3 ms·

> Why would your doctor read the latest research on preventing disease when he can make a tidy profit from treating your disease? Woah woah woah there. Are you

> Why would your doctor read the latest research on preventing disease when he can make a tidy profit from treating your disease? Woah woah woah there. Are you really saying doctors don't read the latest research so that they can make a greater profit? Really? You could have at least picked a more realistic example of misaligned incentives in medicine... e.g. using a more expensive drill bit during a surgery because you know that the surgical rep will take you out to a nice dinner every time he's in town. There's a huge population of doctors. Some ethical. Some unethical. But I believe the profession does a pretty admirable job of stamping out immoral behavior when it finds it.

graeme 13y ago
The OP phrased it badly, but the point is sound. Suppose a doctor has a choice of two activities: 1. Read research, unpaid 2. Treat patient, paid The doctor clearly has an incentive to focus on treating disease. They do read research, but they would surely read even more if they were paid directly to do so. There's nothing nefarious in this, it happens in any industry. We do more of the things we're paid to do, and less of the things we're not.
- bdesimone 13y ago
  It's sound if you assume both aren't part of the job description. Change the occupation in the poorly constructed analogy and we have... Suppose a pilot has a choice of two activities: 1. Read FAA safety report, unpaid 2. Fly plane, paid Doctors, especially at academic institutions, are required not only to be up to date in the latest research, but contribute to it. If a doctor treats a patient in a way not up to par with current practices in research, he will be sued and lose his licensure.
- rosser 13y ago
  Holy false dilemma.
- anactualmd 13y ago
  See mention of CME upthread. The choice is really: 1. Attend CME meeting, often at nice resort locale, usually unpaid, but deductible. Acquire at least 25 hours of such attendance per year. 2. Lose medical license. Pump gas, if you can find a full-service station.

graeme 13y ago

The OP phrased it badly, but the point is sound. Suppose a doctor has a choice of two activities: 1. Read research, unpaid 2. Treat patient, paid The doctor clearly has an incentive to focus on treating disease. They do read research, but they would surely read even more if they were paid directly to do so. There's nothing nefarious in this, it happens in any industry. We do more of the things we're paid to do, and less of the things we're not.

bdesimone 13y ago
It's sound if you assume both aren't part of the job description. Change the occupation in the poorly constructed analogy and we have... Suppose a pilot has a choice of two activities: 1. Read FAA safety report, unpaid 2. Fly plane, paid Doctors, especially at academic institutions, are required not only to be up to date in the latest research, but contribute to it. If a doctor treats a patient in a way not up to par with current practices in research, he will be sued and lose his licensure.
rosser 13y ago
Holy false dilemma.
anactualmd 13y ago
See mention of CME upthread. The choice is really: 1. Attend CME meeting, often at nice resort locale, usually unpaid, but deductible. Acquire at least 25 hours of such attendance per year. 2. Lose medical license. Pump gas, if you can find a full-service station.