• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Why do Dr's and GP's get stuff so horrifically wrong?

D

Deleted member

Guest
I have started to notice more and more that Dr's and GP's are getting stuff so wrong that it is ruining peoples life's. Misdiagnosing people, giving them the wrong medication or simply the Dr doesn't know what they're doing! People are always bragging about "how medical science is so advanced" yet we still get things like this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-misdiagnosed-with-cerebral-palsy-gets-cure-after-33-years/

I was just wondering, why do simple mistakes that can easily be a voided, not being avoided? I mean, these are creating havoc and destroying life's!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
Short answer: tricorders don't exist.

Long answer: medicine is complicated and millions of people get sick every year. We don't have a perfect grasp of what everything means, and very often, our diagnostic tools are imperfect and expensive. Very commonly, we have to rely on looking at a patient's symptoms and checking what they map to, and a lot of symptoms are disturbingly common. Many diseases and disorders look very similar. In the specific case cited in the OP, she had an extremely rare disorder with symptoms that acted very much like a much more common disorder, and in medicine, there's a rule of thumb: "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras". When someone comes in with a cough and a sore throat, you think "common cold" rather than "'Early stage Malaria", because the odds of the former are simply so much greater.
 

Braydon

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 12, 2015
Messages
502
Hahaha... Medicine isn't about the patient's life, it's about how much money they can be asked to pay.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Hahaha... Medicine isn't about the patient's life, it's about how much money they can be asked to pay.
Yeah, no. Patients health should come first. Don't reply without proof to backup your statement...
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Short answer: tricorders don't exist.

Long answer: medicine is complicated and millions of people get sick every year. We don't have a perfect grasp of what everything means, and very often, our diagnostic tools are imperfect and expensive. Very commonly, we have to rely on looking at a patient's symptoms and checking what they map to, and a lot of symptoms are disturbingly common. Many diseases and disorders look very similar. In the specific case cited in the OP, she had an extremely rare disorder with symptoms that acted very much like a much more common disorder, and in medicine, there's a rule of thumb: "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras". When someone comes in with a cough and a sore throat, you think "common cold" rather than "'Early stage Malaria", because the odds of the former are simply so much greater.
But medicine should be able to cure 100%, not just the odd 1% that have Malaria.

(figures are NOT accurate, simply for argument purposes.)
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
See American hospitals.
So that's a no, then?

But medicine should be able to cure 100%, not just the odd 1% that have Malaria.

(figures are NOT accurate, simply for argument purposes.)
But this really has little to do with the real world and how we go about figuring out what's wrong with someone. When someone comes in and complains that they feels under the weather, how should a doctor respond? There are countless potential maladies and illnesses which could cause that, and testing for each is difficult. We cannot simply take an incredibly vague symptom and test for every potential illness or malady. Tests are expensive and time-consuming. Maybe in the future, we'll get better at it, but things like the tricorder and Baymax's scanning apparatus are, well, science fiction.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
But this really has little to do with the real world and how we go about figuring out what's wrong with someone. When someone comes in and complains that they feels under the weather, how should a doctor respond? There are countless potential maladies and illnesses which could cause that, and testing for each is difficult. We cannot simply take an incredibly vague symptom and test for every potential illness or malady. Tests are expensive and time-consuming. Maybe in the future, we'll get better at it, but things like the tricorder and Baymax's scanning apparatus are, well, science fiction.
But then shouldn't they be able to figure out that it's something more serious before its too late?

(also how do you quote multiple people in a reply/post?)
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
But then shouldn't they be able to figure out that it's something more serious before its too late?
Yeah, but again, this just isn't the world we're living in. If there is no reason to believe that the patient has a serious disease, then usually the doctors won't check for it. Why should they? Maybe in the future, we'll get better diagnostic tools, but realistically? This is a problem that needs a solution, and there simply isn't anything quick or easy to get around this problem. If you have a solution, feel free to share it. Or rather, share it in the right channels - it's the kind of thing that would make you a very wealthy man. ;) I mean, it's gradually getting better, as we refine our diagnostics, but saying, "but it should be perfect" doesn't really help.

Witty. Seriously though, when it comes to medicine, this cynicism is not only unwarranted, but downright harmful. There are a great many really positive advancements in medicine, advancements that save lives. Acting like somehow the whole system is irreparably broken is both untrue and dangerous.
 

Claire Diviner

President
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
7,476
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
NNID
ClaireDiviner
Hahaha... Medicine isn't about the patient's life, it's about how much money they can be asked to pay.
If you're cynical about the health care system, fine, you have every right to be. But you can't just say something like that and claim it's a fact without some sort of backup, since there are other countries who provide health care for free (Canada is one famous example). Also, while the health care system is far from perfect in America, there are systems that do provide care for certain demographics - in Massachusetts, those on disability or Social Security receive free Massachusetts-exclusive insurance that covers pretty much everything. As someone living in Massachusetts in that system, I would know this.
 

Claire Diviner

President
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
7,476
Location
Indian Orchard, MA
NNID
ClaireDiviner
@ Claire Diviner Claire Diviner
It's not supposed to be an argument... It was just a cynical post because I've had some bad experiences with doctors...
Fair enough, that makes a lot of people. Just be careful when posting things like that in the DH. Without audible inflections, it's sometimes hard to tell if someone is conveying sarcasm or cynicism.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
There's an unspoken rule in Debate Hall that "non-arguments are not allowed."

spam paranoia at it's finest, ladies and gentlemen.
Can you change the colour of your text, I can't read it..

EDIT: I'm stupid, I can't read it because I use the PM theme... :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeliciousDarren

Smash Cadet
Joined
Oct 11, 2014
Messages
49
3DS FC
1435-3664-3412
While Braydon's post was cynical, I don't believe it was entirely untrue. There is at least a little something wrong when people have to debate whether or not to get medical assistance due to income. My best friend lives in a poor family and has told me various stories of how they avoided going to get medical aid unless completely necessary and how going to the dentist was almost nonexistent. It pains me to even imagine that someone would have to make that decision.

From my personal experience, there hasn't been any serious problems that I have had to face, but I have a minor reoccurring issue that I have to get corrected every so often. When I asked the doctors on how to prevent the issue rather than correct it, the response was "this is a common issue with some people and they just have to come back every so often." After pressing the issue (because I knew it was preventable from other doctors and just wanted a second opinion) they mentioned some possible measures to deal with it. While not any sort of proof, I definitely receive a "I want your money" vibe from some of the medical professionals.

In response the the original poster, not all doctors are equal, and it seems as if one of the doctors she dealt with played a significant part in limiting her correct diagnosis. Her blog mentions that she had a doctor that refused to listen to her, and even made her afraid of going to see other doctors when she was sick.

I didn't want to end this post without posting something relevant to above information so here is an article I found that discusses the poor and medical implications in its introduction.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
From my personal experience, there hasn't been any serious problems that I have had to face, but I have a minor reoccurring issue that I have to get corrected every so often. When I asked the doctors on how to prevent the issue rather than correct it, the response was "this is a common issue with some people and they just have to come back every so often." After pressing the issue (because I knew it was preventable from other doctors and just wanted a second opinion) they mentioned some possible measures to deal with it. While not any sort of proof, I definitely receive a "I want your money" vibe from some of the medical professionals.
Do you mind sharing what that issue is? There are a lot of medical issues where preventative or permanent care is notoriously difficult. For example, basically anything in dentistry is a constant fight against rot that is basically impossible to permanently deal with.
 

DeliciousDarren

Smash Cadet
Joined
Oct 11, 2014
Messages
49
3DS FC
1435-3664-3412
Do you mind sharing what that issue is? There are a lot of medical issues where preventative or permanent care is notoriously difficult. For example, basically anything in dentistry is a constant fight against rot that is basically impossible to permanently deal with.
I'd rather not, since its an online forum and the information will last forever lol. Just know that it is mostly preventable and not too difficult to do so. No disrespect of course.
 

Solar~Beam

Smash Rookie
Joined
May 19, 2015
Messages
10
From my personal experience, there hasn't been any serious problems that I have had to face, but I have a minor reoccurring issue that I have to get corrected every so often. When I asked the doctors on how to prevent the issue rather than correct it, the response was "this is a common issue with some people and they just have to come back every so often." After pressing the issue (because I knew it was preventable from other doctors and just wanted a second opinion) they mentioned some possible measures to deal with it. While not any sort of proof, I definitely receive a "I want your money" vibe from some of the medical professionals.
Then it sounds like you either need to find another doctor for this, if you haven't already, or look into if the "possible measures to deal with it" are actually going to be better for you in the long run than the "coming back every so often". Sometimes the treatment can be just as bad as the diseased. But then again, I don't know what's going on, I don't necessarily want or need to know what specifically is going on, and I trust your vibe you got from your doctor.

I won't parrot what everyone has been saying already in this thread, but this is something that hits a particular nerve for me. I'm just so confused as to when we got to a point in our society where we stopped trusting doctors. DOCTORS. Aren't they supposed to be the people we trust the most? I'm not saying we should trust them blindly or anything but I'm tired of millions of doctors toiling away every day, doing their jobs perfectly, and then one or two will do something wrong (which I will agree can have catastrophic effects and we should not downplay any of them) and then suddenly we are being taught that all doctors are quacks and nutjobs and shouldn't be trusted.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
8,905
Location
Vinyl Scratch's Party Bungalo
NNID
Budget_Player
I'm not saying we should trust them blindly or anything but I'm tired of millions of doctors toiling away every day, doing their jobs perfectly, and then one or two will do something wrong (which I will agree can have catastrophic effects and we should not downplay any of them) and then suddenly we are being taught that all doctors are quacks and nutjobs and shouldn't be trusted.
It gets even worse though, because the people screaming "DON'T TRUST THEM" the loudest are the people who have abandoned the concept of evidence-based or science-based medicine in favor of, well, basically whatever they want to believe works. Look at who's screaming this the loudest - it's the people who think homeopathy works. That acupuncture works. That reiki, theraputic touch, traditional chinese medicine, naturopathy*, Miracle Mineral Supplement, and the like work. Now, these are things where there either is scant evidence that they work, or strong evidence that they don't work. Many are based on prescientific, vitalistic concepts - in order to believe reiki, TT, or acupuncture work, you need to believe in a sort of completely undemonstrated life force concept, the kind of thing that science abandoned decades ago - while others are based on complete misunderstandings of how medicine or the body works. Homeopathy being a famous example of a medicine that does not work because it cannot work, because it violates several well-established principles in chemistry and physics.

Hell, here's a little alt-med story for you. Mercola.org once endorsed a man by the name of Tullio Simoncini, who believed that all cancer was in fact candidiasis that had gotten out of control** (so did NaturalNews, by the way, and you can find articles about this guy on basically any major alt-med site). A yeast infection. For anyone in the room who knows nothing about cancer, let me make something perfectly clear: cancer is not a ****ing yeast infection. In fact, in a stunning case of actual aptitude from the legal system when it comes to quackery in Italy, he was charged and convicted with manslaughter and fraud after his bull**** treatment (based on injecting baking soda into the tumor) led to the death of a patient in 2006.

These are people who know next to ****ing nothing about medicine, and seem to go by the guiding principle of "If it's scientific, can be backed up by peer review, and is recommended by doctors, it's eeeeevil!"

And this kills people.

This is why, @ B Braydon , I find your particular brand of "cynicism" so toxic. Doctors are not saints. They cannot inherently be trusted as perfect human beings. That said, by and large, they are trustworthy. And they're our best shot in dealing with disease, as you would, you know, kind of expect when talking about people who spend 8 years studying the human body. Advising people to stay away from them, and pushing them towards "alternatives" which demonstrably do not work... That's not okay.


*Naturopathy is not simply "getting medicine from natural substances" as some seem to believe. There actually is a scientific discipline based around that; it's called pharmacognosy and has made some truly remarkable discoveries. Naturopathy, by comparison, is a cornucopia of herbal medical cures and quackery that may or may not actually do anything.

**For anyone wondering how he came to such a ****ing ludicrous conclusion, let me explain: he saw a tumor. He noticed that it was white and lumpy. He thought, "Huh, you know what else is white and lumpy?" This is not a joke.

Simoncini realized that all cancers acted the same way no matter where they were in the body or what form they took. There had to be a common denominator. He also observed that the cancer 'lumps' were always white.

What else is white? Candida.
 

Solar~Beam

Smash Rookie
Joined
May 19, 2015
Messages
10
I feel ya. I'm a vet tech coming 4 years so I get very frustrated by people clinging to alt-med and homeopathic remedies. But I can also see why they do it. The media and the internet is so full of false information it's easy to see why people will go for things like acupuncture or Chinese herbs (big thing in veterinary medicine) when faced with the scary reality of their of illnesses.

I hate to be "that guy" to fall back onto the media and the internet but it really does fall back on that a lot. People on the whole are skittish when it comes to medicine those who like to take advantage of that like the throw around words like "chemicals". People are too afraid of the word "chemicals", if you ask me, and I think this may be a key problem with the whole alt-med/homeopathic issue. A lot of people will say "well, I just don't like to take a bunch of chemicals". Well, the problems is, those chemicals are actually really good for you?

I don't want to blindly crap on alt-med/homeopathic, because I think that is similar to people blindly crapping on conventional medicine, but I think you should always go into everything with thorough research. And I have yet to find anything from AM/H after thorough research that would every have it replace conventional medicine for anything major.
 
Top Bottom