March 3rd, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
5 Comments »
A Canadian news story piqued my interest today – apparently, a man living near Edmonton, Alberta was bitten by a bat during his sleep. Curiosity got the better of me as I tried to recreate the scenario in my head. First of all, “vampire bats” (the kind that feed on the blood of livestock) don’t live in Canada, so this little guy was probably a generic “brown bat.” Brown bats are shy creatures who live on insects primarily, so we know that this bat was in a pretty wacky frame of mind to boldly mistake a sleeping human for a beetle.
Stranger than the behavior of this culinarily confused little mammal, was the behavior of the sleeping victim. Apparently he was unconcerned by the bite and went back to sleep afterwards, never seeking medical attention. I don’t know about you, but if I woke up in the middle of the night with any wild animal sinking its teeth into my flesh, I’d probably not shrug and roll over.
Anyway, the sad news is that this man didn’t get his life-saving rabies shots. Rabies is a very serious condition with a 50% mortality rate! The rabies virus (transmitted through infected animal saliva) wreaks havoc on the brain and nerves. The CDC describes it:
Early symptoms of rabies in humans are nonspecific, consisting of fever, headache, and general malaise. As the disease progresses, neurological symptoms appear and may include insomnia, anxiety, confusion, slight or partial paralysis, excitation, hallucinations, agitation, hypersalivation, difficulty swallowing, and hydrophobia (fear of water). Death usually occurs within days of the onset of symptoms.
Isn’t it strange that “fear of water” is part of the rabies syndrome? I’d like to get an explanation of that one from a neurologist…
Anyway, human cases of rabies are quite rare (about 7000 cases/year in the US) and are usually caused by raccoon or skunk attacks. So if you come face to face with a raccoon or skunk “gone wild” my advice is to run away. But if you do get bitten, please go to the hospital immediately and get your rabies shots. You can prevent progression of the disease.
Now, if you’re curious to see if you’re in a rabies “hot zone” check out the CDC’s skunk and raccoon tracking maps (can you believe that someone’s job is to create these?)
And for a good spoof of dangerous animals – check out Dr. Rob’s recent warnings against the common goat. You can tell that he must enjoy Monty Python style humor.
Are you an animal lover? Know of some funny websites or links about animal antics? Do share!
This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
February 25th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in Opinion
1 Comment »
There is an old question still sparking debate in the blogosphere (see Kevin MD’s links): is health care a right or a privilege? I think it’s worthwhile to consider both sides of the argument, as one’s position on this issue actually provides the foundation for how one proposes to “fix” this broken health care system.
I have searched the Internet for some of the best quotes on the subject (and I’m sure I have missed most of them) to frame the debate. Today’s post is devoted to the “health care is NOT a right” position. My next post will provide quotes from the “health care IS a right” camp. I hope that you will provide your own views pro or con as comments.
Mr. Robinson wonders if (based on the US Constitution) one can classify health care as a “right:”
By definition, rights can not extend past the boundaries of one’s own person. One can not, for instance, exercise one’s right to free speech by demanding that one’s neighbor cease speaking, for by doing so, one would deny the neighbor’s right to free speech. Given that healthcare, for the most part, is the product of someone else’s knowledge, labor, capital, and equipment, it is not within the boundaries on one’s own person. Healthcare can not be a right because it makes demands on other people.
This analogy by Dr. Peikoff sheds some light on what would happen if healthcare were treated as “a right” by the government:
Take the simplest case: you are born with a moral right to hair care, let us say, provided by a loving government free of charge to all who want or need it. What would happen under such a moral theory?
Haircuts are free, like the air we breathe, so some people show up every day for an expensive new styling, the government pays out more and more, barbers revel in their huge new incomes, and the profession starts to grow ravenously, bald men start to come in droves for free hair implantations, a school of fancy, specialized eyebrow pluckers develops — it’s all free, the government pays. The dishonest barbers are having a field day, of course — but so are the honest ones; they are working and spending like mad, trying to give every customer his heart’s desire, which is a millionaire’s worth of special hair care and services — the government starts to scream, the budget is out of control. Suddenly directives erupt: we must limit the number of barbers, we must limit the time spent on haircuts, we must limit the permissible type of hair styles; bureaucrats begin to split hairs about how many hairs a barber should be allowed to split. A new computerized office of records filled with inspectors and red tape shoots up; some barbers, it seems, are still getting too rich, they must be getting more than their fair share of the national hair, so barbers have to start applying for Certificates of Need in order to buy razors, while peer review boards are established to assess every stylist’s work, both the dishonest and the overly honest alike, to make sure that no one is too bad or too good or too busy or too unbusy. Etc. In the end, there are lines of wretched customers waiting for their chance to be routinely scalped by bored, hog-tied haircutters some of whom remember dreamily the old days when somehow everything was so much better.
This attorney wonders where the “rights” begin and end in the health care environment:
If we speak of a right to healthcare, we need to ask: What kind of healthcare? Perfectly healthy people seek healthcare simply to confirm that they are healthy. Some people seek treatments—vaccines, nutritional and hormonal supplements, surgery to eliminate genetic cancer risks—as preventive measures in order to preserve their health. Some people seek healthcare for conditions that others would not, such as minor colds, common balding, or sports performance enhancement. Few of us would be willing to recognize, or finance, a “right” to whatever kind of healthcare a person might think desirable.
A physician gives an example of what can happen when consumers demand their “rights” to health care:
“Doctor, this guy states he has a bleeding brain tumor and wants a CT scan of his head,” the emergency department registration clerk announced as I entered his room. He looked me in the eye and intoned, ” I want a CT scan of my brain. I have a bleeding brain tumor.” “Do you have a headache, neck stiffness, loss of strength?” “No,” he responded. I proceeded to examine and finding no neurological deficit I inquired why he thought a CT scan was needed. He informed me that a relative had suggested that the numbness he felt in his scalp might have been a sign of a tumor. He was furious when I told him a CT scan was unnecessary and indignantly took my name to make a complaint to the administrator. I had denied him his right.
A patient continues the refrain:
What’s so special about health care? Why not rights to higher education, job training, clothing, computers, child care, cars, etc.? There are a lot of things that will improve a society if everyone had them. This doesn’t mean that we should establish positive rights to provide all these things for those who can’t afford them. We need to keep incentives in place (and perhaps provide education) to encourage people to spend and save their money wisely and to nurture a solid work ethic. Encouraging people to help themselves seems to be a solution for the long-term, not trying to get everyone else to buy the necessities for them.
Do you think that health care is a right?
This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
February 23rd, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in Opinion
2 Comments »
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the plight of family physicians – reimbursal for their services continues to decline, overhead steadily increases, and pressure to see a minimum of 30 patients a day can drive them to near despair. Family physicians want to provide quality care for their patients, but are exhausted by volume demands and paperwork.
If you missed this article about the primary care crisis in America in the New England Journal of Medicine, it’s an excellent read. Here are some excerpts:
Excessive demands contribute to long waiting times and inadequate quality of care for patients. A growing proportion of patients report that they cannot schedule timely appointments with their physician. Emergency departments are overflowing with patients who do not have access to primary care. The majority of patients with diabetes, hypertension, and other chronic conditions do not receive adequate clinical care, partly because half of all patients leave their office visits without having understood what the physician said.
These problems are exacerbated by the system of physician payment. Thirty minutes spent performing a diagnostic, surgical, or imaging procedure often pays three times as much as a 30-minute visit with a patient with diabetes, heart failure, headache, and depression…
These factors add up to an unsurprising result: fewer U.S. medical students are choosing careers in primary care. Between 1997 and 2005, the number of U.S. graduates entering family practice residencies dropped by 50 percent…
Who might support a national policy to rescue primary care? Employers and insurers, public and private, may reap a return on investment by fostering a more effective primary care sector that will reduce health care costs… Whoever takes up the cause of primary care, one thing is clear: action is needed to calm the brewing storm before the levees break.
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal sent ripples through the blogosphere. It was about how a few family physicians found a way to drastically reduce overhead – by being a solo practitioner and using technology to replace office staff and automate billing as much as possible.
Drs. Charlie Smith and Joe Scherger are family physicians here at Revolution Health who are leading the charge towards high tech solutions for family physicians. Charlie explains his philosophy in his recent blog post:
Having practiced primary care for over 30 years, I’m convinced the model of receiving in office care for every problem is not working well. I really like the ideas espoused by Don Berwick in changing the model of care in the doctor’s office to that of seeing patients in groups, treating them by phone or by e mail, rather than in the office. Using phone calls or e mails to sort through the patient issues, the doctor can decide to see the ones who really need to come into the office and the others can be taken care of without an office visit. This is a MUCH more efficient method, allows you to take care of many more people that need care, and gets people the care when they need it, rather than forcing them to wait until they can fit into a slot in your office.
The ideal way to partner with your doctor to use the health care system in the most effective way possible is to call or e mail him whenever possible, use the internet to research all of your health conditions, and only go into the office when you require in office care, such as exams, procedures, lab tests or x rays. Become an e patient!
I personally believe that Revolution Health can substantially improve the life of family physicians through innovative technologies designed to automate their practices as much as possible (thus reducing overhead and time spent on paperwork), as well as educating patients about the management of their diseases and conditions, (thus improving outcomes and increasing pay for performance bonuses), and triaging low acuity issues through online physician emailing services and retail clinics (thus helping patients receive the care they need without excessive use of office time).
Who will take up the cause of primary care (asks the NEJM)? Revolution Health will. Let’s work together to improve the quality of life for physicians and patients alike.
This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
February 22nd, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
1 Comment »
Recent research suggested that circumcision may reduce the rate of HIV transmission by 50% (foreskin cells are particularly vulnerable to infection with the virus). In response to this news, adult men in Uganda and Kenya have been undergoing the procedure in the hope of reducing their risk of HIV infection.
Some young boys in Kenya were actually expelled from school for not being circumcised. Their parents were asked to bring them back to school once the deed was done.
HIV rates have decreased in Uganda from 15% to 5% after aggressive public health initiatives raised awareness of the importance of safe sexual practices. This is an incredibly positive achievement.
One would hope, however, that circumcision in infancy would become the preferred target age for future procedures.
This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
February 21st, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
1 Comment »
I really couldn’t help but feel saddened by three recent news stories about the continued attitudes that are so harmful to women. If these media reports are right, Japan’s leadership appears to be way off target, referring to women as baby machines and refusing to apologize for enslaving and raping ~200K women in World War II.
America has a more insidious version of sexism that can harm young minds – exposing children repeatedly to age-inappropriate sexually explicit images and ideas. As we expand our understanding of neuronal plasticity, it is becoming more and more clear that what we see and experience can imprint itself on our brains and literally change the way we think and feel. We spend a lot of time worrying about what we put in our bodies (e.g. avoiding trans fats, food chemicals, etc.) I wonder if we should think a little bit more critically about what we let into our minds?
Here’s what I’m talking about:
Japanese health minister says women are “birth-giving machines”
In a report in which the health minister explained how dangerous the low birth rate is for Japan’s economic future, he suggested that women are a rate limiting factor. There are only so many “birth-giving machines… and all we can ask is for them to do their best.”
There has been an outcry in Japan against the health minister though it’s unclear if he’ll resign.
Japan refuses to apologize for crimes against women
Japan admits its army forced women to be sex slaves during World War II but has rejected compensation claims.
Historians believe at least 200,000 young women captured during World War II were forced to serve in Japanese army brothels.
A large number of the victims – who were known as comfort women – were Korean, but they also included Chinese, Philippine and Indonesian women.
The media’s portrayal of young women as sex objects harms girls’ mental and physical health, US experts warn.
Magazines, television, video games and music videos all have a detrimental effect, a task force from the American Psychological Association reported.
Sexualisation can lead to a lack of confidence with their bodies as well as depression and eating disorders.
For more information on kids and sexualization, see Dr. Stryer’s recent blog post.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
