3 ms·

It's not like they aren't paid in reputation though. Because it's a novel surgery, they're now the world's leading experts on applying this surgery successfully

It's not like they aren't paid in reputation though. Because it's a novel surgery, they're now the world's leading experts on applying this surgery successfully, and that makes them the first phone call for anybody with deep pockets who wants to make it happen. Not to mention being published, talking about the surgery in conferences, etc. The patient may not have paid in money, but they did pay in taking a very significant risk of unforeseeable complications. It's not so clear cut.

thecatspaw 9y ago
the one time "do it for the exposure" is justified
- icelancer 9y ago
  This is often the case. Building a website for someone's portfolio for free is nonsense. But things like this come up all the time, and demanding payment in the form of money is often very stupid. I got the chance to film alongside ESPN using experimental cameras and technology that I've pioneered, and didn't request payment (just all expenses covered). Gaining networking contacts at ESPN and on-air mentions of the tech are worth far more than I could reasonably bill, and in the case of billing them, you lose out on extracting favors for doing it for "free." Being a good business operator requires not relying on platitudes you hear from the freelancing community.
csomar 9y ago
That might not do justice to a number of doctors/surgeons/scientists doing it for science and medicine. I was in the medical field and it was ripe with predators doctors. But there was really people interested in advancing science. Also surgeons at these level are probably too well off to care about money for one operation.
onetimemanytime 9y ago
100% true, probably would have doctors running over each other to do such thing--first case, ever. But still, we can't dismiss it like that. They did a great thing and they deserve our kudos. Plenty of doctors take charity cases, some even go to Africa or poor areas in USA.
stochastic_monk 9y ago
That being said, the doctors also took on a huge risk in performing a difficult, new surgery. Whether or not it was good for their careers (I don't doubt it will be) doesn't negate the altruism they offered. It also strikes me as patriotic.
- collyw 9y ago
  I would say that depends on the risk to the patient. There have been some pretty horrendous things done in order to advance medicine in the past. These days we seem to have a bit more in the way of ethical standard though.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
refurb 9y ago
This is really true. There was an interesting documentary about the docs who did the first hand transplant. The docs were really pushing to do it since they could be "first". The patient was so-so about the idea, but went ahead anyways. Fast forward a year and the hand is slowly disintegrating since they couldn't get his immune system to accept it. The patient eventually stopped taking his drugs. The hand was then amputated and he got a prosthetic. Patient was much more functional.
- Balgair 9y ago
  As an aside: the abandonment rate for 'normal' prosthetics is about 35% to 45% : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17979010 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17979010
OskarS 9y ago
This is presumably true for the lead surgeons, but there's plenty of other people involved. Presumably there was a large team of surgical nurses, administrators, and other doctors like anaesthetists who can claim no such fame or fortune for taking part.

thecatspaw 9y ago

the one time "do it for the exposure" is justified

icelancer 9y ago
This is often the case. Building a website for someone's portfolio for free is nonsense. But things like this come up all the time, and demanding payment in the form of money is often very stupid. I got the chance to film alongside ESPN using experimental cameras and technology that I've pioneered, and didn't request payment (just all expenses covered). Gaining networking contacts at ESPN and on-air mentions of the tech are worth far more than I could reasonably bill, and in the case of billing them, you lose out on extracting favors for doing it for "free." Being a good business operator requires not relying on platitudes you hear from the freelancing community.

csomar 9y ago

That might not do justice to a number of doctors/surgeons/scientists doing it for science and medicine. I was in the medical field and it was ripe with predators doctors. But there was really people interested in advancing science. Also surgeons at these level are probably too well off to care about money for one operation.

onetimemanytime 9y ago

100% true, probably would have doctors running over each other to do such thing--first case, ever. But still, we can't dismiss it like that. They did a great thing and they deserve our kudos. Plenty of doctors take charity cases, some even go to Africa or poor areas in USA.

stochastic_monk 9y ago

That being said, the doctors also took on a huge risk in performing a difficult, new surgery. Whether or not it was good for their careers (I don't doubt it will be) doesn't negate the altruism they offered. It also strikes me as patriotic.

collyw 9y ago
I would say that depends on the risk to the patient. There have been some pretty horrendous things done in order to advance medicine in the past. These days we seem to have a bit more in the way of ethical standard though.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

refurb 9y ago

This is really true. There was an interesting documentary about the docs who did the first hand transplant. The docs were really pushing to do it since they could be "first". The patient was so-so about the idea, but went ahead anyways. Fast forward a year and the hand is slowly disintegrating since they couldn't get his immune system to accept it. The patient eventually stopped taking his drugs. The hand was then amputated and he got a prosthetic. Patient was much more functional.

Balgair 9y ago
As an aside: the abandonment rate for 'normal' prosthetics is about 35% to 45% : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17979010 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17979010

OskarS 9y ago

This is presumably true for the lead surgeons, but there's plenty of other people involved. Presumably there was a large team of surgical nurses, administrators, and other doctors like anaesthetists who can claim no such fame or fortune for taking part.