This is an addendum to Trudy Lieberman’s blog post about surgical robot news release puffery…and about questionable claims of robotic surgery “firsts” as robot owners launch marketing and public relations efforts.
I’ve been saving a little sample of robot owner’s claims about their expensive investments, and have posted some of them below.
As you look below at this little gallery of gee-whiz, think about the learning curve that’s required with any new device and any new surgical procedure.
And ask yourself as you look at these promotions whether you’d want to be the first in line…or maybe the 1,000th.
——————–
Follow us on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer
Comments (1)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Jack Fowler
April 13, 2015 at 10:13 amOne ironic part about this series: I think studies showed it took 500 to 700 operations with the robot before surgeons could get their complication rates for radical prostatectomy down to the level of surgeons who did them the old fashioned way. The very last thing in the world a patient should want is to be the first patient on whom a surgeon performs robotic surgery.
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