Rachel Gets Fruity
is a sexually clever ad to encourage men to perform regular testicular self-examinations to help prevent testicular cancer.
Unfortunately,
The US Preventative Screening Task Force doesn’t think testicular screening will be all that helpful
; Rachel’s ad would have been better served
encouraging screening for colorectal cancer
, but we all know that putting something up your butt automatically turns you gay. I guess if that happened, Rachel’s ad wouldn’t be as effective anymore.
Comments Off
on Rachel Gets Fruity
Dear Google and Karen Wickre,
I loved your story “
We Get Letters (2)
” about new parents finding information to help prevent a blood transfusion of their newborn, but it’s inaccurate that the blood transfusion would be
“extremely dangerous,” as the parents report. Blood transfusions are generally *extremely safe*, and the “danger” is a myth medical
professionals have to dispel all the time. It’d be great if you noted this in your entries.
From
Nelson’s Pediatrics
:
“a current estimate for risk of transfusion-associated HIV is 1/1 million donor exposures, with estimates ranging from 1/800,000 to 1/2 million donor exposures.
Similarly, the risk of viral hepatitis C is 1/1 million donor exposures. Transfusion-associated cytomegalovirus can be nearly eliminated by transfusing
leukocyte-reduced cellular blood products or by selecting blood from donors seronegative for antibody to cytomegalovirus.”
Sincerely,
Me.
4 Comments »
The Moral Hazard Myth
is written by Malcolm Gladwell, and he takes his own quirky look at the health care system. I couldn’t agree more, Malcolm.
Comments Off
on The Moral Hazard Myth
The VA is the scariest of all health care systems–it’s paid for and
run
by the government! It probably has the efficiency of the postal service and the compassion of the military, right? You might be surprised. On many screening measures
and actions shown to improve outcomes,
the VA’s winning
.
Another piece from US News
:
Three summers ago, Augustin Martinez’s skin was yellow. He was in pain. And physicians at Kaiser Permanente, his usual source of care, were baffled. The
frustrated Martinez, a retired Lockheed Martin engineer in San Jose, Calif., asked his brother, a New York physician, for advice. After consulting colleagues, his
brother advised him to go to the Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in nearby Palo Alto. Martinez, a former Navy petty officer 2nd class, was entitled to VA
care (eligibility depends on several factors, including date and length of military service, injury, and income). But his brother’s recommendation took him by
surprise. Better care at a VA hospital? But he went–and was quickly diagnosed with pancreatic cancer by Sherry Wren, chief of general surgery, who operated on
him within days. He has relied on VA hospitals and clinics ever since. “They run a good ship,” says Martinez, now age 72.
Yes, it’s just an anecdote. But Dr. Wren is a mentor, and they definitely run a good ship there.
2 Comments »
Major props to Dr. Rangel
for outting (pardon the pun) a misleading, bigotted, homophobic website. The more people that speak out about this, the more everyone will know it’s not
acceptable, and not supported by physicians.
Comments Off
on Rangel on Anti-Gay Site
The Boston Globe has an excellent piece exposing Dr. Paul Cameron
and his Family Research Council’s anti-gay quackery. If you ever hear this guy or his organization being quoted, you can guess it’s all bogus.
Here’s his “peer-reviewed” journal for you:
Cameron said he has made a deliberate strategy of getting his research published in peer-reviewed academic journals, which he considers more effective than merely
writing opinion articles. Cameron said the credibility that goes with being published in the journals enables him to be cited in court decisions and to promote his
views in public appearances. Peer review ”is the standard in the academic world,” Cameron said. ”It means that other people have looked at what
you’ve done and said, ‘It’s OK.’ ”
But Cameron’s adoption study, and at least 10 more of his works, appeared in Psychological Reports, a small journal based in Montana, which says its studies
are peer-reviewed, although editor Doug Ammons said: ”No reviewer has a veto right.” The journal, which typically charges $27.50 per page to print an
article, is portrayed by Ammons as a ”scientific manifestation of free speech.”
By contrast, the largest professional journals, which are often cited as sources of medical information — such as Journal of the American Medical Association
and the New England Journal of Medicine — say they will reject an article if any peer reviewer raises serious objections about its methodology. Those journals
do not charge for publication.
Comments Off
on FRC’s Fraudulent Research
What’s better than The Beatles’ song about a budding medical student who serially kills people with a metal mallet?
When it’s put to animation
.
2 Comments »
In an interview with Stephen Colbert
, we find out he’s deaf in one ear. Acoustic schawnnoma, anyone?
Colbert is forty-one, a native of South Carolina, one of eleven children, the father of three, a suburban guy, and deaf in one ear. “I had this weird tumor as a
kid, and they scooped it out with a melon baller.”
1 Comment »
are now up
. Taken with my new Canon G6 camera. Clinics start tomorrow. Here goes nothing!
1 Comment »
