- Joined
- Jul 12, 2010
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 2
Just about everyone knows that surgery works. However, I was wondering how surgery can ever be rigorously tested under double-blind conditions, without any sort of experimenter's bias, considering that the surgeon would always know that he or she is performing a "fake" surgery? Has surgery ever been truly "proven" in solid scientific studies or is it just an accepted medical reality?
How much of medicine is "proven"? How much of medicine is evidence-based medicine? How much of evidence-based medicine is driven more by political and economic factors, than compassionate and scientific care?
I was just curious more than anything else because it recently hit me that some are skeptical of some of the musculoskeletal benefits of OMT, but the same people are not skeptical of other aspects of medicine that "works because it does," rather than works because the vast majority of research says. I'm asking, rather than accusing.
As a pre-med that will be applying to MD and DO schools, I really just want to know about some these issues that I brought up and was hoping some of you med students could provide insight.
How much of medicine is "proven"? How much of medicine is evidence-based medicine? How much of evidence-based medicine is driven more by political and economic factors, than compassionate and scientific care?
I was just curious more than anything else because it recently hit me that some are skeptical of some of the musculoskeletal benefits of OMT, but the same people are not skeptical of other aspects of medicine that "works because it does," rather than works because the vast majority of research says. I'm asking, rather than accusing.
As a pre-med that will be applying to MD and DO schools, I really just want to know about some these issues that I brought up and was hoping some of you med students could provide insight.