2nd time this week I’ve linked to a Peter Ubel blog post. This one was as irresistible as a doughut is to Homer Simpson.
And why is this a shared decision-making issue? Ubel writes:
“Why all this talk about math with patients? Shouldn’t all this number stuff be handled by physicians? Shouldn’t chemotherapy decisions be made by medical experts?
As it turns out, many such decisions depend strongly on patient preferences. Suppose that chemotherapy increases a patient’s odds of five-year survival from 30% to 35%, but that same chemotherapy also increases the chance that person will die in the next six months, from treatment complications. Should the patient take this chemotherapy? There is no simple medical answer to this question. The answer depends on this individual patient’s preferences for long-term versus short-term survival, with additional consideration for the burdens of chemotherapy. Making the right decision often means coming to grips with some math.”
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
We’ve written about the hype of liquid biopsies for years (see link in comment below). And now this…. https://www.statnews.com/2022/01/12/medicare-shouldnt-cover-liquid-biopsies-early-cancer-detection/
Case counts still matter. “(There) are stories that may not be told adequately if only hospitalizations and deaths are emphasized.” @garyschwitzer interviewed by @dbauder of @AP. https://apnews.com/article/omicron-changing-news-outlets-covid-data-da9272f7c4c8a109c3bfb56bed9e9c76
My friend Gary @garyschwitzer wrote to his city council representative in a Minnesota town about a Viva Las Vegas event scheduled for January.
The response he got seems to perfectly capture where we are now.
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/12/2021-ends-with-covid-craziness-in-sports-and-politics/
Comments (8)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Elaine Schattner, MD
January 11, 2013 at 3:00 pmGary, This post and the Homer cartoon insults oncologists. Why do you publish it?
Gary Schwitzer
January 11, 2013 at 3:17 pmBecause I didn’t think it insulted anyone.
And because I thought Ubel made an important point about health numeracy.
Did you write to Ubel and Forbes and ask them why THEY published it?
Gary Fradin
January 14, 2013 at 10:38 amRelative numbers obfuscate, five year survival rates delude and both confuse. Put everything in base-100 for clarity.
The only question: why haven’t we done that for years?
Gary Fradin
January 14, 2013 at 10:38 amRelative numbers obfuscate, five year survival rates delude and both confuse. Put everything in base-100 for clarity.
The only question: why haven’t we done that for years?
Greg Pawelski
January 15, 2013 at 10:31 amAs with most human conditions, we need people who can not only talk the relevant language but translate it for the consumption of others who can’t.
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