2 of 3
2
X-Ray Overdose
Posted: 18 October 2009 01:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
macgyver - 18 October 2009 06:13 AM

Vyazma you need to keep in mind that this case is an extreme exception to the terrific work done by nurses and other hospital workers every day. There are and will be exceptions as there are in every profession but its important to recognize that this is an exception and just that. It is not an accurate representation of what goes on in hospitals.

It amazes me that you think that somehow supervisors and employers can somehow seperate “someone like this” as though they have a neon sign on their head that says “I’m crazy”.  People always seem to want to believe that such situations are easy to avoid if everyone would just do their job. It may be comforting to think so but the fact is that its just not true.

Ok this is a perfect example of an argumentative point. I would not call it an extreme exception. An exception no doubt! An extreme exception-No!
What were the figures of malpractice in this country. I hate quoting figures and statistics. I’d rather have a balanced discussion about what needs to be fixed in general.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 01:53 PM
macgyver - 18 October 2009 06:13 AM

Vyazma you need to keep in mind that this case is an extreme exception to the terrific work done by nurses and other hospital workers every day. There are and will be exceptions as there are in every profession but its important to recognize that this is an exception and just that. It is not an accurate representation of what goes on in hospitals.

It amazes me that you think that somehow supervisors and employers can somehow seperate “someone like this” as though they have a neon sign on their head that says “I’m crazy”.  People always seem to want to believe that such situations are easy to avoid if everyone would just do their job. It may be comforting to think so but the fact is that its just not true.

Ok this is a perfect example of an argumentative point. I would not call it an extreme exception. An exception no doubt! An extreme exception-No!
What were the figures of malpractice in this country. I hate quoting figures and statistics. I’d rather have a balanced discussion about what needs to be fixed in general.

I dunno, perhaps someone has some good data. A quick google search turns up THIS webpage, that indicates rates of medical negligence at under 1% of patients treated.

IF that is an accurate number, it qualifies as an extreme exception. (I believe statistical certainty is usually considered to be in the 95% range. This is over 99% certainty of non-negligent treatment).

NB: this is not to minimize it when it occurs. Doctors who engage in negligence should have consequences, and patients should be compensated appropriately.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Medical Malpractice Statistics
According to an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), over 225,000 people die each year due to iatrogenic causes. This has become the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer.

12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals
106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medication

This is from the same website Doug. It states these causes are the 3rd leading cause of death in the US. So now we can argue about the definition of extreme.
I’ll tell you what, now that these are posted, I’ll withdraw my opinion that the word extreme shouldn’t have been used.
Keep in mind these are only DEATHS. It doesn’t include injury.
The poor little boy didn’t die, he only suffered radiation burns and chromosome damage….for now!

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4095
Joined  2006-11-28

As one of those healthcare professionals who VYAZMA would argue cannot be objective or look past my narrow self interests, I concur with what macgyver and Doug have said. Medical error rates can always be improved, but they are hardly of the egregious or crisis proportions that the media, and critics of mainstream medicine would suggest. The question is not simply “How many people get hurt in hospitals,” as skeptic65 emphasized, but how many get hurt compared to those that get better. No human endeavor is without error, but let’s not forget, in our quest to improve medicine, that we routinely solve medical problems that have caused untold death and suffering throughout human history and that there is no evidence a fundamental change, as opposed to incremental improvements, is needed in the system.

I generally prefer to argue facts rather than motives, but I do think it is a bit disingenuous to suggest that the OP might have been intended as a critique of mainstream medicine, not just a “human interest” story. Both VYAMZA and skeptic65 have argued that CAM approaches are somehow a solution to the problems they see in mainstream medicine, so a certain skepticism about the agenda behind the OP is reasonable. And as a simple “human interest” story it in need not have been put in the “Alternative Medicine” folder. That choice alone at least creates the impresion that there is an agenda behind the story. I’m willing to accept at face value VYAMZA’s claim that that was NOT his intent, but I still think macgyver’s concern it might have been is understandable and doesn’t require an irrational defensiveness on his part.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet Blog
You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place. 
Johnathan Swift

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 02:09 PM

Medical Malpractice Statistics
According to an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), over 225,000 people die each year due to iatrogenic causes. This has become the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer.

12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals
106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medication

This is from the same website Doug. It states these causes are the 3rd leading cause of death in the US. So now we can argue about the definition of extreme.
I’ll tell you what, now that these are posted, I’ll withdraw my opinion that the word extreme shouldn’t have been used.
Keep in mind these are only DEATHS. It doesn’t include injury.
The poor little boy didn’t die, he only suffered radiation burns and chromosome damage….for now!

Right, but those are numbers out of context. The correct context when judging whether or not something is an “exception” or an “extreme exception” is the percentage that I cited. That is, when you want to know whether an occurrence is exceptional, you need to know the background; how often it happens compared with it not happening.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Right, but those are numbers out of context. The correct context when judging whether or not something is an “exception” or an “extreme exception” is the percentage that I cited. That is, when you want to know whether an occurrence is exceptional, you need to know the background; how often it happens compared with it not happening.

You’re right Doug. The percentage factor is the main point…plus look. 180,000 of those deaths have nothing to do with negligence.
I just wanted to have a Human interest story here that’s all. I’m not trying to criticize the Healthcare industry. I’m not afraid of contracting a disease from a hospital visit.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 02:17 PM

I’m not afraid of contracting a disease from a hospital visit.

I am, somewhat, but that has nothing to do with negligence. It has to do with the fact that hospitals keep lots of sick people bunched up together. If you go to a place frequented by people who are sick, you are more likely to catch illness from them than if you are simply out walking around with healthy people.

That’s also why hospitals tend to be breeding grounds for antibiotic-resistent bacteria: because they use so many antibiotics in hospitals, to treat people with serious illnesses.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

McKenz.

I generally prefer to argue facts rather than motives, but I do think it is a bit disingenuous to suggest that the OP might have been intended as a critique of mainstream medicine, not just a “human interest” story. Both VYAMZA and skeptic65 have argued that CAM approaches are somehow a solution to the problems they see in mainstream medicine, so a certain skepticism about the agenda behind the OP is reasonable. And as a simple “human interest” story it in need not have been put in the “Alternative Medicine” folder. That choice alone at least creates the impresion that there is an agenda behind the story. I’m willing to accept at face value VYAMZA’s claim that that was NOT his intent, but I still think macgyver’s concern it might have been is understandable and doesn’t require an irrational defensiveness on his part.

Don’t you mean it wasn’t disingenuous. In other words you feel the piece was designed to critique. I can understand your view. I know we are flaming up a storm about this.
Recently I was warned to just keep my hands off medical topics. Perhaps that’s what I’ll do. I leave all the criticisms to you guys, I just though it would be interesting to hear stories from the institutionalized medicine world too.
I’m outnumbered. There’s plenty of adherents to the Industry here. I’ve been accused of being an advocate for CAM, and a Believer of CAM. That was the worst. Mainly my motivation has been to deflate the Medical Industry, which is what I and many others view as a major obstacle to Healthcare reform. That’s all, that and I’m just persnickety in not wanting to hear the same angle all the time.
I hope I can put forth some more OP’s regarding healthcare in General. I place them under General Discussion, or Science.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
dougsmith - 18 October 2009 02:22 PM
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 02:17 PM

I’m not afraid of contracting a disease from a hospital visit.

I am, somewhat, but that has nothing to do with negligence. It has to do with the fact that hospitals keep lots of sick people bunched up together. If you go to a place frequented by people who are sick, you are more likely to catch illness from them than if you are simply out walking around with healthy people.

That’s also why hospitals tend to be breeding grounds for antibiotic-resistent bacteria: because they use so many antibiotics in hospitals, to treat people with serious illnesses.

Doug, I’ve had to take deliveries into the Bowels of UB’s research Labs. Roswell Parks research labs etc. The stuff gets spooky. I love talking with these Professors and doctors who look like they live down in these dungeons. Some of ‘em are whackier than me. They’re hilarious. I ask about what’s behind this door, or in that vial, and they just laugh and say you don’t want to know. Or they tell me, oh that, that’s just some virus, or plague we are working on.
“Oh don’t worry about that, it’s been changed so it can’t be communicable”
“The real stuff is in that fridge” “Don’t open that up”.
Monkeys Mice Rats Hyperbolic chambers…I’ve left there many times wondering how close I came to catching Ebola or something.
But I always go back. I know those guys wouldn’t be down there if it wasn’t safe.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4095
Joined  2006-11-28

Right, VYAZMA, I mispoke. I can see why the OP might have been taken as a critique, but I appreciate yourclarifying that that is not how you meant it.

 Signature 

The SkeptVet Blog
You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place. 
Johnathan Swift

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 02:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14
mckenzievmd - 18 October 2009 02:40 PM

Right, VYAZMA, I mispoke. I can see why the OP might have been taken as a critique, but I appreciate yourclarifying that that is not how you meant it.

Yeah. I’d be lying if there weren’t Flame motives. I’m out. Let’s end this war. I don’t care about CAM or Medicine. As I stated I used this mainly to impugn upon Institutionalized medicine, and their varied resistance to Reform.
You Win. Screw CAM. I would always go to hospital or a Doctor.(except when I almost fell for the Chiropractor)
I’ve learned much about healthcare from these threads, and there can be no doubt that CAM is mainly bogus. Any of it’s healing properties are purely psychological, which is not a direct method for improving, or fixing one’s health.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 03:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 02:28 PM

Mainly my motivation has been to deflate the Medical Industry, which is what I and many others view as a major obstacle to Healthcare reform.

There are people in the medical industry on all sides of this debate. But insofar as you’re talking about the people out there against a public option, I agree with your point. I just think I’d target it a little differently.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 03:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 01:28 PM

Yes it was positively found that the hospital didn’t report the instance. They are trying to Fight The California Health System fines which they incurred. Frankly, if I was a Lawyer out there, I’d be contacting and correlating all the people who have received CAT scans there for the past 10 years. These Hospital whackos(of which there have been many cases documented) usually carry-on their heinous activity for years until they are finally caught.

Yes, I have to agree that the amount of oversight is appalling, only exceeded by the hospital’s negligence in reporting the problem. I would suspect that the hospital did so in a misguided attempt to protect its license. I am also appalled that they did not DO anything to correct the problems once they were identified. They should be shut down.

One of the hospitals I’ve worked for once made a very bad mistake which affected (permanently) the health of a large number of employees(including myself). When they discovered it, they went to the state. The hospital was fined, (this was pre ‘root cause analysis’) steps were taken to ensure it would not happen again, and the hospital’s license was made probationary for a year, which greatly affected its ability to generate revenue.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 03:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15395
Joined  2006-02-14
VYAZMA - 18 October 2009 02:38 PM

I know those guys wouldn’t be down there if it wasn’t safe.

The people working on the most dangerous diseases are very brave indeed.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 October 2009 03:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22
dougsmith - 18 October 2009 02:03 PM

A quick google search turns up THIS webpage, that indicates rates of medical negligence at under 1% of patients treated.

IF that is an accurate number, it qualifies as an extreme exception. (I believe statistical certainty is usually considered to be in the 95% range. This is over 99% certainty of non-negligent treatment).

NB: this is not to minimize it when it occurs. Doctors who engage in negligence should have consequences, and patients should be compensated appropriately.

Really, Doug, I admire your intelligence and rationality, however, the de minimus critical thinking fallacy deserves a response by analogy:  If one percent is so minor, then would you be willing to fly on an airline that had only one percent of its flights end up in a crash?  Or would you eat at a restaurant that assured you that only one person out of every, say, 110 patrons died of botulism? 

There are many areas in our lives what a one percent failure rate is completely unacceptable, and where their failure rate is less than one in a thousand. 

Many consumer advocates recommend that medical or hospital patients be sure to have at least one knowledgeable family member present to question each procedure to understand and check what’s going on.  This is a wise idea, especially if the failure rate is close to one percent.  Since, however, few people have enough scientific/medical knowledge most of them are at the mercy of the doctors, nurses and technicians.  That would seem to indicate that it is incumbant on the medical establishment maintain extreme care in preventing errors.

Occam

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2