See the article on today's (8-25) G&B where a MEDICAL DOCTOR, well respected, said he is confused about why the Big 10 canceled football so soon? Is that one of the "doctors and nurses" you defer to, instead of Fox News? (Sorry for the attitude (I am one of your few supporters on here) but even my even-keeled, always upbeat daughter is getting depressed from this mess. And she is only a HS Frosh!)
Hey Wole!
- Thread starter rwenger
- Start date
If you are running a fever of 102.7 for three days, do you call an orthopedic surgeon? Vomiting for three days? Difficulty breathing for three days/? Do you call an orthopedic surgeon? Hearing loss? Vision loss? Do you call an orthopedic surgeon? Concerned you might have HIV? Do you call an orthopedic surgeon? Shame on Dinehart for giving the guy a pulpit and even more shame to Gold And Black for giving a room to house the pulpit. He is a heck of an orthopedic surgeon but I see nothing that makes him an expert on viruses anymore than an eye doctor or hearing doctor.
I dunno. Team Physician for 3 Major League Sports teams and director of US Center of Sports Medicine. Pretty impressive credentials.
Well, since neither optometrists nor audiologists are medical doctors, he would be more qualified to discuss viruses than them...
Fair enough. How about we look at the eye doctors at Midwest Eye Institute. They perform surgeries on people who have strokes in their eyes. They give shots in the eyes to people who need them (me being one of them), so yeah, these folks are just as qualified as an orthopedic surgeon. Orthopedic surgeon also would involve fractures and breaks and such. Show me where sports teams were having virus experts on their payroll in the past. As I said in my post, he is a heck of an orthopedic surgeon but not qualified to express an opinion as an expert on the virus. Agree to disagree all you want, does not change the fact that he is NOT an expert on viruses.
Denial of science...
I've advocated the analysis of data and information for some time, and it was dismissed. Now, a true scientist (a doctor) is attacked and dismissed.
There's an agenda being pushed, methinks...
I've advocated the analysis of data and information for some time, and it was dismissed. Now, a true scientist (a doctor) is attacked and dismissed.
There's an agenda being pushed, methinks...
Well there must be doctors out there that agree with this doctor because all of United States of America is playing football but the big 10.
The one who made the decision to cancel the season is he from the big 10 did he go to a big 10 school if not get rid of him now.
Well maybe that guy was different because this guy looks like hes trying to destroy the big 10
If high schools can play there's no reason why college Should cancel
He is a Medical Doctor, so yes, you could see him for an illness. He can order tests or write prescriptions in the state he is licensed in.
He knows more about viruses than 99.9999% of people on earth.
This is one of those instances where you are both correct. If you spend enough time around specialists you would realize they may be very bright in their area of specialization but you would not want them to treat you for something outside their area of specialization.
Case in point, I once had a fairly atypical fracture. It happened at night on a weekend so went to the emergency room not an orthopedic surgeon, ER doc looked at the film said just a severe bruise you can go back to playing full contact as soon as you feel ready. Next day radiologist looks at the x-ray and finds a break and determines that it needs to be pinned ASAP or it will be further displaced by muscle pulling on the bone. When I voiced some concern about how it happened to my orthopedic surgeon, he responded the ER doc is trained to save your life not identify sports injuries even though the break was pretty clear on the film albeit in a very odd location for the bone to break. So while they have the underlying training specialists tend to be very knowledgeable in what they do but become less and less of a generalist as time goes by. There are certainly exceptions, but I think most specialists would admit this is true.
Im talking specifically viruses and common medical knowledge.
EVERY Medical Doctor is well educated in the basics of medicine.
So this MD giving his Medical opinion on a virus carries more weight than 99.9999% of people on earth. That’s the point I’m making.
They learn it in medical school but it does not mean that it is relevant to their practice or they are an authority. It is like me saying that because I once took calculus I am an authority on calculus even though I have not used it in 25+ years. An orthopedic surgeon is not a virologist. Period full stop. But, by all means if you believe all doctors are equally expert on all matters medical, please promise me that you will see a dermatologist if you ever have a heart attack and not a cardiologist to prove your commitment to your belief.
Once again you are not getting the point.
As an Epidemiologist and Infectious Disease Director, I can tell you that MDs, even if in specialties, understand basic virology. The calculus example doesn’t jive because MDs still keep up on basic medical knowledge and use it, unlike you and calculus. Many MDs in specialties also do clinical hours once a week to keep up their practice. And yes, if I had a heart attack and fell over in front of a dermatologist I would have more faith in them than 99.9999% of people on earth to revive me with basic medical knowledge. You don’t need a cardiologist to get rescue breathing.
I don’t need to do anything you suggest above. I am perfectly content in my belief because I live it every day for the last 15 years.
Carry on.
I very clearly said that they have basic knowledge, but as someone who has been married to a cardiologist for 25+ years and who counts as one of his best friends an MD PHD who is a prominent oncology researcher, I am not relying on Grey's Anatomy on ABC. My point which you seem to be missing, is that you are both right. I agree that anyone who graduated medical school, passed their boards and is practicing knows more about medicine than a non-doctor and is qualified to speak about the practice of medicine. However, specialists are called specialists not generalists for a reason. Ergo, someone who treats infectious diseases is going to know more about viruses than a trauma surgeon. They just are, because that is how the system is designed to work. Just like in the non-medical world where you would not call a mason to unplug a drain, you would call a plumber even though they are both trades people. Nowhere did I say the orthopedic surgeon could not have an informed view point; I would just put more weight on someone who actually specializes in the relevant subject matter. Pretty sure that is not objectionable.
I emailed your response to my wife and her response verbatim was "He must be an academic or researcher. Other than a couple colleagues who volunteer at low income/free clinics, I do not know anybody with an established practice at a non-teaching hospital that has clinic hours. No specialist worth her salt is going to waste time pretending to be a GP; your value is your expertise. Ask him why malpractice insurance often has exclusions or limitations on coverage related to claims resulting from practice outside one's specialty."
no
You're over-thinking it.
This is one of the rare circumstances where NDAFArly is spot-on.
This is a dishonest analogy. The correct analogy would be something along the lines of you would not call a master electrician to fix my lamp socket, or you would not call a master welder to weld my mail box.
But you could, and they would get the job done.
my son went to 5 different qualified doctors in Southern Illinois for treatement of his leg. These were all highly respected doctors in their field. He finally went to a specialist at Barnes hospital in St louis who provided an accurate diagnosis. He will now never be able to compete competitively again. How can 5 doctors considered by many to know what they're doing and talking about be wrong?
I have a friend who broke his elbow as part of a fall. He was treated by 4 doctors before he saw a specialist in St louis who basically ripped out everything that was done and started over. He lost out on 3 months of work because of it.
one diagnosis by a competent doctor is not always correct.
We have seen 35 students expelled from Purdue because of their party habits. We have seen colleges start to close. . SEC schools say they will keep playing even if they lose half their team, or may have to postpone or cancel some games. That tells you where their priorities lie. Athletic facilities provided athletes a safe haven. But once the other students returned, the positive cases zoomed up exponentially. As I said before, unlike pro sports, you cannot expect college athletes to go to college and remain in their protective bubble. I applaud the college athletic departments for their actions, but at some point, you can't place every athlete in isolation fromthe rest of the campus.
COVID has hit our family. My son's coworker at his fitness training facility tested positive, and now the staff is quaranteened. I will be receiving a test on Friday. I went to an ice cream shop that was closed down 10 hours after my visit. in my short stay , I was the only one of about 50 customers wearing a mask. I'm a very high at risk person. My blood pressure shot up 20 points the following day. and now I've been placed on steriods. Thank you all you thoughtless and stupid people.
COVID is transmitted via the air, and it doesn't care if that air is outside or inside.
well that guy said it was ok. well he could be wrong.
I have a friend who broke his elbow as part of a fall. He was treated by 4 doctors before he saw a specialist in St louis who basically ripped out everything that was done and started over. He lost out on 3 months of work because of it.
one diagnosis by a competent doctor is not always correct.
We have seen 35 students expelled from Purdue because of their party habits. We have seen colleges start to close. . SEC schools say they will keep playing even if they lose half their team, or may have to postpone or cancel some games. That tells you where their priorities lie. Athletic facilities provided athletes a safe haven. But once the other students returned, the positive cases zoomed up exponentially. As I said before, unlike pro sports, you cannot expect college athletes to go to college and remain in their protective bubble. I applaud the college athletic departments for their actions, but at some point, you can't place every athlete in isolation fromthe rest of the campus.
COVID has hit our family. My son's coworker at his fitness training facility tested positive, and now the staff is quaranteened. I will be receiving a test on Friday. I went to an ice cream shop that was closed down 10 hours after my visit. in my short stay , I was the only one of about 50 customers wearing a mask. I'm a very high at risk person. My blood pressure shot up 20 points the following day. and now I've been placed on steriods. Thank you all you thoughtless and stupid people.
COVID is transmitted via the air, and it doesn't care if that air is outside or inside.
well that guy said it was ok. well he could be wrong.
I think this is a very valid question in a lot of minds and so I tried to actually see what courses were required and such. That said and I'm totally appreciative to be corrected. It appears that an epidemiologist has a MUCH greater understanding of specific statistical approaches in modeling the virus as well as a few courses in the medical arena...such as
- PM 418: Cardiovascular Epidemiology (3 credits)
- PM 424: Chronic Disease Epidemiology (3 credits)
- PM 442: Nutritional Epidemiology (3 credits)
- PM 451: Infectious Disease Epidemiology
One seems to understand how contageous it is and another may understand the effects on the body was infected better. At least that was my cursory view and by no means consider myself well informed in this comparison between the two "different" areas of strength.
Something that really hasn’t been talked about or mentioned that may have played on the minds of the BIG 10 presidents. What happens if an athlete becomes seriously ill and possibly dies and the family sued the school for negligence. Who pays that bill? The school? Or the school’s insurance? With health insurance what it is today, would this even be covered? Even for survivors, hospital health care can be very expensive. As they say, for everything you know, there are 1,000 other things you don’t.
How is that different from any other illness/disease/condition?
These kids play with CTE, PEDs, Hypertension, diabetes, obesity, etc..,
All things that are much more prevalent and deadly long term than Covid to these kids. There are hundreds of studies that show the long term negative heart outcomes of African American males who play college football from Diabetes, hypertension, obesity, etc.... The scientific evidence is indisputable. The negative outcomes of CTE is indisputable. The negative outcomes of PEDs is indisputable. Even the negative outcomes from influenza and secondary infections from influenza are indisputable. But I don’t see anything getting cancelled over any of those things or anybody talking about long term health concerns with any of those things?
Motor vehicle accidents is the leading cause of death from the ages 1-54. It’s 10,000 times more likely a 17-24 year old will die in a motor vehicle accident in their live than Covid. But nobody has stopped driving yet.
A lot of people with no medical or epidemiology background are making silly decisions based off of emotion, fear and politics.
Im at Riley Children’s Hospital in Indianapolis now. ALL the specialist here, (world recognized specialists) do clinical hours every week.
Inform your wife her response is an embarrassment to American Medicine and she is not qualified to say that. But I’m guessing you just made up that response because nobody in medicine would say what you claim she said.
Please stop talking about medicine when you are obviously not qualified to do so.
And please stop pretending your wife is telling you things no respected MD would say. You exposed yourself in this thread. Please move on. Thanks.
I probably should hire a PI to see where she has been going all these years and where she got the hospital ID badge.
If I am so crazy, you might want to take a gander at your medical malpractice policy. In the definitions or as an annex, I will bet there is a definition of the scope of your practice and if you track that definition through your policy you will see I am not some crazy old coot. Better yet, ask your colleagues how many of them have umbrella or excess liability policies and why they have them. The fact that such limitations exist is a reflection of the specialization system that is the backbone of modern medicine.
Second, I am sure you do not believe that members of your profession operate pill mills, engage in medicare/medicaid fraud, get sued for malpractice, leave surgical sponges in patients, operate on the wrong limb, etc. Your belief in the nobility of your profession is admirable. I would agree that most are worthy of such admiration, but between my wife, friends who are doctors and colleagues in the plaintiffs bar who specialize in med mal I know the real world is rather different. I know I am just some crazy old coot who is tilting at windmills, but the problem you have is that podcasts like Dr. Death, TV shows like Botched, etc. show that you have on rose colored glasses. It substantially undercuts your argument when the lowly hoi polloi like myself can see clear contrary evidence in pop culture.
I have no doubt there are doctors who are as studious and concerned about keeping up on developments generally as you describe. There are others like my wife who keep on top of everything that applies to her specialty but recognize her job is to be expert in her practice area. And, while you can toss your toys out of the pram and call my wife made up or imply she is a crappy doctor (I'd bet the house she'd eat your lunch, but I am just a lowly summa cum laude JD/MBA from a public ivy so what do I know), her view on specialization is fairly common. Google Dr. Bob Arnot's views on going to a GP versus going to a specialist; I am extremely confident that if he was just another crazy old coot like me, the lawyers at the various media outlets that present him as their medical corespondent would censor his view due to concerns of implied liability.
Again, you seem to be missing my point. It is not that they are incapable of doing it, they simply understand that specializations exist for a reason and you send the patient to the right person. Call me stupid, a fraud, whatever, but your world is not that different than mine. Could I handle an acquisition? I know the basics; I took business associations and securities regulations many moons ago. Would I handle an acquisition? Absent exigent circumstances, not a chance. My duty is to protect my client's interest and that is letting someone who is an expert handle their matter.
You clearly have the god complex down. Surprised you are not a surgeon in light of your clear belief the world rotates around you.
As a registered dumbA$$ in this area like almost ALL the population why can't you through your wife and @NDAFArly both have informed understandings and different outcomes based upon those understandings? Being "specialists" in different areas, why would we expect full 100% agreement where both are practicing medicine and based upon what we have seen over the last few months, why would we think those practicing medicine have a clear cut, only important view of the what should be done? If expertise in medical areas differ in what should happen, why would we think us lab rats would or even should agree?
If valid opinions, based upon "relevant," but differing expertise "areas" cannot agree (who is to say "What is the best relevant knowledge based upon this thing, people are still trying to discern, without a clear winner?) on what should happen next?
Does it then make sense that with valid, but different opinions of those with various expertise that embraces valid, but different understandings to decide on a given, obviously detrimental distruction (shutting down) economically and any tangential health issues over a valid but speculative thought on what the future "could" hold for so many if not shut down? Do we see these differences as an overt view of each person's risk averse take, not just here, but across the country?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Edey Combine Grade A , 1st Round Coming Baby!!!!!- Latest: Bleedinggoldandblack
-
-
-
