Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

I applaud Dr. Ofri for making such an excellent argument. The dilemma she raises is true in other sub-specialties as well. I have certainly seen it in oncology, when we are challenged as a field and as clinicians when patients sometimes want treatment which is unlikely to provide benefit but has the potential to cause harm.

I am reminded of a medical school professor who, when attending in the ICU, said that he considered his role to be more like an executive than a maitre d’. “My job is to explain my reasoning and make a strong recommendation, not to say Would madame prefer intubation or bipap this evening?”

This does fly in the face of our lofty goal of shared decision making. However Dr. Ofri is unfortunately correct: while it is hard to explain a denial to a patient, it is even harder to explain it to a jury.

— Mark

from the comments on the article.

Jules, lately I've been getting blood transfusions twice a week from 12 year old Mormon boys. The blood is pure, and I feel great....tons of energy

Would you recommend this to any of your patients?

NTF!

NEAG.....props....I was LOL'ing.

Jules,

Why do black gays creep me out?

Could be something from your past. How do you feel when you see Ryan Howard on TV or at the stadium?

No, this was the case long before he struck out looking to end the NLCS

Were you ever touched inappropriately by the help at your house?

thats a good pt- tho misguided as he had no help at his house, that act's just that- an act.

He doesnt come from old or new $...

BUT- NEAG, its well known you are Catholic- were you ever a victim of some 'bad touch' at the hands of a trusted church leader during your days attending>?

Serious question.

If too personal, all good.

Seth, really, come on.

No I was never touched by a priest nor have I personally known anyone who was.

Ok well fair enuf.

It seems like a fair question given that it seemingly happens quite a bit, and I don't know a lot of catholic guys.

Went to PITT w/ 1 who could be considered a really good friend.
No males in my wifes side of the family (they're catholic) and i have no other friends who have spoken openly about being raised catholic.

Sorry if it offended.

I'm not offended about being asked

cool

Seth, I know its part of his act. I realize he was also clowning with his question. Figured I'd go along with the goofiness.

However, I've known more than a few women who've been victims of that. Pretty scary stat is that 1/7 girls was abused (sexually or physically or both). Keep in mind those are "reported" stats. I'm sure for guys the number is very "low", but, I have no doubt that sort of thing is far more under-reported for men/boys.

Jules, with all the medical advances over the years, why are the only over the counter pain killers stuff that contains something that can damage your liver, and another thing that can give you ulcers?

Lyte, sorry I never answered this earlier.

Both acetaminophen, aspirin and ibuprofen were developed prior to the FDA as analgesics.

If aspirin were tested today, it'd never get approved by the FDA.

Jules, I'm noticing that my joints are starting to get worse over the years, and rather than deal with relievers for pain I'm curious what kind of stuff (general vitamins or specific supplement) which would promote healing/healthy joints?

Chondroitin Sulfate is supposedly not helpful. Personally, I'd say, load up on anti-oxidants including fish oil, berries, pomegranate, dark chocolate (as unsweetened as you can stomach), veggies, etc.

If you are working out, try to stretch more. As you age, your ligaments and tendons are less flexible and more "stiff".

Unfortunately, to date, there are only things which slow down degenerative changes in joints but nothing to fully stop or reverse them.

Jules, I was wondering your thoughts on the "pseudoscience" of psychology- worthless or does it have any merit?


link

Well this would explain why you seemed to have gotten dumber with every post out here over the years....

Ouch

I have to say, FB, that was a stupid study and dumber still for getting published in a peer review journal. What is the purpose? To state that "ambiguous" racism impacted cognitive function in blacks more than whites?

So the fuck what?

As for psychology, there is a lot of merit for the science itself, but you have to recognize that (a) there are politics in everything and publications provide name recognition and enough of them can lead to tenure (b) personal biases can have subtle, difficult to trace impact on general population biases.

In the end, you are dealing with many variables. And, ignoring the interplay of those variables or failing to understand the significance of them is clearly detrimental.

I think Jules, that their purpose was to highlight the effects of subtle racism, but I agree- they were over ambitious and reached a little bit... hence my use of the term "pseudoscience".

And as expected, 736 took the bait and made a hilarious joke

took the bait?

Your dumbass posted a link that makes you look like the dolt you are- for a guy who would seemingly look for subtle racism in a weather forecast, you sure have 'proven' that BS theory in that peer reviewed paper.

And fwiw, i agree w/ jules, its crap.

Wow, another F_B moment.

Their best paper would be how they recruited 123 black students at Princeton (not even being a wise guy)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22