<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Trusting Yourself Over Medical Professionals</title>
	<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126</link>
	<description>High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 07:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: wordworks2001</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-903</link>
		<dc:creator>wordworks2001</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:39:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-903</guid>
		<description>I suspect Dr. Reyes will be about as forthcoming answering my challenge as she was when she mentioned another VA study she was unable to cite.  Let me help her out:

Twenty-two Year Follow-up in the VA Cooperative Study of Coronary artery bypass surgery for Stable Angina. Peduzzi, P, Kamina A, Detrie, K, American Journal of Cardiology. 1998; 81; 1393-1399.

Between 1972 and 1974 354 patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease were assigned to conservative medical treatment and 332 with similar symptomatic coronary artery disease were assigned to surgical revascularization. The overall 22 year cumulative survival rate for the medically treated group was 25% while it was 20% in the surgically treated group. The probability of being free of heart attack was significantly higher in the medically treated group (57% vs. 41%). The authors conclude that the trial "provides strong evidence" that initial bypass surgery does not improve survival or reduce the overall risk of a future heart attack. On the contrary, invasively treated patients were much more likely to suffer a heart attack or die compared to patients who are not treated surgically. 

As you can see, the good doctor also got her facts wrong.  I hope she wasn't as sloppy when she treated patients.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect Dr. Reyes will be about as forthcoming answering my challenge as she was when she mentioned another VA study she was unable to cite.  Let me help her out:</p>
<p>Twenty-two Year Follow-up in the VA Cooperative Study of Coronary artery bypass surgery for Stable Angina. Peduzzi, P, Kamina A, Detrie, K, American Journal of Cardiology. 1998; 81; 1393-1399.</p>
<p>Between 1972 and 1974 354 patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease were assigned to conservative medical treatment and 332 with similar symptomatic coronary artery disease were assigned to surgical revascularization. The overall 22 year cumulative survival rate for the medically treated group was 25% while it was 20% in the surgically treated group. The probability of being free of heart attack was significantly higher in the medically treated group (57% vs. 41%). The authors conclude that the trial &#8220;provides strong evidence&#8221; that initial bypass surgery does not improve survival or reduce the overall risk of a future heart attack. On the contrary, invasively treated patients were much more likely to suffer a heart attack or die compared to patients who are not treated surgically. </p>
<p>As you can see, the good doctor also got her facts wrong.  I hope she wasn&#8217;t as sloppy when she treated patients.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wordworks2001</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-902</link>
		<dc:creator>wordworks2001</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-902</guid>
		<description>Dr. Reyes, this isn't the first time you've cited a VA study. Would you please provide us with a website URL where we can learn more about this purported VA study?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dr. Reyes, this isn&#8217;t the first time you&#8217;ve cited a VA study. Would you please provide us with a website URL where we can learn more about this purported VA study?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nancy Reyes</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-901</link>
		<dc:creator>Nancy Reyes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:45:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-901</guid>
		<description>Ah, yes. All doctors are assholes because they are not Jesus Christ and can't cure my disease.
Sorry to tell you this, but we only have certain tools. We do not have good treatment for Ulcerative colitis, but I can tell you that fifty years ago it was considered "psychosomatic" and they gave people tranquillizers. Then they discovered it was the body making antibodies against itself. But since emotions affect the immune system, stress makes it worse, but a good diet and positive outcome decrease the stress hormones and improve the disease.

So having a positive outlook will help and even cure you. Good. However, that leaves me stuck with the people whose lives read like a soap opera, whose colitis is complicated by drunken husbands, children who were killed in accidents, raising the grandchildren of their dead children, living in poverty, trying to make ends meet, etc. on top of the colitis.

But then I've never worked with well balanced, healthy middle class people who are educated enough to take responsibility for their health. So stay away from doctors. we have too many of the other types keeping us busy.

As for coronary arteries, I date before cardiac surgery. They did a VA study comparing surgery vs medicines twenty years ago, and for half the people it made no difference. 

But the other half developed severe angina that limited their lives, and many ended up with surgery and others died.
So I'm happy when "No treatment" works. But remember: For half of the people, it doesn't work. And if you persuade them to not have surgery and they die, YOU won't be sued for malpractice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, yes. All doctors are assholes because they are not Jesus Christ and can&#8217;t cure my disease.<br />
Sorry to tell you this, but we only have certain tools. We do not have good treatment for Ulcerative colitis, but I can tell you that fifty years ago it was considered &#8220;psychosomatic&#8221; and they gave people tranquillizers. Then they discovered it was the body making antibodies against itself. But since emotions affect the immune system, stress makes it worse, but a good diet and positive outcome decrease the stress hormones and improve the disease.</p>
<p>So having a positive outlook will help and even cure you. Good. However, that leaves me stuck with the people whose lives read like a soap opera, whose colitis is complicated by drunken husbands, children who were killed in accidents, raising the grandchildren of their dead children, living in poverty, trying to make ends meet, etc. on top of the colitis.</p>
<p>But then I&#8217;ve never worked with well balanced, healthy middle class people who are educated enough to take responsibility for their health. So stay away from doctors. we have too many of the other types keeping us busy.</p>
<p>As for coronary arteries, I date before cardiac surgery. They did a VA study comparing surgery vs medicines twenty years ago, and for half the people it made no difference. </p>
<p>But the other half developed severe angina that limited their lives, and many ended up with surgery and others died.<br />
So I&#8217;m happy when &#8220;No treatment&#8221; works. But remember: For half of the people, it doesn&#8217;t work. And if you persuade them to not have surgery and they die, YOU won&#8217;t be sued for malpractice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wordworks2001</title>
		<link>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-899</link>
		<dc:creator>wordworks2001</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bloggernews.net/13126#comment-899</guid>
		<description>Jonas, I applaud you fr having the courage and initiative to take charge of your own health. If I had listened to my primary care physician, a cardiologist she referred me to and a cardiothoracic surgeon he had me see right after an  angiogram, I would have had a quintuple bypass two days after the consultation. That's how quickley they want to crack my chest open and do a quintuple coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) to treat my coronary artery disease (CAD). "Your heart is in great shape," I was told, "But you have two arteries that are 100% occluded and three that are more than 85% blocked." When I told them I wanted to think about it, I was told, "You are a walking time bomb. You could have aheart attack, stroke, or worse within a few days or a few months at most."

"Well, if it is the job of the coronary arteries to supply my heart with oxygen, how can my heart be in 'great' shape?" I asked. None of these three doctors could or would give me an answer. I told them I would get a second opinion.  I did and am still alive and kicking, lousy coronary arteries and all.  I haven't lived three months longer than predicted, it's been nearly three years and my angina has been successfully brought under control with medication,, not a scapel.

A year after being told I was a walking time bomb, I made an appointment to see the cardiologist who called me a "walking time bomb in May 2004.  I said, "Hey, doctor.  Here I a, no more angina and I feel great." He was astounded.  "I guess the walking time bomb was a dud, huh Doc?" I said.  He just smiled and I retorted, "Perhaps my doctors were duds, doc, perhaps my doctors were.

Check out my blog for more information on my adventures in medicine: http://wordworks2001.blogspot.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonas, I applaud you fr having the courage and initiative to take charge of your own health. If I had listened to my primary care physician, a cardiologist she referred me to and a cardiothoracic surgeon he had me see right after an  angiogram, I would have had a quintuple bypass two days after the consultation. That&#8217;s how quickley they want to crack my chest open and do a quintuple coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) to treat my coronary artery disease (CAD). &#8220;Your heart is in great shape,&#8221; I was told, &#8220;But you have two arteries that are 100% occluded and three that are more than 85% blocked.&#8221; When I told them I wanted to think about it, I was told, &#8220;You are a walking time bomb. You could have aheart attack, stroke, or worse within a few days or a few months at most.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Well, if it is the job of the coronary arteries to supply my heart with oxygen, how can my heart be in &#8216;great&#8217; shape?&#8221; I asked. None of these three doctors could or would give me an answer. I told them I would get a second opinion.  I did and am still alive and kicking, lousy coronary arteries and all.  I haven&#8217;t lived three months longer than predicted, it&#8217;s been nearly three years and my angina has been successfully brought under control with medication,, not a scapel.</p>
<p>A year after being told I was a walking time bomb, I made an appointment to see the cardiologist who called me a &#8220;walking time bomb in May 2004.  I said, &#8220;Hey, doctor.  Here I a, no more angina and I feel great.&#8221; He was astounded.  &#8220;I guess the walking time bomb was a dud, huh Doc?&#8221; I said.  He just smiled and I retorted, &#8220;Perhaps my doctors were duds, doc, perhaps my doctors were.</p>
<p>Check out my blog for more information on my adventures in medicine: <a href="http://wordworks2001.blogspot.com." rel="nofollow">http://wordworks2001.blogspot.com.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
