Here on SBM we have frequently had cause to criticize the media for poor science reporting and for spreading misinformation. Among many other individual offenders, we have criticized Dr. Oz for promoting alternative medicine on his TV show and gullibly promoting guests who pretend to talk to the dead and pretend to heal people with carnival sideshow tricks. We tend to be negative and critical because somebody has to do it, but it’s not pleasant. For once, I have some good things to say.
The September 12 issue of TIME magazine was a Special Nutrition Issue. The cover featured pictures of food and the title “What to Eat Now: Uncovering the Myths about Food by Dr. Oz.” It devotes 7 pages to an article by him entitled “The Oz Diet: No more myths. No more fads. What you should eat — and why.” This is followed by a 5 page article by John Cloud “Nutrition in a Pill? I took 3000 supplements over five months. Here’s what happened.” Both articles have a rational, science-based perspective without any intrusions of woo-woo.
Oz on What to Eat
Oz acknowledges that the science of nutrition is not simple and that much of what we once believed has been discarded in the face of new knowledge. He debunks a number of popular misconceptions about diet. Most of what he says is consistent with scientific evidence and with mainstream diet advice. Read more »
Misconceptions about mental health can have devastating effects on individuals, families and communities. National Alliance of Mental Illness’ Wendy Brennan talks with Dr. Jon LaPook about the importance of education and treatment.
Newsweek’s Sharon Begley writes about the phenomenon, which goes a long way why the myth about “death panels” continues to persist in the health reform conversation. She cites the work of sociologist Steve Hoffman, who explains: “Rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe.”
And with a growing majority obtaining their news through pundit-tinged lens, such as from FOX News on the right and MSNBC on the left, there’s always fodder to confirm pre-existing beliefs.
Ms. Begley goes on to suggest that cognitive dissonance is also in play:
This theory holds that when people are presented with information that contradicts preexisting beliefs, they try to relieve the cognitive tension one way or another. They process and respond to information defensively, for instance: their belief challenged by fact, they ignore the latter. They also accept and seek out confirming information but ignore, discredit the source of, or argue against contrary information.
This is seen often in those who believe there is a link between vaccine and autism, despite convincing evidence to the contrary.
And with information freely available on the internet and on the 24-hour cable news cycle, there are endless opportunities to confirm, rather than challenge, one’s beliefs.
*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com*
Newsweek tries to refute the “Five Biggest Lies In the Health Care Debate.”
But I’ve heard much bigger lies than the ones in this article.
I mean, are people really showing up angry at town hall meetings over fears that “the government will set doctor’s wages”?
Misinformation – or just plain old confusion – about our health care system is common. To try to help fix this, I offer five of the biggest, most commonly repeated misconceptions I hear regularly about the U.S. health care system.
1. Government plays a relatively small role in American health care. Government actually plays a big role. In 2007, federal, state and local governments paid for more than 46 cents of every health care dollar – more than $1 trillion. In fact, since 1980, the government has paid at least 40 cents of every dollar, and as early as 1960 – 5 years before Medicare – government paid a quarter of health care expenses. Government is a massive health care customer and has the impact one might expect such a big customer to have.
2. Health insurance companies drive the increasing cost of care in America. Not true, and here’s why: perhaps 200 million Americans don’t get their coverage from a health insurance company.
Most of these people, or a family member, work at one of the thousands of companies that self-insure (the rest are covered by government programs). What this means is those companies take the health care risk themselves, and use an insurance company mostly to handle the bills. For these companies, the cost of health care directly affects their bottom line. It’s one of the reasons employers have implemented so many programs to try to help their employees live healthier lifestyles, make sure they’re getting good care, and many others. Some data suggest it is working to control health care costs.
The exception is small groups and individuals. They have to buy health insurance, and face few, expensive options. There are many reasons for this, which I’ve blogged about extensively here. One of the most important is that there is not a truly competitive market for this kind of coverage. Still, many of these insurance companies are not-for-profit (some say as many as half of Americans with health insurance are covered by non-profit plans), and so it cannot be that profit drives the premium increases they, too, experience.
3. America has a free market in health care. Health care may be the most heavily regulated industry in America, with layers of state and federal regulation of care and insurance. For example, your doctor can only practice in the state in which he is licensed. If he wants to move to another state and be a doctor there he can’t do it unless he’s gone through a licensing process in that other state.
One of the most important reasons why the market for health insurance is so uncompetitive is that it, too, is regulated by 50 different state bodies. If an insurer wants to sell in another state, it has to go through an extensive process in order to do it, and be subject to all kinds of mandates and other requirements that make it very impractical to do so. It makes for a market that is much less dynamic than it could be.
I suspect one reason people call the U.S. system a “free market” is that rich or well-connected people can get better care than those who are less fortunate. This may be true, but this is just a reality of the human condition, not the health care system.
4. There is an Obama reform plan, and you’re either for it or against it. Much of the media – and even Chuck Norris – describe the various health care reform ideas as part of an “Obama plan” or “ObamaCare.” But other than broad outlines of what the President thinks are important principles, the President has not proposed any plan. Most of what people are talking about – including the entirety of the Newsweek article I started this post with – is the 1,017-page bill from the House Ways and Means Committee. While there are indications that the President is going to propose something concrete in the coming days, calling what is on the table Obama’s plan is more politics than reality.
5. Rising health care costs are a uniquely American problem. America’s not the only country suffering with rising health care costs. In Canada, for example, the government of British Columbia has seen its health care costs increase by 45% over the last 6 years. It’s created a budget crisis, and efforts to steadily increase the premiums it charges consumers and employers. The U.K. has actually experienced a higher rate of growth in health care costs than the U.S. over the last several years. So while it is true that the cost problem is worse in America than in in other countries, this is a matter of degree, not of kind.
I’ve heard lots of others, but these are the ones I most commonly run into.
What kinds of misconceptions have you heard?
*This blog post was originally published at See First Blog*
I’d like to welcome Dr. Jon LaPook, medical correspondent for the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, to the Better Health team of bloggers. Jon will be contributing video interviews on engaging consumer health topics on a weekly basis. This first contribution is a video interview with male fertility expert Dr. Harry Fisch, combined with some entertaining “man on the street” discussions in Columbus Circle, NYC. Let me know what you think!
It’s no secret that doctors are disappointed with the way that the U.S. healthcare system is evolving. Most feel helpless about improving their work conditions or solving technical problems in patient care. Fortunately one young medical student was undeterred by the mountain of disappointment carried by his senior clinician mentors…
I am proud to be a part of the American Resident Project an initiative that promotes the writing of medical students residents and new physicians as they explore ideas for transforming American health care delivery. I recently had the opportunity to interview three of the writing fellows about how to…
I m often asked to do book reviews on my blog and I rarely agree to them. This is because it takes me a long time to read a book and then if I don t enjoy it I figure the author would rather me remain silent than publish my…
When I was in medical school I read Samuel Shem s House Of God as a right of passage. At the time I found it to be a cynical yet eerily accurate portrayal of the underbelly of academic medicine. I gained comfort from its gallows humor and it made me…
I am hesitant to review diet books because they are so often a tangled mess of fact and fiction. Teasing out their truth from falsehood is about as exhausting as delousing a long-haired elementary school student. However after being approached by the authors’ PR agency with the promise of a…
