Comments on: Medicine and luck http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:46:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Criminallopathhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67233 Criminallopath Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:45:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67233 The problem is the lax enforcement of the rules of evidence governing expert testimony when it comes to application to clinicians. This serves them well in PI cases in which they can parrot, with the claim of authority, the history provided to them by their ltigant/plaintiff. It works against them when other junk science clinicians use the same unscientific correlations and anecdotes and peddle it as causation in medical malpractice cases. The rigorous application of the tenets of Daubert or any of its progeny would invalidate clinical causation testimony on almost every case except for those in which a signiture diagnosis was present based on objective measures (poking the patient in the rear and asking them if it hurts is by no means objective)and in which the exposure level of the particular injurious factor could be determined. One wonders what the potential error rate is in relying on a litigant regarding the source of their subjective complaints and utilizing purely subjective orthopaedic/neruological testing when it comes to determining the cause of an objective structural injury? The problem is the lax enforcement of the rules of evidence governing expert testimony when it comes to application to clinicians. This serves them well in PI cases in which they can parrot, with the claim of authority, the history provided to them by their ltigant/plaintiff. It works against them when other junk science clinicians use the same unscientific correlations and anecdotes and peddle it as causation in medical malpractice cases. The rigorous application of the tenets of Daubert or any of its progeny would invalidate clinical causation testimony on almost every case except for those in which a signiture diagnosis was present based on objective measures (poking the patient in the rear and asking them if it hurts is by no means objective)and in which the exposure level of the particular injurious factor could be determined. One wonders what the potential error rate is in relying on a litigant regarding the source of their subjective complaints and utilizing purely subjective orthopaedic/neruological testing when it comes to determining the cause of an objective structural injury?

]]> By: CJDhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67223 CJD Wed, 20 Sep 2006 02:55:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67223 "a bad infant outcome is always blamed on the obstetrician,"<br/><br/>It is? Every one? Really?<br/><br/>Is the truth just not something you guys are interested in anymore? “a bad infant outcome is always blamed on the obstetrician,”

It is? Every one? Really?

Is the truth just not something you guys are interested in anymore?

]]> By: lawyersuxhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67216 lawyersux Tue, 19 Sep 2006 19:39:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2006/09/medicine-and-luck.html#comment-67216 It is the obstetricians fault. 100% of Births in the US should be by C-section. Women should be forced to travel to anopther country if they want a natural vaginal delivery. Why should an obstetrician risk anything when the outcome if a "bad baby" is born is so profitable for lawyers? Then again, anyone who goes into OB-GYN these days is either naive or has a serious gambling and risk-taking problem. The local slimeball sodomite just made 1.5 million dollars on the latest CP case. Without a Trial! Don't just give money away like that. Slice and dice! It is the obstetricians fault. 100% of Births in the US should be by C-section. Women should be forced to travel to anopther country if they want a natural vaginal delivery. Why should an obstetrician risk anything when the outcome if a “bad baby” is born is so profitable for lawyers? Then again, anyone who goes into OB-GYN these days is either naive or has a serious gambling and risk-taking problem. The local slimeball sodomite just made 1.5 million dollars on the latest CP case. Without a Trial! Don’t just give money away like that. Slice and dice!

]]>