April 24th, 2011 by GarySchwitzer in Health Policy, Opinion
No Comments »
On the US News & World report website, Dr. Kenny Lin writes as a physician and a concerned observer about “Dangers of Incidentaloma: Why To Think Twice Before Getting a CT Scan.”
It’s an important issue. Give it a look.
Lin’s blog, “The Common Sense Family Doctor,” is also worth visiting. Recently he cited one of my alltime favorite essays, “The Last Well Person,” by Dr. Clifton Meador, who wrote in 1994:
“The demands of the public for definitive wellness are colliding with the public’s belief in a diagnostic system that can find only disease. A public in dogged pursuit of the unobtainable, combined with clinicians whose tools are powerful enough to find very small lesions, is a setup for diagnostic excess. And false positives are the arithmetically certain result of applying a disease-defining system to a population that is mostly well. … If the behavior of doctors and the public continues unabated, eventually every well person will be labeled sick. Like the invalids, we will all be assigned to one diagnosis-related group or another. How long will it take to find every single lesion in every person? Who will be the last well person?”
*This blog post was originally published at Gary Schwitzer's HealthNewsReview Blog*
April 23rd, 2011 by RyanDuBosar in Quackery Exposed
2 Comments »
A handful of physicians are collaborating to take Mehmet Oz, MD, to task on what they’re calling outlandish claims and bad medical advice. Their suggestion is to no longer pay attention to that man behind the curtain.
David H. Gorski, MD, PhD, at the blog Science-Based Medicine went after Dr. Oz for hosting segments about faith healing and consulting psychics. Dr. Gorski pulls no punches, saying, “Dr. Oz has in some ways imitated Oprah and in some ways gone her one better (one worse, really) in promoting the Oprah-fication of medicine. And this season has been a particularly bad one for science-based medicine on The Dr. Oz Show.”
(Dr. Mehmet Oz may be using his “Degree in Thinkology” to come up with some of his show topics.)
Val Jones, MD, the woman behind the curtain at GetBetterHealth.com, joined the crusade against Dr. Oz, saying that he’d descended from “competent and caring cardiothoracic surgeon whose research interest was reducing preoperative stress” to “America’s chief snake oil salesman.” She is organizing a campaign to drown out the bad information with better messages. (As a disclosure, ACP Internist‘s blog contributes to and draws posts from GetBetterHealth.com.)
ACP Member Peter A. Lipson, MD, also wanted to clear the air about primary and secondary prevention of heart attacks, “one of an internist’s most important tasks, given that heart disease is one of the three top killers of North Americans.” Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
April 23rd, 2011 by John Mandrola, M.D. in Opinion
No Comments »
After spending an entire vacation reading stories, I would like to start tonight’s post with a tiny dose of fantasy. Can we try using a daydream to learn something about the challenge of making good nutrition choices?
The fantasy goes something like this…
You have just been sentenced to eternal life on a far-away sun-drenched island. This island has mountains, paved roads, wide bike lanes, and mountain bike trails. You get to take two bikes, a couple riding buddies and your family—if they’ll go. You also get to take one Apple product.
Sounds good so far.
The kicker is that you only get four food choices—and liquids count.
You are a cyclist, so after coffee and beer there are only two food choices remaining. Obviously, you will need a protein source. Smart choices here would include nuts, mercury-free fish or organically-fed animals. The protein isn’t the point, let’s keep moving.
Now we are down to the carbohydrate source.
Choose one of the following:
A.) Arugula
B.) Quinoa
C.) Cranberries
D.) Fruit Loops
Herein lies the primary hurdle that smart-nutrition advocates face: unhealthy simple sugars taste really good. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr John M*
April 23rd, 2011 by Glenn Laffel, M.D., Ph.D. in Research
1 Comment »
Based on their experience during countless schleps to the market, moms know that kids pick cereals whose boxes have cartoon characters on them. Previous research by Yale scientists explained the phenomenon: kids say that the stuff poured from such boxes tastes better than the same stuff when poured from a cartoon-less box. The same thing happens when kids pick graham crackers, carrots and gummy fruit snacks.
Pictures of Shrek, Dora the Explorer, Scooby Doo and their kin make just about anything taste yummier, it seems.
Can this observation be leveraged to encourage kids to select healthier foods? Yes, it turns out. But the story isn’t as straightforward as you’d think.
To study the impact of licensed media spokescharacters and other nutrition cues on kids’ taste assessment of food products, scientists at the University of Pennsylvania fed cereal from a box that had been labeled either “Sugar Bits” or “Healthy Bits” to 80 kids. Half the boxes in each “brand category” were adorned with cute cartoon penguins, while the other half were not. The kids were between 4 and 6 years old. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Pizaazz*
April 23rd, 2011 by Steven Roy Daviss, M.D. in Research
No Comments »
This month’s Psychiatric Times continues the discussion [registration required 🙁 ] about the NY Times article on psychotherapy that Dinah and readers discussed on April 9. This time, our colleague, Ron Pies MD, authored this article which deconstructs the myths perpetrated in the NYT article, which interviewed a med check doctor who found it “sad” that his patients found him to be important to them in their lives (read the article for the full flavor).
I’m glad that Ron pointed out (as we have) that the 2008 Mojtabai and Olfson article — which implied that only 11% of US outpatient psychiatrists provide psychotherapy — was a misleading statistic. Why? Because they did not consider brief psychotherapy sessions (30 minutes or less) to be classified as “psychotherapy” for their session. Thus, a 90807 (45-50 min) is considered psychotherapy, but a 90805 (20-30 min) would not be considered so, even though the AMA’s CPT manual defines it as psychotherapy. Also, brief and supportive forms of psychotherapy are often given even when only a “med check” is billed. Nonetheless, the sound bite from that article has been: “Only 11% of psychiatrists do psychotherapy”. It just ain’t true. As Mark Twain said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.“—–
*This blog post was originally published at Shrink Rap*
