Comments on: My take: Preventive medicine, Rhode Island, C-sections http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html medical blog Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:35:28 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html/comment-page-1#comment-83684 Anonymous Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:28:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode-island-c-sections.html#comment-83684 Kevin, in your reference to the "latest verdicts", only one was cited, and there's no evidence the physician's career was ruined or that his/her insurance did not cover it, or that they even have paid anything. You're not doing a very good job supporting your claims. Perhaps that's because the facts aren't there for your one trick pony of malpractice claimants are the world's greatest evil? Kevin, in your reference to the “latest verdicts”, only one was cited, and there’s no evidence the physician’s career was ruined or that his/her insurance did not cover it, or that they even have paid anything. You’re not doing a very good job supporting your claims. Perhaps that’s because the facts aren’t there for your one trick pony of malpractice claimants are the world’s greatest evil?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html/comment-page-1#comment-83632 Anonymous Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:17:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode-island-c-sections.html#comment-83632 Anon 10:26 - isn't it a great argument? Just say that doctors are morons, and you've made your point! <br/>I wonder if they looked at c-section rates by state and mother's age. From what I remember, women in MA are the oldest in the nation when they get married. It would make sense that women in MA would be having kids later in life as compared to other states.<br/>My husband is a OB training in MA. He tells me his patients have never been older. It's amazing how many people are willing to go through fertility treatments and get pregnant at, say 48. Also, excellent hospitals in the Boston area attract a lot of higher-risk patients from New Hampshire, and even Maine (those are at higher risk of having a c-section to begin with). Anon 10:26 – isn’t it a great argument? Just say that doctors are morons, and you’ve made your point!
I wonder if they looked at c-section rates by state and mother’s age. From what I remember, women in MA are the oldest in the nation when they get married. It would make sense that women in MA would be having kids later in life as compared to other states.
My husband is a OB training in MA. He tells me his patients have never been older. It’s amazing how many people are willing to go through fertility treatments and get pregnant at, say 48. Also, excellent hospitals in the Boston area attract a lot of higher-risk patients from New Hampshire, and even Maine (those are at higher risk of having a c-section to begin with).

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html/comment-page-1#comment-83613 Anonymous Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:26:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode-island-c-sections.html#comment-83613 Doctors are self-absorbed, opinionated morons. C-section rates have been rising in all states, including those that imposed liability caps. Indeed, they've been jumping just as fast in states like TX with caps as those without, like PA. If there were truly a obvious relationship between c-section and liability fear, you'd expect at least a lower rate of increase in the capped states.<br/><br/>The reasons for c-sections go to the way docs are compensated and trained, U.S. doctors have a culture of intervention that leads to useless and invasive procedures.<br/><br/>Why do you think midwifery has grown so much in the last 20 years? They're from a different treatment culture: one that is perhaps better suited for those desiring natural childbirth Doctors are self-absorbed, opinionated morons. C-section rates have been rising in all states, including those that imposed liability caps. Indeed, they’ve been jumping just as fast in states like TX with caps as those without, like PA. If there were truly a obvious relationship between c-section and liability fear, you’d expect at least a lower rate of increase in the capped states.

The reasons for c-sections go to the way docs are compensated and trained, U.S. doctors have a culture of intervention that leads to useless and invasive procedures.

Why do you think midwifery has grown so much in the last 20 years? They’re from a different treatment culture: one that is perhaps better suited for those desiring natural childbirth

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html/comment-page-1#comment-83608 Anonymous Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:13:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode-island-c-sections.html#comment-83608 Love change in style with the talking points, Kevin. Keep it up. Love change in style with the talking points, Kevin. Keep it up.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode.html/comment-page-1#comment-83607 Anonymous Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:11:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2008/02/my-take-preventive-medicine-rhode-island-c-sections.html#comment-83607 Actually C section rates have been rising for quite a long time. When I sat on med exec committees in the late 90's and early 20's, the ideal rate was somewhere below 20%. We were running around 26% at the time and tried everything possible to lower it. Now I think everyone has just given up - the pressures from the patients and litigators are just irresistible. I am not an OB, but would be interested in the clinical risk/benefit analysis of allowing the rate to rise so. Actually C section rates have been rising for quite a long time. When I sat on med exec committees in the late 90’s and early 20’s, the ideal rate was somewhere below 20%. We were running around 26% at the time and tried everything possible to lower it. Now I think everyone has just given up – the pressures from the patients and litigators are just irresistible. I am not an OB, but would be interested in the clinical risk/benefit analysis of allowing the rate to rise so.

]]>