BMJ editor Fiona Godlee published an editor’s note, “Overtreatment, over here,” kicking off a discussion in her journal. She begins:
“How much of what we offer to patients is unnecessary? Worse still, how much harm do we do to individuals and society through overtreatment? In the 30 years since Ivan Illich wrote his seminal and, at the time, shocking book Medical Nemesis, the idea that medicine can do clinical and societal harm as well as good has become commonplace. But are we doing enough to bring medicine’s harmful hubris under control?”
US journalist Jeanne Lenzer writes in that same edition, “Unnecessary care: are doctors in denial and is profit driven healthcare to blame?” A BMJ subscription is required for full access.
But you don’t need a subscription to watch a well-done BMJ video featuring Lenzer, colleague Shannon Brownlee, acting director of the New America Health Policy Program and author of Overtreated: How Too Much Medicine is Making Us Sicker and Poorer, David Himmelstein, professor at the City University of New York School of Public Health, Vikas Saini, a Harvard cardiologist and president of the Lown Cardiovascular Research Foundation, and Patty Skolnik of CitizensForPatientSafety.org.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
You can't keep a great man down.
@garyschwitzer is back with new edition of @HealthNewsRevu
Terrific Table of Contents
1)Analyzing celebrity health stories
2)Cardiovascular craziness
3)Fascinating study how spin skews patients' comprehension
Grab it:
https://t.co/eMV9r1deRq
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
shaun nerbas
October 13, 2012 at 1:28 pmMore Americans should see this video and its important message for health care, especially in this election year, with two different health care philosophies on the table for voters to select from. It’s time to ask these two parties some tough questions about the quality, cost, and coverage of the system they believe in.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like