The PhD commenter below has refused to understand that the actions of Presidents Carter and Clinton, in cooperation with a young lawyer named Barack Obama, more than ten years ago could have caused a legal and moral situation that built up over time and finally fed upon itself in the financial excesses that are destroying the entire world today.
This PhD believed that, since the thirty year trend of building, self-nourishing, moral and financial disease, combined with Carter’s CRA that requires banks to lend more and more to unqualified buyers, reached a fevered peak during Bush’s administration, that Bush was the cause of the disaster.
He cannot comprehend that CCCCO (CuCoo Carter Clinton and Obama) created the legal framework and regulatory environment that enabled and even DEMANDED the financial misbehavior of the apocalypse.
While Bush is certainly guilty of being too stupid to perceive the disease and cut it short, so are all the people that Obama has appointed to cure it. For example, Tim Geithner, whom Obama calls the only man who can save us, was in fact asleep at the switch when he, as head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, was in charge on preventing the collapse, and DID NOT. Yet Obama relies on Timmie for our salvation?
Here is the medical educator argueing with me on the efficiency of our medical system. Is it no wonder that the students who come out of our current educational system vote for the food stamp president?
Medical Second Opinions
PhD Commenter: Since I have a Ph.D., it doesn’t intimidate me in the least. (that I disagreed with him)
Host: That you claim a PhD is not surprising – you should get a refund from your schools, undergraduate and high schools, as well as PhD factories.
Don’t get me started on the incompetence of doctors and the failures of the US Medical Educational System.
PhD Commenter: Sure, go on about the medical education system, as if you really know anything about it. The most you have is a few personal anecdotes. Let’s hear them, and I’m sure they’ll have nothing to do with the doctor’s education or medical knowledge, but what the heck.
Host: Regarding doctors’ competency and the state of the medical profession, more than one third of the time we get a second opinion, it recommends different treatment.
That is not acceptable.
PhD Commenter: And yes, it is acceptable. It is very acceptable. For one thing, when a second opinion is sought, either the diagnosis or the treatment is in question. For any given set of symptoms and test results, there is often more than one possible diagnosis. For any given diagnosis, there is almost always more than one option for treatment. That is just the way it is and will continue to be as long as medicine is advancing. It is even the truth that one medical institution gets better results with one treatment and another gets better results with another.
Host: One of my biggest gripes is how dysfunctional our college system is, and how our Food Stamp President keeps throwing more money into it instead of shutting it down and starting all over
Well, you certainly make me feel better.
Thanks for that treatment.
But seriously, if I understand your comment, if I am receiving a treatment from one facility and am not getting good results, then I could go to another doctor and get the same treatment with a different result?
And if I go for a second opinion, then I might get another variety of treatment from a third facility.
And if that does not go well, perhaps a fourth facility could give the second treatment with different results than the third facility?
Is there a limit on the number of places/doctors I need to see/pay before I get cured? Or before I get killed?
Does the scientific principle of replicable results enter into this?
By the way, four doctors and four treatment/outcomes for the same medical condition/disease are not as unusual as anyone might think/fear!
Many patients see more than four doctors before getting correctly diagnosed and cured.
The newspapers, golf clubs, condo associations, country clubs and the internet are full of histories that take many, many doctors before a cure is encountered.
It is not acceptable to dismiss such things as “that is the way it is” or as merely “anecdotal evidence.”
Actually, many doctors admit that three or more doctors may be required before finding the working/curing treatment for 15 to 20 percent of patients.
My own family’s “anecdotal” evidence consists of more than thirty doctors for four people covering 95 years, and includes three instances (for four people) where doctors insisted on immediate operations that were not necessary or appropriate. Did they teach the spelling of “malpractice” in your PhD thesis?
One doctor screamed at me at the top of his voice that if I did not let him operate on me tomorrow, I would die.
I refused and am living very happily. Another doctor cured the condition with antibiotics costing $47 compared to the $30,000 the surgeon wanted to waste, forget the pain, suffering, and risks of surgery, including the very real risk of infection in our filthy hospitals.
Our family declined all three operations, and has lived very healthily without them, although it did take three doctors a bit longer to pay off their yachts.
I believe our medical schools, doctors, and medical boards are in need of even more drastic reform than our financial and governmental systems, all of which are so broken they cannot be fixed, but need to be totally discarded and reinvented.
PS Later the “Educator Of Doctors” Replied that one way to improve medicine was to give doctors free magazine subscriptions.
Presumably they might read them on their yachts bought with unnecessary operations.
Read Full Post »
Carol Teaches 
You must be logged in to post a comment.