4 ms·
It's interesting because I feel the opposite as an acute care doctor in the US. If I give a medication, or get a scan, or whatever, and the patient has an adve
by subltemelt 6y ago
It's interesting because I feel the opposite as an acute care doctor in the US. If I give a medication, or get a scan, or whatever, and the patient has an adverse reaction, it's the medication/scan's fault. If I don't give the medication, don't get the scan, and something bad happens, it's my fault. At least that's how people see it for now. Leads to a lot of over-treatment and extra unnecessary testing in my opinion, especially around COVID (for example, I frequently see high-dose dexamethasone given for longer than 10 days or given to normoxic patients, despite the recommendation being for 6 mg daily for 10 days, and only for patients requiring oxygen).
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoExactly. You care if people die on your lawn. So you give out medication, do scans, etc. so that if people die they do it on someone else's lawn. It's ass-covering all the way down.
- andyjohnson0 6y ago> You care if people die on your lawn. I don't know how you know that. Given the significant time and effort required to become a doctor, isn't it at least as likely that they are motivated about people not dying on any lawn?
- midoBB 6y agoA doctor is a job like any other job to be honest. Most people are in it to make a better life for themselves not to think about other people.
- drcode 6y agoWhat you say makes complete sense, I'd argue the incentives are different for government agencies, however.
- nradov 6y agoI thought that methylprednisolone was now preferred over dexamethasone for COVID-19 treatment. https://covid19criticalcare.com/medical-evidence/methylprednisolone/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/medical-evidence/methylpredn...
- jayd16 6y ago>If I give a medication, or get a scan, or whatever, and the patient has an adverse reaction, it's the medication/scan's fault. What about the Hippocratic oath? First do no harm.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- StavrosK 6y agoI mean, it doesn't actually say that, it says "I will do no harm" and "I will abstain from all intentional wrongdoing". That doesn't mean that doing nothing is fine, because you didn't do harm.
- amelius 6y agoSo a more accurate description is: politicians care deeply if people die from an action (or inaction) that went against the public opinion.
- dahfizz 6y agoTo take this further, public opinion cares much more about action than inaction. A handful of unjust police killings cause widespread protest / riot / unrest, but 15,000 unprevented homicides are largely accepted as part of life. You can argue that they are morally equivalent, but our brains get more angry at someone doing a bad thing than at someone not doing a good thing.
- cutemonster 6y agoOr 42 000 people dead in traffic accidents (in the US year 2020), most of this preventable, eg by middle of the road separation barriers or separate bike lanes. Most of the public doesn't care or understand, neither do the politicians. Not interesting to fix because no one intentionally did anything bad? And, spending time on this won't win any elections?