Comments on: Dr. Steven Nissen: "The Michael Moore of the medical industry" http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-michael-moore-of.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:04:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-michael-moore-of.html#comment-75425 Anonymous Thu, 24 May 2007 23:20:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-the-michael-moore-of-the-medical-industry.html#comment-75425 Quite frankly, I am entirely unimpressed by Nissen's paper. And to be honest I find the Michael Moore comparison somewhat apt. The two large studies showed no significant change in risk; it came almost entirely from the pooled "small studies" and I find it unconvincing.<br/><br/>What gets me about it is that the 2009 trial will end the debate on the subject, so it's hardly as if the topic is being ignored and he needed to draw attention to it. All this paper did was draw attention to him while doing virtually nothing to actually answer the question of whether avandia is a cardiac risk. Quite frankly, I am entirely unimpressed by Nissen’s paper. And to be honest I find the Michael Moore comparison somewhat apt. The two large studies showed no significant change in risk; it came almost entirely from the pooled “small studies” and I find it unconvincing.

What gets me about it is that the 2009 trial will end the debate on the subject, so it’s hardly as if the topic is being ignored and he needed to draw attention to it. All this paper did was draw attention to him while doing virtually nothing to actually answer the question of whether avandia is a cardiac risk.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-michael-moore-of.html#comment-75423 Anonymous Thu, 24 May 2007 22:09:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-the-michael-moore-of-the-medical-industry.html#comment-75423 I don't know why you would be such an advocate indy since if the feds took over, high paying fields like urology would be the ones with the highest decrease in reimbursement. They can't cut into primary care that much more after all. I don’t know why you would be such an advocate indy since if the feds took over, high paying fields like urology would be the ones with the highest decrease in reimbursement. They can’t cut into primary care that much more after all.

]]> By: The Independent Urologisthttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-michael-moore-of.html#comment-75417 The Independent Urologist Thu, 24 May 2007 19:58:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/05/dr-steven-nissen-the-michael-moore-of-the-medical-industry.html#comment-75417 Like most people out of training/med school, my belief--stronlgy held--was that of the superiority of the US heath care system and was taught that single payor, universal health was actually a commie--pinko plot. 7 years later and well into practice, my personal experience and via the observation of others have proven the exact opposite of this rhetoric. The majority of people--including physicians--whether they know it or not, would benefit from meaningful health care reform and a single payor, federally funded system. It'll never happen, and aside from my rants on Kevin's excellent forum, there is nothing I can do about it.<br/>Thanks for the platform, Kevin. Like most people out of training/med school, my belief–stronlgy held–was that of the superiority of the US heath care system and was taught that single payor, universal health was actually a commie–pinko plot. 7 years later and well into practice, my personal experience and via the observation of others have proven the exact opposite of this rhetoric. The majority of people–including physicians–whether they know it or not, would benefit from meaningful health care reform and a single payor, federally funded system. It’ll never happen, and aside from my rants on Kevin’s excellent forum, there is nothing I can do about it.
Thanks for the platform, Kevin.

]]>