one of 26 useless tests and treatments.

In this situation, the big question is, “Is all medical progress really beneficial?”Can it be harmful in some cases? Or are some advances just a money-making gimmick? “Hope or hype: the high price of obsession with medical progress and false promises” Richard A. Deyo and Donald L Patrick (page 335, Amacom New Media, New York $ 24.50) answer these questions.

Journal of Clinical Institute The book was described as “a classic exposition worthy of a wide range of readers,” said George Lundberg, editor. Medscape Comprehensive Internal Medicine“Deyo and Patrick thoroughly explain Greed is Good’s philosophy, which pervades much of American medicine. They understood it over and over again.” Press Release “Dr. Richard Deyo and Dr. Donald Patrick say that doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, equipment makers, advocacy groups, politicians, the media, and patients themselves are routinely insignificant, expensive and high-tech. Find out how we are colluding to promote a medical “breakthrough” without criticism. Sometimes useless and sometimes harmful. Based on their own extensive and unbiased research and tragic stories of real patients, these doctors figure out what’s wrong with the increasingly costly healthcare system. In addition, they provide patients with facts and effective strategies for doing something about them. The book talks about the dangers of uncritically accepting medical advances and the dangers of common treatments that have caused unnecessary disability, financial responsibility, or death.

Observations by two researchers at the University of Texas are worth mentioning. “In an era when invasive heart surgery is a manifestation of high-tech and intensive care, many patients and their families expect and insist on active management. The term” conservative management “is thoughtfully reflected. Instead of doing so, it may project an impression of obsolescence, inadequacy, and inferiority complex (as well as to doctors and patients). If a positive approach is pursued (that is, “everything is done as much as possible”), then even if such an approach contributes to unfavorable results, it is forgiven. The book covers almost every aspect of medical care, from arthritis management to Zyban, with case reports.

The author also criticizes regulators and the media. The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) drug approval process is erroneous because it only checks to see if a drug works without harmful effects. This is not a comparison between new and existing drugs. Existing drugs may be cheaper and better. The FDA’s regulations on medical devices are also loose and do not control surgery. Responsible media is important for disseminating medical information from the right perspective. Health reporting has become sensational and frustrating in sales competition.

In Hilton Terrell’s article “Living on Bread Only-Myths of Preventive Medicine” Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine I’m writing about cholesterol mythology. He argues that lowering cholesterol lowers the incidence of heart disease and lowers mortality. But the data is the opposite. Enough people are dying from other causes to offset the benefits of heart death from lowering cholesterol. He added, “Therefore, the logical conclusion drawn is that lowering cholesterol only changes the mode of death in the net effect on the longevity of the population, not the certainty or timing of death. I can’t do that. ” Some may argue that there may be quality of life and financial benefits. Preventive defenses against degenerative diseases that occur near the end of life are weak when discussed for economic reasons. It is a preventive paradox. If that works, you are handed over from one cause of illness, disability, expense, and death to another of the same cause. You will be delivered to a less productive, older age with more age-related illnesses. “In general, it’s cheaper to die younger in the United States today,” he concludes.

How far will medical progress progress? Everything in biology has physiological limits. Imagine the limits of medical progress. If all the organs were replaced with artificial ones (“Bionic Man”), would that person be the same person? And what are the sociological problems associated with eternal life in the current world system? Death is a reality. What would happen instead if no one died of cancer? If it wasn’t due to the disease that medicine is currently treating or preventing, what would we die of? And is this progress? Is it? According to one study, 34% of Americans believe that modern medicine can cure almost anything, compared to 27% of Canadians and 11% of Germans. Medicine is eager to find Will-o’-wisp of eternal life and the fountain of youth. We should reassess the pointless pursuit that medicine seeks to prolong life at all costs. Instead, stress should be a reduction in quality of life and morbidity during a reasonable lifespan.

Hope and hype About American medical care. There is little information about the situation in other countries. The United States is at the forefront of selling illness. US health care costs are lower than any other high-income country in terms of per capita and GDP, and long-term trends indicate that the spending gap between the US and other countries continues to widen. I am.

American medical culture extends to India. We are also techno madmen. We tend to think that high-tech medical care is better than low-tech medical care. This is well documented by the name of the hospital. There are “high-tech,” “super-specialty,” and “fully computerized” hospitals, flaunting “state-of-the-art” equipment that seduces patients with captivating advertising. Instead of a healing touch, I was impressed with the “digital” inspection performed by the latest gadgets of marginal utility.

Healthcare is having a big impact on consumers’ finances. With a per capita income of $ 65295, good health insurance, and good social security, the United States is in a pinch of rising health care costs. The Obamacare and Less Is More movements reflected this reality.

Therefore, in India, where per capita income is $ 2099 and medical insurance and social security are inadequate, the American medical model could be a prescription for disasters. In these situations, the blind follow-up of so-called modern Western medical services creates good prescriptions, but treats them badly. This is more appropriate for current scenarios that encourage “health tourism”.

Not all medical advances are bad. Many medical advances, such as cataract surgery, have revolutionized medicine. Similarly, drugs like cimetidine have changed the landscape of gastric surgery. It is also impossible to control the huge movement of medical progress. Medical research costs money and society has to pay for it.

The important thing is to separate the rice husks from the grain and have a humanistic perspective. We need to be aware of suspicious treatments that are treated as “scientific” medical care with the sole motive of gaining unfair benefits. Medical ethicist Daniel Callahan talks about “sustainable medicine,” where society and science work together to promote public health and health and embrace the limits of medicine. In Callahan’s view, sustainable medicine continues to innovate, while humans “get sick, age, age, die” and science cannot keep us alive forever. Is also what we all accept.

In fact, in an era of rapid medical progress, globalization and liberalization, practical policies are needed to control health care delivery in light of socio-economic realities. Until then, consumers must follow the following principles: Buyer liability burden (Customers should be careful).

Whither medical advances? – Express Healthcare Source link Whither medical advances? – Express Healthcare

Related Articles

Back to top button