tetramer

4 ms·

1.
by tetramer 3y ago
Sure. As I stated in my original comment, I'm excited about CGMs being widely available. The example in my comment was very specifically answering "why do doctors perform unnecessary interventions?".
2.
by tetramer 3y ago
You don't know if it's a false positive or not until you do further interventions. Realizing it's unnecessary is only evident in hindsight. E.g. CT scan shows an incidental, tiny lung nodule. You do a biopsy. Unfortunately, d
3.
by tetramer 3y ago
The standard of care in the US is immunohistochemistry (IHC), with FISH testing in equivocal cases so not really ELISA based. HER2 testing is done on all breast cancers as it affects treatment choices though the majority of breast cancers a
4.
by tetramer 3y ago
You're right that benefits of screening vary widely depending on type of cancer, type of test, and even a patients own co-morbidities. However, there are a lot of inaccuracies in this comment. False positives on a screening test are ba
5.
by tetramer 3y ago
It also only looks at HER2 and CA15-3 (aka MUC1) expression - what about breast cancers that don't express either of these? I realize this is an early technology and I think it should continue to be explored, but I would anticipate tha
6.
by tetramer 3y ago
...thanks but I'm a real human (and oncologist).
7.
by tetramer 3y ago
Hey friend, I'm so sorry you're going through that and I wish you the best of luck in your journey. I would argue though that it's not rocket science...currently, it's a lot harder with many more unknowns. Some of the is
8.
by tetramer 3y ago
The general public definitely doesn't have a great understanding of the word "cancer." Patients often don't know that prostate cancer is not the same as lung cancer is not the same as colon cancer, etc. And unfortunately
9.
by tetramer 3y ago
I see neurodivergent individuals (or at least, significantly neurodivergent that a more individualized approach is needed) relatively rarely in my field of work (adult oncology, where the average patient is much older and has often had sign
10.
by tetramer 3y ago
I'll finish up my fellowship this summer and it will have been a solid 10 years from when I started medical school. The vast majority of people have no idea what goes into medical training (even my own parents remain confused) - and th
11.
by tetramer 3y ago
As you've said, the human body is complex. We don't always know what's wrong - of course we do our best with the tests we have, but often we're ruling things out and are left without a clear answer. When I try to tell pa
12.
by tetramer 3y ago
That's fair, this definitely may be a functional cure for many people and that's absolutely something to be celebrated. The language around "cure" is complicated in general. We often use it in diseases like cancer but wi
13.
by tetramer 3y ago
Realistically, this treatment is not going to be available in places with a high prevalence of malaria for a long time, so I don't think this is too much of a concern.
14.
by tetramer 3y ago
CRISPR is definitely an awesome technology, and I'm glad that after many decades of research, we're finally getting approved treatments as a result. That being said, I do want to clarify that this isn't a "cure" for
15.
by tetramer 3y ago
No, this treatment would not - it does not act by "fixing" hemoglobin S (which causes sickle cell disease), but rather increasing production of hemoglobin F (fetal hemoglobin).
16.
by tetramer 3y ago
The truth is, in medicine, we often fall into a trap of treating a number rather than the patient, and Vitamin D abnormalities are a classic example of this. It's well known that by our current reference ranges, the vast majority of hu