Re: Scientific Medicine? Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Tell me another good one. :)

From: Steve Harris sbharris_at_ROMAN9.netcom.com (sbharris_at_ix.netcom.com)
Date: 10/17/04 

Date: 16 Oct 2004 20:22:51 -0700

davidvio@gmail.com (Wolfbrother) wrote in message news:<c8d91119.0410161404.57bd1b8@posting.google.com>...
> johngohde@naturalhealthperspective.com (N-H-P) wrote in message news:<16a9b594.0410160331.4c909285@posting.google.com>...
> > Here is another small step for me and a giant leap for mankind in my
> > attempt to rise above fat farm threads.
> >
> > The topic of this thread is Biomedicine, NOT alternative medicine or
> > CAM.
> > http://www.halexandria.org/dward048.htm
> >
> > The simple question is this. If Biomedicine is so scientific, then
> > why are iatrogenic deaths in the United States NOT listed in the
> > official governmental death statistics? Why is there a coverup of
> > iatrogenic deaths?
> >
> > There have been plenty of published research on iatrogenic deaths in
> > journals like JAMA. JAMA puts iatrogenic deaths in the top 10 causes
> > of death in the United States, if not the third leading cause of
> > death.
> >
> > These studies repeatedly show that iatrogenic deaths are both real and
> > significant. Still, they are totally ignored in the offical death
> > statistics.
> >
> > So, why the coverup dear science bigots?
>
> Umm do you even have to ask? There is nothing unusual at all about
> this. This is what you call self regulation. Similar to just about
> every other area of industry and government. If you committed murder
> would you turn yourself in? All one needs is a decent grasp of human
> nature and some intelligence to begin understanding the realities of
> what really goes on in this world

COMMENT:

This whole thing is precious. Here you are going on about the problems
of self-regulation, in response to some funny statistics about
medicine from something some doctors published in the Journal of the
American Medical Association. Shhhhh. Keep it down, okay?

Okay, if this is just between us. This whole think has been debated to
death. In case you weren't in on it, there is no way to tell how many
deaths there are from iatrogenic mistakes, because the group with the
mistakes was never compared against a similarly ill group who had no
mistakes. So we have no way to figure out the pure effect of the
mistakes.

Hospitals are often where people go to die, you know. And I have more
news: the mortality rate for being human is 100%, even if your doctors
never screw up even once. So a control group is needed badly.

SBH

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scientific Medicine? Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Tell me another good one. :)
    ... >> attempt to rise above fat farm threads. ... >> why are iatrogenic deaths in the United States NOT listed in the ... deaths there are from iatrogenic mistakes, ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)
  • Re: Interesting Read about "Big Pharm"
    ... when you add the cancer deaths to the deaths caused directly ... by the prescribing of poisonus materials termed "medicines", ... 250,000 iatrogenic deaths added to the ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: 34,000 a year killed by hospital blunders.
    ... >>>deaths in the NHS in 12 months. ... The report says that many mistaken deaths ... >by negligence, incompetence, simple mistakes - and even by murder. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: 34,000 a year killed by hospital blunders.
    ... >>> What are mistaken deaths? ... >>by negligence, incompetence, simple mistakes - and even by murder. ... I am saying that there are many deaths that occur within the NHS that have ... mistake, negligence, etc - this is still a much higher figure than police ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: 34,000 a year killed by hospital blunders.
    ... A recent case of a doctor doing just that shows it is ... The report says that many mistaken deaths ... by negligence, incompetence, simple mistakes - and even by murder. ...
    (uk.legal)