Needling ORDER and Method (true medicine or placebo)

[Guest guest]

In the USA, it is said that only 0.5-2.0% all cases of cold, flu,

sinusitis, etc. actually involve bacterial infection. Yet some 40% of

cases seen by MD's are treated with antibiotics.

 

Is this the use of placebo effect? (The MD feels he/she has to

prescribe something to make the patient 'feel' better

(placebo wishing to placate)?

 

Or is it justifiable in terms of prophylaxis against an opportunistic

bacteria coming along?

 

Or is it just laziness and/or mal-practice?

 

I have no data to make a judgment among these alternatives.

Personally I suspect all three possibilities come into play in

different instances.

 

I also suggest that this demonstrates that physicians are using some

sort of intentionality here, as they aren't, in some sense, applying

the medicine appropriately or " truly " . (According to the Times

writer, they almost never do simple microscopic observation to verify

of the presence of bacteria, that is to say, they proceed without a

valid diagnosis of bacterial infection.)

 

Admitting that the actual figures are possibly not to be interpreted

to say that a full 40% of the 98% of all cases are mis- or

questionably prescribed. It might be that the doctors treat something

less then 100% of cases, to that 40% of these (using AB Tx) is less

than 40% of the total.

 

(1) New York Times newspaper, sometime in 2005 (have the article at

work, handing it out copies regularly to cold/flu/sinus sufferers)

 

 

[Guest guest]

Chris,

Do you have the title and/or link to article. I think it is a great idea to

hand out or inform the public about their healthcare decisions and how they

might be duped. Medicine w/o a diagnosis, sounds like malpractice to me.MB

 

 

: : Sat,

20 May 2006 01:31:24 -0700Re: Re: Needling ORDER and Method (true

medicine or placebo)In the USA, it is said that only 0.5-2.0% all cases of cold,

flu, sinusitis, etc. actually involve bacterial infection. Yet some 40% of cases

seen by MD's are treated with antibiotics.Is this the use of placebo effect?

(The MD feels he/she has to prescribe something to make the patient 'feel'

better (placebo wishing to placate)?Or is it justifiable in terms of

prophylaxis against an opportunistic bacteria coming along?Or is it just

laziness and/or mal-practice?I have no data to make a judgment among these

alternatives. Personally I suspect all three possibilities come into play in

different instances.I also suggest that this demonstrates that physicians are

using some sort of intentionality here, as they aren't, in some sense, applying

the medicine appropriately or " truly " . (According to the Times writer, they

almost never do simple microscopic observation to verify of the presence of

bacteria, that is to say, they proceed without a valid diagnosis of bacterial

infection.)Admitting that the actual figures are possibly not to be interpreted

to say that a full 40% of the 98% of all cases are mis- or questionably

prescribed. It might be that the doctors treat something less then 100% of

cases, to that 40% of these (using AB Tx) is less than 40% of the total.(1) New

York Times newspaper, sometime in 2005 (have the article at work, handing it out

copies regularly to cold/flu/sinus sufferers) [Non-text portions of this message

have been removed]Subscribe to the new FREE online journal for TCM at Chinese

Medicine Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com Download the all new TCM

Forum Toolbar, click,

http://toolbar.thebizplace.com/LandingPage.aspx/CT145145To change your email

delivery settings, click,

and adjust

accordingly. Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside

the group requires prior permission from the author.Please consider the

environment and only print this message if absolutely necessary.