6 ms·

This poor woman. I feel like auto-brewery syndrome is well known enough in pop culture that I am somewhat stunned it went so long before anyone considered the p

by donatj 2y ago

This poor woman. I feel like auto-brewery syndrome is well known enough in pop culture that I am somewhat stunned it went so long before anyone considered the possibility.

lenerdenator 2y ago
It's known in pop culture because it's so strange to actually see in a doctor's office.
sed3 2y ago
[flagged]
- master-lincoln 2y ago
  because believing is for religious people...
  - sed3 2y ago
    Believing something with 4000 years of tradition in different cultures, was validated in several studies is "religious". Versus believing something that came out last year, and has only single study sponsored by manufacturer...
    - joseda-hg 2y ago
      I'd say you're misinterpreting what belief implies here Tradition isn't proof, but also it doesn't harm credibility, at least to coherent people, and that's how it should be* Eventually if there's enough proof, the consensus shifts, regardless of how much initially people try to deny it Fasting goes against recent consensus, yet it's becoming both more researched and more recommended (At the very least at the layman level, I'm no dietician) * Something working doesn't tell you why it works, so it's important to be rigorous and always check, else you risk cargo-culting unnecesary or even risky things
  - notarobot123 2y ago
    ...and rational people when combined with justification and evidence.
- schmidtleonard 2y ago
  (X) Doubt Last time I was in a medical space, intermittent fasting was all the buzz. The idea that it somehow has opposition from mainstream medicine seems like the kind of thing that an internet community would invent to pretend at being brave rebels (and run defense if case they were caught getting frisky with unsubstantiated health claims.) If you search "intermittent fasting" on google, the results are full of very positive articles from all the big names in medicine: Johns Hopkins: Intermittent Fasting: What is it, and how does it work? Mayo Clinic: Intermittent fasting: What are the benefits? Harvard Health: Intermittent fasting: The positive news continues So no, I don't buy for one second that "most doctors do not believe something like fasting can improve health."
  - sed3 2y ago
    Intermittent fasting is pretty much American invention with all the usual marketing.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  There's a lot of vagueness in your last statement and I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. "Most doctors" is an unspecific appeal to authority; which doctors can you cite that do not believe something like fasting can improve health? "believe" was already mentioned by another commenter. An authority will make an assertion based on facts, not a belief based on ??? "something like" is it fasting or is it something else? Be specific. "fasting" What kind of fasting do you mean? Between sunup and sundown like ramadan? Intermittent fasting? 30 day juice diet fasting? "improve health" Improve how? And what aspect of health? "Health" is such a broad term that saying "this is good for your health" or "this food is healthy" are empty statements.
  - sed3 2y ago
    My point is that "auto brewery syndrome" is pretty well known at some type of community.
failrate 2y ago
It took me several years to get a SIBO diagnosis even though the "breath test" fir it is cheap and easy. Similar symptoms and treatment to autobrewery syndrome, and a lot of the feedback I got from doctors prior to diagnosis was that I was either a hypochondriac or "just more sensitive to pain".
- nerdponx 2y ago
  It's ridiculous what doctors will put people through instead of doing a basic test that's cheap and easy to administer and (in the USA) should be covered by health insurance. I know someone who went through a similar experience with H. pylori.
  - jrockway 2y ago
    Tests are not 100% accurate, so running a test without a good reason can lead to a lot of unnecessary medical intervention. A false positive can lead to thousands of dollars of expense and not getting better.
    - failrate 2y ago
      In my particular case, I had numerous other more expensive and invasive tests before my gastro finally decided to even offer the breath test. The treatment is a course of antibiotics for a week.
    - solveit 2y ago
      This reasoning only makes sense in the context of a dysfunctional system. "We can't gather information because we will react in stupid ways". Surely the correct response for noninvasive tests is to run the test, and raise the threshold for intervention?
      - andrewflnr 2y ago
        Or if it's cheap, run the test twice. And you're presumably going to have other symptoms that corroborate the results. Maybe the symptoms of X are ambiguous alone, but what are the odds you have a positive test for X and matching symptoms but not X itself? Not zero, but lower.
Workaccount2 2y ago
The core issue is that the system is just not good at catching outliers, and the only conceivable way to do so would be incredibly wasteful and expensive. For every case of "It took 8 doctors over the course of 3 years to get a diagnosis" there are 5000 cases of "It took 1 doctor on one visit to get a diagnosis"
- belmarca 2y ago
  And "outliers" aren't necessarily exotic. Idiopathic disease isn't rare and difficult to diagnose.
  - Gibbon1 2y ago
    The problem is the fat tail of rare conditions is really wide because their are thousands of them. Say there are 500 rare conditions with a rate of 2 per 100k per year. That means one out of 100 patients will develop one of those 500 in a given year.
- tivert 2y ago
  > The core issue is that the system is just not good at catching outliers, and the only conceivable way to do so would be incredibly wasteful and expensive. But in this case, I don't think it would be "incredibly wasteful and expensive." The case study stated, "On her ED visits, she was discharged with the diagnosis of alcohol intoxication, despite her reports of no alcohol intake, corroborated by her family." She didn't need some expensive diagnostic test for a diagnosis, she needed a doctor to pay attention to what she and her family were saying.
  - shermantanktop 2y ago
    And to disregard their previous experience with high-functioning alcoholics who deny everything when they mess up. I’d bet there’s a lot more hidden day-drinkers out there than patients like this. As someone with a relatively obscure condition, I’ve gotten used to being the pachinko ball that falls straight down the diagnostic chart to the wrong conclusion. But I understand the numbers are against me.
MisterTea 2y ago
> I feel like auto-brewery syndrome is well known enough in pop culture Never heard of it until now.
- s1mon 2y ago
  It may depend on what TV shows you watch. It's been on Grey's Anatomy, the Good Doctor and House MD. I thought it was on Chicago Med once or twice too.
  - eadler 2y ago
    I don't think it's ever been on House. Don't recall it from memory or find it on a quick Google search. Posisble I'm wrong though.

by donatj 2y ago

This poor woman. I feel like auto-brewery syndrome is well known enough in pop culture that I am somewhat stunned it went so long before anyone considered the possibility.

lenerdenator 2y ago

It's known in pop culture because it's so strange to actually see in a doctor's office.

sed3 2y ago

[flagged]

master-lincoln 2y ago
because believing is for religious people...
- sed3 2y ago
  Believing something with 4000 years of tradition in different cultures, was validated in several studies is "religious". Versus believing something that came out last year, and has only single study sponsored by manufacturer...
  - joseda-hg 2y ago
    I'd say you're misinterpreting what belief implies here Tradition isn't proof, but also it doesn't harm credibility, at least to coherent people, and that's how it should be* Eventually if there's enough proof, the consensus shifts, regardless of how much initially people try to deny it Fasting goes against recent consensus, yet it's becoming both more researched and more recommended (At the very least at the layman level, I'm no dietician) * Something working doesn't tell you why it works, so it's important to be rigorous and always check, else you risk cargo-culting unnecesary or even risky things
- notarobot123 2y ago
  ...and rational people when combined with justification and evidence.
schmidtleonard 2y ago
(X) Doubt Last time I was in a medical space, intermittent fasting was all the buzz. The idea that it somehow has opposition from mainstream medicine seems like the kind of thing that an internet community would invent to pretend at being brave rebels (and run defense if case they were caught getting frisky with unsubstantiated health claims.) If you search "intermittent fasting" on google, the results are full of very positive articles from all the big names in medicine: Johns Hopkins: Intermittent Fasting: What is it, and how does it work? Mayo Clinic: Intermittent fasting: What are the benefits? Harvard Health: Intermittent fasting: The positive news continues So no, I don't buy for one second that "most doctors do not believe something like fasting can improve health."
- sed3 2y ago
  Intermittent fasting is pretty much American invention with all the usual marketing.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
There's a lot of vagueness in your last statement and I'm not sure what you're trying to imply. "Most doctors" is an unspecific appeal to authority; which doctors can you cite that do not believe something like fasting can improve health? "believe" was already mentioned by another commenter. An authority will make an assertion based on facts, not a belief based on ??? "something like" is it fasting or is it something else? Be specific. "fasting" What kind of fasting do you mean? Between sunup and sundown like ramadan? Intermittent fasting? 30 day juice diet fasting? "improve health" Improve how? And what aspect of health? "Health" is such a broad term that saying "this is good for your health" or "this food is healthy" are empty statements.
- sed3 2y ago
  My point is that "auto brewery syndrome" is pretty well known at some type of community.

failrate 2y ago

It took me several years to get a SIBO diagnosis even though the "breath test" fir it is cheap and easy. Similar symptoms and treatment to autobrewery syndrome, and a lot of the feedback I got from doctors prior to diagnosis was that I was either a hypochondriac or "just more sensitive to pain".

nerdponx 2y ago
It's ridiculous what doctors will put people through instead of doing a basic test that's cheap and easy to administer and (in the USA) should be covered by health insurance. I know someone who went through a similar experience with H. pylori.
- jrockway 2y ago
  Tests are not 100% accurate, so running a test without a good reason can lead to a lot of unnecessary medical intervention. A false positive can lead to thousands of dollars of expense and not getting better.
  - failrate 2y ago
    In my particular case, I had numerous other more expensive and invasive tests before my gastro finally decided to even offer the breath test. The treatment is a course of antibiotics for a week.
  - solveit 2y ago
    This reasoning only makes sense in the context of a dysfunctional system. "We can't gather information because we will react in stupid ways". Surely the correct response for noninvasive tests is to run the test, and raise the threshold for intervention?
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      Or if it's cheap, run the test twice. And you're presumably going to have other symptoms that corroborate the results. Maybe the symptoms of X are ambiguous alone, but what are the odds you have a positive test for X and matching symptoms but not X itself? Not zero, but lower.

Workaccount2 2y ago

The core issue is that the system is just not good at catching outliers, and the only conceivable way to do so would be incredibly wasteful and expensive. For every case of "It took 8 doctors over the course of 3 years to get a diagnosis" there are 5000 cases of "It took 1 doctor on one visit to get a diagnosis"

belmarca 2y ago
And "outliers" aren't necessarily exotic. Idiopathic disease isn't rare and difficult to diagnose.
- Gibbon1 2y ago
  The problem is the fat tail of rare conditions is really wide because their are thousands of them. Say there are 500 rare conditions with a rate of 2 per 100k per year. That means one out of 100 patients will develop one of those 500 in a given year.
tivert 2y ago
> The core issue is that the system is just not good at catching outliers, and the only conceivable way to do so would be incredibly wasteful and expensive. But in this case, I don't think it would be "incredibly wasteful and expensive." The case study stated, "On her ED visits, she was discharged with the diagnosis of alcohol intoxication, despite her reports of no alcohol intake, corroborated by her family." She didn't need some expensive diagnostic test for a diagnosis, she needed a doctor to pay attention to what she and her family were saying.
- shermantanktop 2y ago
  And to disregard their previous experience with high-functioning alcoholics who deny everything when they mess up. I’d bet there’s a lot more hidden day-drinkers out there than patients like this. As someone with a relatively obscure condition, I’ve gotten used to being the pachinko ball that falls straight down the diagnostic chart to the wrong conclusion. But I understand the numbers are against me.

MisterTea 2y ago

> I feel like auto-brewery syndrome is well known enough in pop culture Never heard of it until now.

s1mon 2y ago
It may depend on what TV shows you watch. It's been on Grey's Anatomy, the Good Doctor and House MD. I thought it was on Chicago Med once or twice too.
- eadler 2y ago
  I don't think it's ever been on House. Don't recall it from memory or find it on a quick Google search. Posisble I'm wrong though.