3 ms·

> I'm wondering if a doctor would balk at signing a document of liability for {x} resulting from vaccination. If she wouldn't put her career behind her belief,

> I'm wondering if a doctor would balk at signing a document of liability for {x} resulting from vaccination. If she wouldn't put her career behind her belief, should I believe her? I'm wondering if a programmer would balk at signing a document of liability for {x} resulting from their code submitted on a tight deadline. If they wouldn't put their career behind the belief in their code, should I believe them?

loceng 13y ago
... adding "tight deadline" imbalances this equation a bit. In a place where a vaccine will stop rampant spreading of a virus, then you could consider it a tight deadline - though in a place where it's mostly under control, the comparison doesn't hold as apples to apples.
- carbocation 13y ago
  How much time do you think doctors have to spend with each patient, and would you consider that a tight deadline? The time pressure on programmers due to business needs limits the amount of time they get to spend with their code, much like the time pressure on doctors due to business needs limits the amount of time they get to spend with each patient, researching the latest anti-vax theories, etc.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    The amount of time a doctor takes in a patient consultation has zero effect on the probability of vaccine injury (also, vaccinations are typically administered by nurses).
    - fecak 13y ago
      Is there a source for that? Someone in this thread mentioned things like egg allergies as a source for vaccine complications, and it isn't hard to imagine that increased consultation time (over no consultation at all) would result in better outcomes and fewer injuries.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        >Is there a source for that? What? No. Please explain how "increased consultation time (over no consultation at all) would result in better outcomes and fewer injuries."
        fecak 13y ago
        Ok. If I had an egg allergy and went to a doctor who simply decided to roll up my sleeve and stick me, I would likely have an adverse reaction. If the doctor took one minute to speak to me about any allergies, I'd likely not get stuck and have an adverse reaction (and I'd be given an alternate vaccine for those allergic). Is that pretty clear how a consultation would result in a better outcome and less injuries?
        loceng 13y ago
        A simple questionnaire a nurse could look over first - or anyone who's trained on what to look for.
        fecak 13y ago
        Whether or not you call that 'consultation time' is splitting hairs.
  - loceng 13y ago
    You're not diagnosing a patient for vaccines, that's really the point of them being given out to everyone - it's efficient, and at the cost of side-effects for those who might be more sensitive to them (whatever that means, and however that displays itself as).
  - fecak 13y ago
    When you ask how much time doctors 'have' to spend with each patient, I assume you are using have as in 'how much time do they possess' and not 'are required to spend'. Assuming you are using the former (mainly because there does not seem to be a mandated minimum), doctors have as much time as they want to spend with each patient. The problem is that it's less profitable to spend more than a few minutes, and it's even more profitable to pass off the responsibility of seeing patients to those that lack a doctor's credential (who earn less). The tight deadline you refer to is entirely self-imposed due to profit models.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      >The tight deadline you refer to is entirely self-imposed due to profit models. And/or a scarcity of doctors.
phy6 13y ago
Not the best analogy with the tight deadline, but I understand your stance. If I was asked to bet my career that my code would not kill or disfigure someone, then I'd have to answer based on what I personally believe, and what I trust my code to do based on my education as a software engineer. I could say, "yes this website will not kill you, but this drone software might under extremely rare circumstances."

loceng 13y ago

... adding "tight deadline" imbalances this equation a bit. In a place where a vaccine will stop rampant spreading of a virus, then you could consider it a tight deadline - though in a place where it's mostly under control, the comparison doesn't hold as apples to apples.

carbocation 13y ago
How much time do you think doctors have to spend with each patient, and would you consider that a tight deadline? The time pressure on programmers due to business needs limits the amount of time they get to spend with their code, much like the time pressure on doctors due to business needs limits the amount of time they get to spend with each patient, researching the latest anti-vax theories, etc.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  The amount of time a doctor takes in a patient consultation has zero effect on the probability of vaccine injury (also, vaccinations are typically administered by nurses).
  - fecak 13y ago
    Is there a source for that? Someone in this thread mentioned things like egg allergies as a source for vaccine complications, and it isn't hard to imagine that increased consultation time (over no consultation at all) would result in better outcomes and fewer injuries.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      >Is there a source for that? What? No. Please explain how "increased consultation time (over no consultation at all) would result in better outcomes and fewer injuries."
      - fecak 13y ago
        Ok. If I had an egg allergy and went to a doctor who simply decided to roll up my sleeve and stick me, I would likely have an adverse reaction. If the doctor took one minute to speak to me about any allergies, I'd likely not get stuck and have an adverse reaction (and I'd be given an alternate vaccine for those allergic). Is that pretty clear how a consultation would result in a better outcome and less injuries?
        loceng 13y ago
        A simple questionnaire a nurse could look over first - or anyone who's trained on what to look for.
        fecak 13y ago
        Whether or not you call that 'consultation time' is splitting hairs.
- loceng 13y ago
  You're not diagnosing a patient for vaccines, that's really the point of them being given out to everyone - it's efficient, and at the cost of side-effects for those who might be more sensitive to them (whatever that means, and however that displays itself as).
- fecak 13y ago
  When you ask how much time doctors 'have' to spend with each patient, I assume you are using have as in 'how much time do they possess' and not 'are required to spend'. Assuming you are using the former (mainly because there does not seem to be a mandated minimum), doctors have as much time as they want to spend with each patient. The problem is that it's less profitable to spend more than a few minutes, and it's even more profitable to pass off the responsibility of seeing patients to those that lack a doctor's credential (who earn less). The tight deadline you refer to is entirely self-imposed due to profit models.
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    >The tight deadline you refer to is entirely self-imposed due to profit models. And/or a scarcity of doctors.

phy6 13y ago

Not the best analogy with the tight deadline, but I understand your stance. If I was asked to bet my career that my code would not kill or disfigure someone, then I'd have to answer based on what I personally believe, and what I trust my code to do based on my education as a software engineer. I could say, "yes this website will not kill you, but this drone software might under extremely rare circumstances."