“Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

This category is meant for discussion of technical legal issues in workers' compensation. If you are an injured worker, do not ask questions here. Go to the Injured Workers' forum.

“Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby 4anewusers on Fri Oct 06, 2017 2:46 pm

“Evidence-Based Medicine”: Corporate Medicine’s Corrupted Instrument

This article does not get into the ways it is being used as a means for cost containment.


https://medium.com/@noorchashm/evidence ... 8591db940b
Patient Advocate for medical device safety and ethics. •Modern medicine offers important benefits, yet it also has the capacity to cause harm;•Those harms arise from three central failings: the overuse, underuse, and misuse of medical services.
4anewusers
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:09 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby LawAdvocate on Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:23 am

LOL. Fail in logic. Scientific illiteracy. What a bunch of speculative garbage.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby steve appell on Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:26 am

Sorry but I don't get it.
What is the point of this post?
Is there an opinion or a point of view here?
Even if it is garbage, inquiry minds want to know!
Steve

appellandassociates.com
6311 Van Nuys Bl #480
Van Nuys, Ca 91401
wcexaminer@aol.com


Check out 'WORK COMP MATTERS" Free PODCAST below
https://www.workcompcentral.com/educati ... ype=online
User avatar
steve appell
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:02 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby jpod on Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:43 pm

I agree; the definition of evidenced based medicine as I understand it is a proposed treatment should out perform a placebo. If it doesn't then it is unethical to prescribe the treatment.

Maybe marketers have misappropriated the term. The history of medicine is replete with unscrupulous purveyors of gimmicks, lotions, potions, and gadgets which employ the placebo effect. EBM is designed to expose that age old tradition of snake oil salesman.

It is similar to the age old swindle where one gets 1,000 people to pay for betting/investing advice. Tell half "it"will go up; tell the other half it will go down. "It" will do one or the other and the 500 you told it would do what it did will think you "know" how to pick em'. Do it again and again until you are down to one customer/schmuck and move on.
jpod
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 1:21 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby 4anewusers on Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:28 pm

Evidence based medicine should be used as a guideline of treatment, and not mandatory for every patient.

Evidence based medicine can be corrupted when those who have financial interests are supplying the evidence.

https://theincidentaleconomist.com/word ... hcpr-newt/

http://content.healthaffairs.org/conten ... .full.html


You do not have to look far to find instances "evidence based medicine" has been corrupted by those who have a financial interest. It can be used as a means to get things approved that do not help the patient (over treatment)and it can also be used as a means to deny appropriate treatment for cost containment (under treatment). Both overtreatment and under trreatment causes harm to patients. Both sides of the fence have been guilty of doing this to patients in the workers' compensation system.
Last edited by 4anewusers on Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Patient Advocate for medical device safety and ethics. •Modern medicine offers important benefits, yet it also has the capacity to cause harm;•Those harms arise from three central failings: the overuse, underuse, and misuse of medical services.
4anewusers
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:09 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby LawAdvocate on Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:34 pm

Evidence based medicine requires more than one study to be evidenced based medicine. All studies are funded by someone. The definition of evidenced based medicine is that the results MUST be repeatable and reliable. NO fraudulent studies would therefore make it through, so your example is garbage. Just because a random spine journal publishes a study does not make it a part of evidenced based medicine. Fifth grade science teaches every one what defines a valid scientific statement or evidenced based medicine, it must be reliable and repeatable. The test results must be randomized and with valid controls. The study you are speaking of in all of its forms was not valid, reliable and repeatable. It was not used as evidenced based medicine in ANY insurance company's programs. All of those cage surgeries were in fact considered to be experimental.

Most of America fails to understand or continue their education in science the doctor in this article obviously went to the Ben Carson school of medicine and then the verified scientific illiterate Americans fell for it, oooohhhh look the big bad insurance companies. Bologna, if you are ignorant you better find someone smart in your life who knows how to evaluate fact from fiction and apply their expertise to your decisions.

You are back again with pablum about your ax to grind not about reality or any understanding of science and what constitutes evidenced based medicine. That is why this article is garbage and pointless. Stop spreading bad information for those who follow, which is the only reason I respond, otherwise I would just laugh and move on.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby 4anewusers on Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:19 pm

The author of the article went to Harvard and practiced medicine at Harvard, is a very well respected cardiologist and also has a PHD. He is also a national patient advocate for medical device safety and ethics.

Some patients who have been implanted with these cervical corpectomy devices are now successfully suing.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/th ... 25e49048b2

Two of the top ten selling cervical devices in the US are cervicle corpectomy cages. The above reference to the sham study was one example.

I responded above to Steve Appeal, who asked for clarification. Do you think I had no right to answer him and are you the moderator of this site? I believe this site was meant for all in this industry to converse and not just those on the insurance side. If you continue to troll those who do not have the same perspective with insults instead of constructive dialogue, then what you have left is a forum with less members and only individuals from one side.

Under rules of this forum davidd:

"RULE #2: Name calling, abusive statements, slander, expletives, inappropriate remarks, etc. are forbidden. You are entitled to your point of view - and you can express it - but with courtesy, respect and dignity. Failure to adhere to standards of common courtesy will result in a posting deletion and repeated violations will be cause for banning.

RULE #4: Respect each other. If you don't like someone's opinion, then say so and let it be. You can agree to disagree and no one will take offense. But, remember that your opinion is only your opinion."

Feel free to respond so I can laugh too. While I do not mind a difference of opinion, your argument would play better without the insults.
Patient Advocate for medical device safety and ethics. •Modern medicine offers important benefits, yet it also has the capacity to cause harm;•Those harms arise from three central failings: the overuse, underuse, and misuse of medical services.
4anewusers
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:09 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby 4anewusers on Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:17 pm

For those interested in this topic.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28881000

complete article http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 12834/full

"How to survive the medical misinformation mess.

Ioannidis JPA1,2,3, Stuart ME4,5, Brownlee S6,7, Strite SA5.


Abstract

Most physicians and other healthcare professionals are unaware of the pervasiveness of poor quality clinical evidence that contributes considerably to overuse, underuse, avoidable adverse events, missed opportunities for right care and wasted healthcare resources. The Medical Misinformation Mess comprises four key problems. First, much published medical research is not reliable or is of uncertain reliability, offers no benefit to patients, or is not useful to decision makers. Second, most healthcare professionals are not aware of this problem. Third, they also lack the skills necessary to evaluate the reliability and usefulness of medical evidence. Finally, patients and families frequently lack relevant, accurate medical evidence and skilled guidance at the time of medical decision-making. Increasing the reliability of available, published evidence may not be an imminently reachable goal. Therefore, efforts should focus on making healthcare professionals, more sensitive to the limitations of the evidence, training them to do critical appraisal, and enhancing their communication skills so that they can effectively summarize and discuss medical evidence with patients to improve decision-making. Similar efforts may need to target also patients, journalists, policy makers, the lay public and other healthcare stakeholders.

Currently, there are nearly approximately 17 million articles in PubMed tagged with ‘human(s)’, with >700 000 articles identified as ‘clinical trials’, and >1·8 million as ‘reviews’ (approximately 160 000 as ‘systematic reviews’). Nearly one million articles on humans are added each year [1]. Popular media also abound with medical stories and advice for patients.

Unfortunately, much of this information is unreliable or of uncertain reliability. Most clinical trials results may be misleading or not useful for patients [2, 3]. Most guidelines (which many clinicians rely on to guide treatment decisions) do not fully acknowledge the poor quality of the data on which they are based [4]. Most medical stories in mass media do not meet criteria for accuracy [5], and many stories exaggerate benefit and minimize harms.

Clinicians and patients often do not recognize how pervasive this problem is and how profoundly it affects the care they deliver or receive. Twenty to 50 per cent of all healthcare services delivered in the United States is inappropriate, wasting resources and/or harming patients [6-10]. Much of this waste is due to overuse of medical interventions, resulting in an unknown amount of preventable harms. Underuse of effective and safe interventions further compounds the system's failure to meet patients’ needs [11-13]. While there are many causes for inappropriate care and waste, much of it may be attributed to the poor quality of information that clinicians and patients rely on to make decisions about the services they deliver or receive."



© 2017 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation."
Patient Advocate for medical device safety and ethics. •Modern medicine offers important benefits, yet it also has the capacity to cause harm;•Those harms arise from three central failings: the overuse, underuse, and misuse of medical services.
4anewusers
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:09 pm

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby LawAdvocate on Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:30 pm

Above all physicians are scientists, if they can't recognize bad clinical evidence they should just go home. However, insurance companies do, because it effects their bottom lines in that they can get sued for using bad information. Follow the money, it is that simple.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: “Evidence-Based Medicine”:Corrupted (California) (California

Postby 4anewusers on Tue Oct 17, 2017 9:23 pm

Insurance companies are being duped or victims of this system as well. It is estimated 50% of medical treatment in the US is unnecessary (over treatment), and on the other side (under treatment) is also systemic.

The FDA does not do testing's or clinical trials on the safety or efficiency of a medication or medical device. Clinical trails are done by the company that manufactured the product. This is a big problem. Also, medical devices do not have to undergo any clinical trials or provide proof of their safety etc if they are approved by the FDA 510K approval process. They are approved on the basis they are "substantially equivalent" to a device that has previously been approved. Most medical devices are now being approved this way. This 510k is a sham as device manufacturers can state their device called device b is substantially equivalent to device number a, and the following year another company can states their device called c is substantially equivalent to device b, and all along there are changes to design none of which are tested. Due to this I would personally never want a new device implanted in me or a loved one until it has been around for a while to see if it is safe. Patients receiving new devices on the market approved by the FDA 510k approval process are the guinea pigs.

As I wrote above there is a lot of bad scientific data that is being used and manipulated as a means to make profit, even if the device, medication, test or treatment is not as safe or effective as stated in the data (over treatment). On the other side of the fence there is inaccurate data out there being used for cost containment (under treatment). This statement I know may not be a popular one to those on the insurance side, who are ethical hard working people and who believe the guidelines they use to both approve and deny are in the best interest of the patient. I also believe it is unethical to place every patient under a certain guideline as every patient is different.

Some doctors are recognizing there is a lot of bad scientific data out there and are working to make change through education and advocacy.This problem is multi layered and cannot be fixed overnight.
Another article that coincides with this subject.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamain ... ct/1669099
Patient Advocate for medical device safety and ethics. •Modern medicine offers important benefits, yet it also has the capacity to cause harm;•Those harms arise from three central failings: the overuse, underuse, and misuse of medical services.
4anewusers
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 1:09 pm

Next

Return to Legal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron