I had the pleasure of attending this event yesterday. I was hoping to hear some ground breaking discussions on new and unique treatments. Being a chiropractor I am always looking at how integrative medicine will grow in the future. After a great discussion by the renowned oncologist, Dr. Barry Boyd, the rest of the day kind of limped along, almost with a certain amount of politically correct behavior. I thought Yale would really wrap their mighty arms around this topic and look for answers, or better yet, look for new avenues of thought. But no, that was not the case. There was a smattering of mind body talk, some eastern medicine and nutrition, but nobody, except for Dr. David Katz, really addressed the topic. To make matters worse, Dr. Steven Novella, the self proclaimed defender of science based medicine, (and what is that exactly?) sat on a panel discussion to defend his miopic stance on the science and plausibility medicine. On counterpoint was Dr. David Katz, who had to remind Dr. Novella that as a physician, we treat patients who happen to have some symptoms, not symptoms that happen to appear on some patients. Also Dr. Boyd asked the question of whether or not there was any value to “healing touch” being administered to patients in a hospital, Dr. Novella stated that there is no science to it, therefore it should not be allowed, Dr. Katz was for it, and so was Dr. Boyd. I think Dr. Novella’s expertise is best used in lab, removed from humans and the conditions they suffer from.
Welcome back doc!
Comment by bertster — March 6th, 2010 @ 1:03 pm
Science based medicine is simply put medicine that is supported by legitimate clinical studies. The use of the scientific method, critical thinking and skepticism are the backbone of science based medicine. Sadly, many people don’t understand the difference between medicine that is substantiated with legitimate science vs. fraud or self deception.
Comment by Frank — March 9th, 2010 @ 5:09 pm
The reality is until eastern and western medicine enter into a symbiotic agreement, healthcare will remain segmented as it is the mainstream it is today. We have to as patients act as our own health cars advocates and step outside our comfort zone box to experience any of the alternative treatments today that are not dictated by insurance companies, or the government with the toxic medications we are all prescribed. Once that happens we will all be feeling better both inside and out.
Comment by Lisa Topham — March 16th, 2010 @ 8:51 pm
Dear Frank,
Thank you for your comment. With an email address that contains the phrase “nanotech” I can only imagine how scientific you are. I agree that critical thinking and skepticism belong in medicine, but so does the art of healing and an understanding of the human condition. Many drugs are used these days in an “off label” manner, going beyond what evidence suggests, meaning, people thinking out of the box, beyond RCT’s, beyond what makes sense. Our patients have emotions, inconsistencies and don’t always behave the way data suggests they should. There is definitely fraud and self deception out there, but there is also hope, kindness and so many anecdotes of that special doctor that went the extra yard………..We as health care givers need to treat people, with respect to data and evidence, but not be blinded by it.
Comment by Brian Nathanson — March 16th, 2010 @ 11:02 pm
Dr. Nathanson,
Re: Your response to Frank
Doctors who use drugs “off label” are most certainly NOT doing so “beyond what evidence suggests.” Doctors use drugs to help patients based on their experience and the information available. What is not always necessary is a full FDA-appoved clinical trial (hence the “off-label” tag) to prove efficacy for a particular use.
You say you don’t support cyber-bashing and yet you write to Frank “…I can only imagine how scientific you are.” He wrote you a reasonable letter and you responded with sarcasm.
And calling the Georgetown-educated, Yale neurologist, Dr. Novella “mypopic” and suggesting he stop practicing clinical medicine also sounds a bit out of line. Do you think all docs with whom you disagree should stop practicing?
And did you publish a portion of Frank’s email address? Was this meant to intimidate him or merely discredit him, or both. It states here that email addresses “will not be published.”
Good to see you back, Doc!
Comment by Ken (former res) — March 25th, 2010 @ 1:22 pm
Funny, I took some time from blogging for persona l reasons, during my absence the CT Post contacted me and wanted me to spice things up a bit, so my first real post back was a bit spicier than I usually am.
Using drugs off label, is not “evidence based”, which is a trend where WE all are going. Including you Ken. Performing procedures based on your own evidence is showing creativity, and free thought. Listening to Dr. Novella that day, he would not approve of such measures. Yes he is extremely well educated, employed at one the top institutions in the world, obviously on the top of his profession, but I am concerned at his rigid adherence to science. No compassion for the human spirit. Years ago I had a neighbor who was a pathologist, loved medicine, loved science, hated talking to people. They were messy and a pain in the neck to him. They got in the way of his science. So he knew where he belonged and I’m sure he has done some great things over the years. Through creativity and free thought comes innovation.
I truly did not publish only a piece of Frank’s email address to intimidate, only to underscore his passion to science. I apologize for that and will not breach that confidence again. But on the topic of Frank’s post he said “Sadly, many people don’t understand the difference between medicine that is substantiated with legitimate science vs. fraud or self deception.” This is a large statement. Yes we have “standards” for measuring legitmate science, but unfortunately even those get tainted. It was discussed at Yale that day. How often does big pharm sponsor a trial, and then spin it to fit their needs or worse yet, bury it. There is definitely fraud in our world of health care, snake oil abounds in all types of practices, self deception is a funny one, it reminds of placebo effects. A study just came out, I can’t find it at this moment, it came through reuters health line. It actually found that patients were more likely to get side effects of a medication if they actually knew what they were. I’ll have to look it up I just can’t find it at this moment.
So Ken, thanks for giving me your actual name, I have your email address, it will remain sacred. I would like to continue to discuss issues with you without any verbal jousting. You and I are really on the same team. I welcome your insights and experience. Together we can make a difference. Isn’t that why we ran up these huge student loans? Talk to you soon.
Comment by Brian Nathanson — March 25th, 2010 @ 2:12 pm