Why do people think they know more than doctors?

[jl lin]

My younger sister couldn't be breastfed because my mom was on chemo for breast cancer at the time. But my sister is fine. It's not like she has severe immune deficiencies because she was fed formula.

Yes, that is one of the tiny % obviously.

We have neonates that are so critically ill, when the child can get off of TPN, we will use the mom's pumped breast milk and fortifiers through feeding tubes. There are moms that have so much breast milk, they have to give it away. And it's a shame, b/c all they want to do is hold their babies and nurse them. So there are definitely situations where breastfeeding cannot occur; but my point stands. Most women indeed can breastfeed, and more would be successful if they get over the learning/tolerance curve.
Please don't misconstrue my point/s.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DokterMom]

This is where the problem lies. You're basically saying that if you go to a doctor and he doesn't tell you what you want to hear you'll look online for sources that confirm your preconceived notions and the follow that instead regardless of if there is any or abundance of proof on the contrary. Do you bother searching if whether what the doctor told you is correct? Did you even ask him to clarify his reasoning. Sometimes we don't have the time to sit down with every patient and spend 30 minutes telling them what and why are thought processes are. Mostly it just doesn't pop into our heads to do so but if you ask most will try to explain it to you. I'm not saying doctors are infallible and with all the recent news of doctors prescribing/performing unnecessary stuff to make money definitely makes us look bad but a majority of us aren't in it to harm or belittle our patients. We just have a million things going on in our heads at the same time.

Please note that I was not talking specifically about me or even specifically about Doctors, but rather about human nature and ordinary human responses to being told to do things that for one reason or another, we don't want to do. That was my whole point. Being told to do something by someone who appears to consider us idiotic engenders resistance and defensiveness; it just does.

My suggestion to have an NP and/or nutritionist talk to the patient was an attempt to build a connection to the mother on a level she could relate to and trust. That provider could still dispense science-grounded intelligent advise -- just without making the patient defensive in the process.

I mean, I'm not saying we shouldn't "disassemble the bad ideas", just that there's a better way to go about it than saying "you're stupid, you don't know what you're doing, you're killing your child". Doing that just makes people defensive.

This exactly --

I have a story that might show things from the other side. One day in clinic, I saw a baby--4 months old, I think, and this was her first check since her newborn check. Mother had decided not to breastfeed, and dad was super suspicious of formula, so found a recipe online for goat's milk formula. Now, there are multiple things in the literature about feeding infants goat's milk, mostly surrounding the electrolyte content and lack of folate. But, the recipe this father was using seemed to address those concerns. I thought it was strange, but went and spoke with my attending, who freaked out as soon as 'goat's milk' was mentioned and demanded that we get electrolyte levels and CBC in the child, and recommend switching to regular formula, etc, etc.

Infant got her labs, and they were all normal. They never returned to our clinic.

Now, if I had been working with a different attending (who I actually showed the recipe to and has an interest in integrative medicine), the conversation likely would have been very different and much more reassuring, and we might've actually seen this child again. We would have been able to vaccinate her and make sure the choices her father was making weren't harming her, and instead she dropped out of the healthcare system (as far as I know, at least). How the information is presented to the parents is important in determining whether or not they will actually follow-through on our recommendations.

A perfect illustration. My point is that it's more important to be effective than to be right --

• that you can't effectively use science-based arguments to persuade someone who's distrustful of science,
  
• or religious arguments to change an atheist's mind,
  
• that you can't use authoritarian tactics to gain compliance from someone who is anti-authoritarian, and
  
• that you can't use 'everybody does it' tactics to convince someone with 'special snowflake complex'

Get the necessary information across in the 'language' the patient understands --

 

[jl lin]

Please not that I was not talking specifically about me or even specifically about Doctors, but rather about human nature and ordinary human responses to being told to do things that for one reason or another, we don't want to do. That was my whole point. Being told to do something be someone who appears to consider us idiotic engenders resistance and defensiveness; it just does.

My suggestion to have an NP and/or nutritionist talk to the patient was an attempt to build a connection to the mother on a level she could relate to and trust. That provider could still dispense science-grounded intelligent advise -- just without making the patient defensive in the process.



This exactly --



A perfect illustration. My point is that it's more important to be effective than to be right --

• that you can't effectively use science-based arguments to persuade someone who's distrustful of science,
  
• or religious arguments to change an atheist's mind,
  
• that you can't use authoritarian tactics to gain compliance from someone who is anti-authoritarian, and
  
• that you can't use 'everybody does it' tactics to convince someone with 'special snowflake complex'

Get the necessary information across in the 'language' the patient understands --

Precisely. Excellent points.

 

[deleted407021]

Yeah I understand, but I think there can be a middle ground, like we can recognize that people think that way for valid reasons, while still maintaining that that thinking is dangerous, if that makes sense.

Their reasons are very often invalid. "That vaccine will make my kid autistic!" etc., etc., are invalid reasons.

 

[Lannister]

Their reasons are very often invalid. "That vaccine will make my kid autistic!" etc., etc., are invalid reasons.

I guess valid wasn't the right word. Their opinions might not be scientifically correct, but they arrive at those opinions based on reasons that make sense to them. Being scared for the health of your child is completely reasonable.

 

[piii]

Second, there's more of a shift from paternalistic medicine to where patient and provider are collaborating together in decision making. However, the downside of this is we're now too far on the other side where medical decision making is completely left to the patient or family member, who often barely completed high school and have no understanding of medical science at all. They may hear or read a few things here or there and base their decision on that. So is it so shocking that letting poorly informed people make decisions about things they don't know result in overall poor choices and bad outcomes? Do you tell the mechanic how to fix your car when you have no idea about anything car related?

Uh.. There's s little thing called medical ethics and morality that factors into why there has been a shift in this direction. It involves not letting physicians have to power to abuse patient autonomy, which, believe it or not, is more important than patients making poor decisions - free will and all that.. One would argue that we need to better educate and inform these patients, not go back to paternal roles. It is nothing trivial like your mechanic analogy.

 

[Cotterpin]

Please note that I was not talking specifically about me or even specifically about Doctors, but rather about human nature and ordinary human responses to being told to do things that for one reason or another, we don't want to do. That was my whole point. Being told to do something by someone who appears to consider us idiotic engenders resistance and defensiveness; it just does.

My suggestion to have an NP and/or nutritionist talk to the patient was an attempt to build a connection to the mother on a level she could relate to and trust. That provider could still dispense science-grounded intelligent advise -- just without making the patient defensive in the process.



This exactly --



A perfect illustration. My point is that it's more important to be effective than to be right --

• that you can't effectively use science-based arguments to persuade someone who's distrustful of science,
  
• or religious arguments to change an atheist's mind,
  
• that you can't use authoritarian tactics to gain compliance from someone who is anti-authoritarian, and
  
• that you can't use 'everybody does it' tactics to convince someone with 'special snowflake complex'

Get the necessary information across in the 'language' the patient understands --

I love everything about this post. We are totally on the same page.

 

[deleted407021]

I guess valid wasn't the right word. Their opinions might not be scientifically correct, but they arrive at those opinions based on reasons that make sense to them. Being scared for the health of your child is completely reasonable.

It doesn't matter if it makes sense to them, yet doesn't comport with reality, as we understand it. This is how our kids get hurt, our climate goes to crap and our teachers illegally push creationism in their classroom, etc. etc.

Also, I doubt a mom with the Internet has stumbled upon anything profound that doctors are unaware of.

 

[Citygirl44]

I don't want to change the topic and start another conversation. I know some people are touchy about this subject. But that is also why it is important to try to recruit doctors with diversity. Some things that may seem " strange or unreasonable" to some doctors, may not seem strange at all to others that may be more familiar with certain customs/ ways of clients from certain communities. Doesn't make one person wrong or right, it is what it is. For instance if a person is diabetic and needs to cut carbs you can't just tell them to stop eating so much rice. Rice is a staple in the diet of many cultures so that may not work for them. You, as the doctor, have to figure out a plan then that can work for them ( maybe they can have it only once a day and no toast with breakfast and a salad instead of a sandwich for lunch) . You understand the point that I'm trying to make ( don't want to debate my example , lol). Point is Doctors also need to be open minded and adapt to their " clients" whenever medically possible. Just because people do things differently, doesn't make them stupid or unreasonable. Sorry, wanted to get they out.

 

[Citygirl44]

I would also advise future doctors to be very careful of their attitude and how they "come across" to their patients. If you are going to be inflexible and insensitive to your patient's ideas, beliefs and opinions about how they would like their health managed, there are nurse practitioner practices that will gladly take your patients off of your hands. Just saying. Now I'm going to watch football. Take care everyone.

 

[Gandyy]

The sad thing is that science is literally the closest you are going to get to the "absolute truth" of anything, yet the public mistrusts it due to some misplaced sense of "conspiracy."

I blame the media. (mostly Fox news )

Ok, on a more serious note, I think as a physician you should definitely take into account the patient's needs and concerns, but at the end of they day, if someone is anti-science, they are just that.

Plus, from what I've seen in my clinical experiences thus far, I really dont think most patients are like this. Just a small percentage that you cant really do much about. Every doctor has a few of those patients.

 

[Hospitalized]

An acquaintance of my wife has a 4 month old baby. Doctors recommend babies are bottle or formula fed until they are one year old. She doesn't breastfeed and and won't give her baby formula because "it's just corn syrup" (obviously she's not the brightest bulb in the box)

This made me think of countless other times when people believe old wives tales, the internet, their friends or complete strangers over what a qualified physician says. Why? Is it a communication or trust issue? I just don't get it. How can I get my patients to follow my recommendations?

Bolded portion is absolutely incorrect. Not sure where you are getting this information.

 

[Cotterpin]

The sad thing is that science is literally the closest you are going to get to the "absolute truth" of anything, yet the public mistrusts it due to some misplaced sense of "conspiracy."

I blame the media. (mostly Fox news )

I think the big problem with the public perception of science boils down to it just being hard to understand. Most people just don't get science. It's pretty natural for people to not trust things they don't understand. And then some of them fill in the gaps in their knowledge with the conspiracy stuff.

 

[Citygirl44]

It kind of bothers me that so many intelligent, well-educated people are so judgemental of the vast majority of Americans who have less natural intelligence and perhaps did not have access to as good of an education as they did. This woman is doing what she thinks is best for her son, just like people who don't vaccinate their kids are doing what they think is best for their kids. They're just scared and misinformed, they're not purposely trying to harm anyone, so why are we so aggressive towards them? If we treat them like they're stupid and evil then we're probably just going to push them to keep mistrusting doctors. We'd have more success getting them to listen to their doctors if we are understanding and listen to their fears and don't judge them so harshly.

Let me first say,I'm totally in favor of giving children vaccines. But why are people regarded as being unreasonable if they are skeptical about vaccinating their children? Once you put the vaccine in the child, you can't take it out. With the amount of peanut, seafood and other allergies that people are getting ( more than ever before), why would it be unbelievable that a person can have an allergic response to a vaccine? I don't think that's silly. I'm not saying that it causes autism but children are receiving more vaccines than ever before at closer intervals than ever before. Sometimes side effect information comes out 20 years later.

 

[Edentern11]

because they went to medical school of course!

 

[mvenus929]

nevermind nutrition. This woman needs to give her milk to allow antibody transmission. My thought is the baby could become sick otherwise.

I believe in olden days they tried to solve this by hiring a nanny/midwife that could. It's very upsetting to hear that OP mother isn't. I really hope this baby is alright.

yes my bad, I just remembered that they had someone to do feeding if not the mother. I can understand that some patients just physically can't and even though to the normal person they seem to have the ability to, you just don't know the physiology of every person and I don't want to shame the mother on this but I would on the fact that she isn't finding a proper substitute and I would blame the doctor for not taking the time to share the bad news if she decided to not go the traditional route.

I am insanely curious as to your background with your intense emotions about this.

Babies continue to have antibodies that were transmitted trans-placentally until like 18 months of age (this has ramifications for checking for some infectious diseases in infants). Yes, the IgA they get through breastmilk can help them fend off some illnesses and ideally every baby should be breastfed for at least a year, but that doesn't always happen for a variety of reasons (inability to store breastmilk, needing to go back to work, not having support at work to pump, difficulty producing, etc). And babies do eventually develop their own immune system--there would be no reason to give them vaccines so early if they did not respond to them at all, and most all people have sufficient titers against Hep B after the third dose, even if it was done at 6 months of age....

And 'finding a proper substitute' can be very dangerous in this day. Supposed 'breastmilk' that you can buy on ebay and elsewhere is often laced with cow's milk, and donor milk banks are few and far between in the US (I'm fortunate to train at an institution with one, and the response to opening the bank a couple years ago was so overwhelming that we're looking to start selling it outpatient, but it is far more expensive than formula).

Bolded portion is absolutely incorrect. Not sure where you are getting this information.

The recommendation is to give breastmilk or formula through 1 year of age (I assume this is what @Dr. Death was intending to say since formula is bottle feeding...). Then you can switch to cow's milk (whole milk). You can start feeding other things between 4 and 6 months of age, but up until 6-8 months, formula or breastmilk should be providing most of the nutrition in the infant's diet. Not sure where you are getting your information...

 

[mvenus929]

Let me first say,I'm totally in favor of giving children vaccines. But why are people regarded as being unreasonable if they are skeptical about vaccinating their children? Once you put the vaccine in the child, you can't take it out. With the amount of peanut, seafood and other allergies that people are getting ( more than ever before), why would it be unbelievable that a person can have an allergic response to a vaccine? I don't think that's silly. I'm not saying that it causes autism but children are receiving more vaccines than ever before at closer intervals than ever before. Sometimes side effect information comes out 20 years later.

Actually, the antigenic load of vaccines is smaller than it used to be, even with more diseases being covered. Because we're better at refining the antigens in the vaccines now. Link.

 

[Gandyy]

Actually, the antigenic load of vaccines is smaller than it used to be, even with more diseases being covered. Because we're better at refining the antigens in the vaccines now. Link.

I was thinking about being a pediatrician at some point because kids are fun, but how do you deal with the frustrating/difficult parents?

 

[Hospitalized]

The recommendation is to give breastmilk or formula through 1 year of age (I assume this is what @Dr. Death was intending to say since formula is bottle feeding...). Then you can switch to cow's milk (whole milk). You can start feeding other things between 4 and 6 months of age, but up until 6-8 months, formula or breastmilk should be providing most of the nutrition in the infant's diet. Not sure where you are getting your information...

Sorry, I interpreted OP's post as saying formula fed was the recommendation for <1 year (by putting formula in a bottle) -- there was no mention of breastfeeding which is why I disagreed. The preferable form of infant inutrition is breastfeeding.

 

[Citygirl44]

Actually, the antigenic load of vaccines is smaller than it used to be, even with more diseases being covered. Because we're better at refining the antigens in the vaccines now. Link.

My point was that it wasn't unreasonable for a parent to be anxious about giving their child vaccines. They shouldn't be made to feel like they are being silly for being skeptical. That's all.

 

[mvenus929]

My point was that it wasn't unreasonable for a parent to be anxious about giving their child vaccines. They shouldn't be made to feel like they are being silly for being skeptical. That's all.

I'm fine dealing with parents that are skeptical, as long as they are reasonable. The parents who are adamant that they once got the flu because they got the flu vaccine and thus don't want their children to get it despite the fact that their child has horrendous asthma, etc.

But I was specifically addressing the idea in your post that we are giving more vaccines closer together than ever before. We are actually giving less antigens than ever before, despite the condensed schedule. Which is why the Dr. Sear's way of doing things doesn't make much sense to me. The vaccines are studied by giving them together. How well they work if they are spread out or deconstructed is unknown.

I was thinking about being a pediatrician at some point because kids are fun, but how do you deal with the frustrating/difficult parents?

I find it's a lot easier to deal with difficult parents than difficult adult patients. At least I can usually get on the same side of the parents ("We both want what's best for your child, and these are my recommendations to have little Suzy grow up to be as healthy as possible"). The ones I have the most difficulty with usually switch providers. And there are some parents that I've developed a rapport with, but they don't get along with my attending. Which is always an interesting dynamic.

 

[Gandyy]

I'm fine dealing with parents that are skeptical, as long as they are reasonable. The parents who are adamant that they once got the flu because they got the flu vaccine and thus don't want their children to get it despite the fact that their child has horrendous asthma, etc.

But I was specifically addressing the idea in your post that we are giving more vaccines closer together than ever before. We are actually giving less antigens than ever before, despite the condensed schedule. Which is why the Dr. Sear's way of doing things doesn't make much sense to me. The vaccines are studied by giving them together. How well they work if they are spread out or deconstructed is unknown.



I find it's a lot easier to deal with difficult parents than difficult adult patients. At least I can usually get on the same side of the parents ("We both want what's best for your child, and these are my recommendations to have little Suzy grow up to be as healthy as possible"). The ones I have the most difficulty with usually switch providers. And there are some parents that I've developed a rapport with, but they don't get along with my attending. Which is always an interesting dynamic.

I bet the kids give the specialty a lot of appeal though right? I mean its much easier to work with kids than adult patients I would think. Or am I off here?

 

[getdown]

I bet the kids give the specialty a lot of appeal though right? I mean its much easier to work with kids than adult patients I would think. Or am I off here?

The one thing I could never get around to during my peds rotation are the sick syndromic kids. It's all fine when you're dealing with healthy kids but when they're in the NICU/PICU because of some genetic problem with a bunch of lines and stuff my heart breaks. These kids just drew the short end of the straw from the get go. Unlike adult patients who are sick as **** because they didn't exercise, drank too much, smoked too much, did drugs, etc... All their problems they brought upon themselves so it's hard to feel for them.

 

[mvenus929]

I bet the kids give the specialty a lot of appeal though right? I mean its much easier to work with kids than adult patients I would think. Or am I off here?

I mean, the kids are why I went into Peds. But a lot of Med students will say stuff like "I could never do Peds because while I like kids, I can't stand the parents". Which I find to be a silly statement given aspects of adult medicine. But I get to hang on to my childhood by going into Peds. Knowing who Elsa and Anna are is super important.

The one thing I could never get around to during my peds rotation are the sick syndromic kids. It's all fine when you're dealing with healthy kids but when they're in the NICU/PICU because of some genetic problem with a bunch of lines and stuff my heart breaks. These kids just drew the short end of the straw from the get go. Unlike adult patients who are sick as **** because they didn't exercise, drank too much, smoked too much, did drugs, etc... All their problems they brought upon themselves so it's hard to feel for them.

And another reason I went into Peds. After the 10th type 2 diabetic who refused to change his diet, it got old. Again, parents are generally motivated to do what is best for their children, so we far more motivated to change than most adults. If a kid gets sick, it's generally not their fault and most of the time, kids bounce back far, far better than adults do. The success stories far outweigh the sad ones.

 

[Gandyy]

The one thing I could never get around to during my peds rotation are the sick syndromic kids. It's all fine when you're dealing with healthy kids but when they're in the NICU/PICU because of some genetic problem with a bunch of lines and stuff my heart breaks. These kids just drew the short end of the straw from the get go. Unlike adult patients who are sick as **** because they didn't exercise, drank too much, smoked too much, did drugs, etc... All their problems they brought upon themselves so it's hard to feel for them.

True.

 

[Promethean]

An acquaintance of my wife has a 4 month old baby. Doctors recommend babies are bottle or formula fed until they are one year old. She doesn't breastfeed and and won't give her baby formula because "it's just corn syrup" (obviously she's not the brightest bulb in the box)

This made me think of countless other times when people believe old wives tales, the internet, their friends or complete strangers over what a qualified physician says. Why? Is it a communication or trust issue? I just don't get it. How can I get my patients to follow my recommendations?

I would say that it is a communication and a trust issue. Going both ways.

Patients come in with a set of ideas that they have gathered from sources both reputable and otherwise, colored by their culture, ability to understand the information, etc.

Our challenge is not just to convince them that we know best and to do as we say. It is to learn to communicate with them on a level that meets them where they are. People do what they are motivated to do, and if we fail to capture their attention and acceptance of the information we provide to them, they will be more motivated to follow advice that does that than anything we tell them.

You describe her as "not the brightest bulb, but although she may be misinformed, she cares about her kid and its nutrition and she is using the best information she has, as she understands it, to make choices that she believes are best for her baby. So, you can't ridicule her for that. You have to make use of that and go from there. Applaud those strengths and show her that you want to be her ally in doing what is best for baby.

Tell her that you agree that giving a baby a lot of corn syrup without other nutrients would be a disaster... but that baby formula is so much more than that. Educate her that it actually contains protein, vitamins, minerals, and healthy fats in amounts that have been proven to provide babies everything that they need to grow and develop normally. Also, it doesn't have ingredients that are known to cause harm to infants, even though they are safe for older children and adults. This gives you a chance to talk about how babies aren't just little adults, that they have particular needs and risks that can be managed.

Instead of squaring off against your patient who is just being obstinate and not blindly following your advice, you are making yourself an ally who appreciates what your patient wants for her baby and who wants to provide the very best information about how to achieve her goals. When your advice is in line with what the patient wants to accomplish, and when they have been helped to see that, you won't be able to stop them from following it.

So, yes, it is communication, and trust, as well as respect, and understanding. Flowing both ways. If you have good relationship building skills, you won't need to ask why patients won't follow your advice. They will, or else you will already know why they decided to make a different choice.

 

[catie_jane]

I mean, I'm not saying we shouldn't "disassemble the bad ideas", just that there's a better way to go about it than saying "you're stupid, you don't know what you're doing, you're killing your child". Doing that just makes people defensive.

Edit: also, I think there are very few people who are truly anti-intellectual and anti-science. The problem is that some of these people are very influential, and the uneducated masses are disposed to believe them because they don't know any better.

Yeah, take Jenny McCarthy for example. I don't believe she is an unintelligent person perse, but when she made those comments about believing vaccines = autism, that idea spread like wildfire because of how influential of a person she is.

You would think that people as influential as this would be held to a higher standard of making sure they understand all sides before making huge statements like this. Especially when only 1 scientific article (in a non-peer reviewed journal) stated that autism was related to vaccines (and was discredited almost immediately after publication)

 

[catie_jane]

I wouldn't mind having a legal means to force people to vaccinate their kids either, but right now in the US, doctors have no legal basis to force people to vaccinate their kids, as far as I know. So for the time being, if we can't force people to do it, we have to somehow persuade them to do it. And I don't think treating them like they're stupid is going to have the best outcomes.

I think this legality matter lies a lot within the education system. A lot of schools (daycare facilities, etc.) are now making in mandated that a child show proof of vaccination before entering the school system (or other areas where there are mass amounts of kids they would come into contact with)

There is a great Law and Order SVU episode about all this stuff if you like that show hahah

 

[Cotterpin]

Yeah, take Jenny McCarthy for example. I don't believe she is an unintelligent person perse, but when she made those comments about believing vaccines = autism, that idea spread like wildfire because of how influential of a person she is.

You would think that people as influential as this would be held to a higher standard of making sure they understand all sides before making huge statements like this. Especially when only 1 scientific article (in a non-peer reviewed journal) stated that autism was related to vaccines (and was discredited almost immediately after publication)

It is extremely depressing that Jenny McCarthy could ever be considered an influential person.

 

[catie_jane]

It is extremely depressing that Jenny McCarthy could ever be considered an influential person.

Unfortunately, that is the day and age we live in. I'm also pretty sure that she made those initial comments on The View (or some related TV show), which you know the majority of the audience is women, with children, which only made the situation even worse.

Edit: maybe I should have said well-known celebrity instead of influential. But now-a-days those terms are sort of interchangeable to many people

 

[Cotterpin]

Unfortunately, that is the day and age we live in. I'm also pretty sure that she made those initial comments on The View (or some related TV show), which you know the majority of the audience is women, with children, which only made the situation even worse.

Edit: maybe I should have said well-known celebrity instead of influential. But now-a-days those terms are sort of interchangeable to many people

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just depressing.

 

[jl lin]

I bet the kids give the specialty a lot of appeal though right? I mean its much easier to work with kids than adult patients I would think. Or am I off here?

Not necessarily so at all. You have to keep in mind their developmental stages and how they react to things. Children can be complicated compared to adults for a number of reasons--to much to go into here and now. Also, children are minors, and with those minors comes adult parents or guardians, and they can be difficult to deal with at times, depending upon a number of factors. Also, kids have less to no coping mechanisms as adults often do. Not everyone can or should specialize in treating children.

 

[jl lin]

The vaccination issue comes down to looking at the science and understanding and then adequately explaining the benefits: risks. The overwhelming information supports the benefits over any/most possible risks. It is true that nothing is absolutely benign. Heck, for some people, even diphenhydramine is not necessarily benign, even though it is pretty much benign in the correct dosage for most of the population of people. I think it comes down to relating the information in balance.

Example, getting the Menactra vaccine is better than taking you chances with meningococcal meningitis.

http://www.chop.edu/centers-program...ne-details/meningococcal-vaccine#.VkoOzoQ26t8

 

[username456789]

Sorry, I should have said excessive amounts of bread (which is the level most Americans are consuming it) are unhealthy. Calm down. If you're going to get that upset at a simple statement, you're going to be a very angry physician.

Edit: just looked at your post history, and if your attitude in real life is as bad as your attitude on SDN, then I hope you never become a physician.

Invoking Burnett's Law is the weakest form of rhetoric.

 

[Chelsea FC]

Because of Ben Carson

 

[deleted407021]

Because of Ben Carson

Look guise. Some ancient Egyptian pyramids!

 

[waka flocka flame]

WebMD = Instant Doctor.

 

[TheZaLord]

It kind of bothers me that so many intelligent, well-educated people are so judgemental of the vast majority of Americans who have less natural intelligence and perhaps did not have access to as good of an education as they did. This woman is doing what she thinks is best for her son, just like people who don't vaccinate their kids are doing what they think is best for their kids. They're just scared and misinformed, they're not purposely trying to harm anyone, so why are we so aggressive towards them? If we treat them like they're stupid and evil then we're probably just going to push them to keep mistrusting doctors. We'd have more success getting them to listen to their doctors if we are understanding and listen to their fears and don't judge them so harshly.

I agree with you for the most part. It's the people who say, "Oh, well I have researched this and..." And are just as snide, if not more so, in their confidence of these "research papers" which are just honestly mostly op/Ed pieces from blogs as far as I can tell. They're the ones that really get to me, and their numbers are growing.

And they hold any discredited person up as martyr. Even Wakefield- who actually HARMED children. They say the whole flawed "study" and the exposure that he had invested in an alternate vaccine company as a conspiracy against him. Rather than...anyway, you probably know the story.

One girl I went to school with even went so far as to say that "big pharma" is dictating what goes into medical textbooks so you can't trust any (real) doctor, ever.

No, let's go to the witch-doctor snake oil salesman who deals in "holistic" medicine (and charges hundreds-thousands to peddle his useless ****) because they're "not about the money" like doctors are.

But no, I don't think aggression generally is helping. It's hard not to get there though.

 

[RaspberrySlushy]

Yea, in the place where I used to live (very hippie/alternative/holistic), I saw people who spent ridiculous amounts of money on these quack cures, seminars, etc, never putting it together that they were being swindled. Some had a lot of disposable income but a lot didn't and went into a lot of debt. One went bankrupt and STILL kept on paying for all this crap w/money she didn't have. And if you talked to her, or others, they never really came across as unintelligent, many were educated, and yet still these totally bat**** beliefs prevailed and were spread as if proven facts.

 

[Whats up Doc!]

Definitely going to be one of the hardest parts of the job, trying to explain things to patients who will continue to do what they want regardless of your facts and scientific findings, everyone thinks they are smarter. I have an aunt whos a medical assistant (doesnt even work in a medical office) and whenever a family member is in the hospital she always attacks the nurses and doctors and wants to know everything their doing for said family member, then she googles the medication/procedure and tries to make herself sound smart by reading what she found on wikipedia, now my damn family is convinced shes a f***ing genius . Sigh..........

 

[Whats up Doc!]

Yea, in the place where I used to live (very hippie/alternative/holistic), I saw people who spent ridiculous amounts of money on these quack cures, seminars, etc, never putting it together that they were being swindled. Some had a lot of disposable income but a lot didn't and went into a lot of debt. One went bankrupt and STILL kept on paying for all this crap w/money she didn't have. And if you talked to her, or others, they never really came across as unintelligent, many were educated, and yet still these totally bat**** beliefs prevailed and were spread as if proven facts.

Ahhhhhh I know allot of people into holistic medicine who defend it to the death even when there is no facts or evidence to support it. If you told them eating horse **** would lower their stress levels they would without question buy horse **** (hey I should start selling horse **** and tell people its healthy). I understand some of it can be beneficial (I occasionally partake with shots of wheat grass) but when someones dying from a terminal illness please dont expect bark from a tree in the rainforest to cure them.

 

[LivMoore]

I think a small part also has to do with these mlm sellers going around that I see on Facebook in groups or from friends- people selling stuff like "itWorks" pills/wraps. I saw a person post about how they used to take X amount of prescription medicine until they started taking one pill from this company... or magical healing blueberries @_@

 

[Whats up Doc!]

I think a small part also has to do with these mlm sellers going around that I see on Facebook in groups or from friends- people selling stuff like "itWorks" pills/wraps. I saw a person post about how they used to take X amount of prescription medicine until they started taking one pill from this company... or magical healing blueberries @_@

No doubt some people are tricked by these (somehow)

 

[TheZaLord]

I think a small part also has to do with these mlm sellers going around that I see on Facebook in groups or from friends- people selling stuff like "itWorks" pills/wraps. I saw a person post about how they used to take X amount of prescription medicine until they started taking one pill from this company... or magical healing blueberries @_@

Oh my god if I get invited to one more "ItWorks!" party, essential oils party (I am not saying oils don't work for some things when used properly- they actually have been great for aromatherapy to lessen the effects of my migraines), Herbalife party, juiceplus party, or whatever...I am going to lose it.

I'm trying to be nice, but, really, ladies? We all work for a very poor school district. Who has the money to spend on this bullsh*t?
Not to mention thirtyone, jamberry nails, scentsy etc...yes, great, my mom probably WOULD love some of that stuff, but target has it too, for a lot cheaper.
I digress.

My aunt is like that, too. Saying, oh, well you're Uncle Steven doesn't have to take his blood pressure medicine, etc...anymore after this and...well, that's great. But I don't think your magic fairy dust did that- his exercising, eating right, and losing weight was the major factor in that equation, but what do I know?

 

[Whats up Doc!]

Oh my god if I get invited to one more "ItWorks!" party, essential oils party (I am not saying oils don't work for some things when used properly- they actually have been great for aromatherapy to lessen the effects of my migraines), Herbalife party, juiceplus party, or whatever...I am going to lose it.

I'm trying to be nice, but, really, ladies? We all work for a very poor school district. Who has the money to spend on this bullsh*t?
Not to mention thirtyone, jamberry nails, scentsy etc...yes, great, my mom probably WOULD love some of that stuff, but target has it too, for a lot cheaper.
I digress.

My aunt is like that, too. Saying, oh, well you're Uncle Steven doesn't have to take his blood pressure medicine, etc...anymore after this and...well, that's great. But I don't think your magic fairy dust did that- his exercising, eating right, and losing weight was the major factor in that equation, but what do I know?

Preach it!!! My gf's mom sells this stuff and swears by it and I cant stand itttttttt. The other day I was feeling tired so she basically forced me to try a few drops of the stuff in my water and for the remainder of the day I had to pretend like it worked as I was head bobbing about to pass out lol I didnt have the heart to tell her its just expensive BS in a bottle!!!

 

[timetwister]

I am insanely curious as to your background with your intense emotions about this.

Babies continue to have antibodies that were transmitted trans-placentally until like 18 months of age (this has ramifications for checking for some infectious diseases in infants). Yes, the IgA they get through breastmilk can help them fend off some illnesses and ideally every baby should be breastfed for at least a year, but that doesn't always happen for a variety of reasons (inability to store breastmilk, needing to go back to work, not having support at work to pump, difficulty producing, etc). And babies do eventually develop their own immune system--there would be no reason to give them vaccines so early if they did not respond to them at all, and most all people have sufficient titers against Hep B after the third dose, even if it was done at 6 months of age....

And 'finding a proper substitute' can be very dangerous in this day. Supposed 'breastmilk' that you can buy on ebay and elsewhere is often laced with cow's milk, and donor milk banks are few and far between in the US (I'm fortunate to train at an institution with one, and the response to opening the bank a couple years ago was so overwhelming that we're looking to start selling it outpatient, but it is far more expensive than formula).



The recommendation is to give breastmilk or formula through 1 year of age (I assume this is what @Dr. Death was intending to say since formula is bottle feeding...). Then you can switch to cow's milk (whole milk). You can start feeding other things between 4 and 6 months of age, but up until 6-8 months, formula or breastmilk should be providing most of the nutrition in the infant's diet. Not sure where you are getting your information...

Dude I'm just pointing out a fact here. You may think babies can do well without but I think it is still a source of concern. By proper sub, I was not at all thinking of a donor bank lol.

 

[Spinach Dip]

Oh my god if I get invited to one more "ItWorks!" party, essential oils party (I am not saying oils don't work for some things when used properly- they actually have been great for aromatherapy to lessen the effects of my migraines), Herbalife party, juiceplus party, or whatever...I am going to lose it.

I'm trying to be nice, but, really, ladies? We all work for a very poor school district. Who has the money to spend on this bullsh*t?
Not to mention thirtyone, jamberry nails, scentsy etc...yes, great, my mom probably WOULD love some of that stuff, but target has it too, for a lot cheaper.
I digress.

My aunt is like that, too. Saying, oh, well you're Uncle Steven doesn't have to take his blood pressure medicine, etc...anymore after this and...well, that's great. But I don't think your magic fairy dust did that- his exercising, eating right, and losing weight was the major factor in that equation, but what do I know?

Every illness you have can be cured by my new and improved HEALALL formula (tap water + 1 attogram dandelion root extract + 1 drop green food coloring). In fact, I'm giving out free samples!*

*Price of shipping free samples: $100 for each 1 ounce vial. Please allow 6-12 weeks for delivery.

 

[moisne]

You mean I don't know more???

Gosh, that explains everytime I talk to my doc he looks at me like I'm a *****.

 

[vantheman]

Because they finally found out that there is a cure for cancer/vaccines cause autism and the government is keeping it a secret. Oh and they found out the government is also trying to control our brains and we should all wear tin foil hats

 

[Gandyy]

Because they finally found out that there is a cure for cancer/vaccines cause autism and the government is keeping it a secret. Oh and they found out the government is also trying to control our brains and we should all wear tin foil hats

Its just so impeccably bad isn't it?