Modern medicine - still the third leading cause of death

[Foxaèr]

I don't want to be your real mum.

I just want to be your course toward rationality.

[Homeless Nutter]

He actually admitted he used antibiotics when he had lung problems a few years back ... [...]

Yeah - "lung" problems... One can catch horrible "lung" infections, if one doesn't use a condom...

[The Valkyrie]

YOU'RE NOT MY REAL MUM

[John V]

This is the same sort of dimwittery that the anti-vaxers use for their demented screed against vaccines - wee Jimmy was given a measles shot and later developed autism.  Therefore, vaccines are bad.

Balance medical wins against medical failures and you'll fucking RUN to a doctor.

Boru

I would disagree that JAMA and BMJ are in the same camp as anti-vaxxers.

[John V]

Good to hear your mum's still about.  I've had two instances in my life where it took skilled medical people, modern technology and (in once case) high transfusions to keep me going.

I propose an experiment.  It requires someone who decries modern medicine, a proper location, and a sharp, rusty knife encrusted with fecal matter.  Here's how it'll work:  We place the anti-modern med individual just outside the entrance to a state-of-the art hospital, say 5m from the doors.  An identical distance on the other side of the individual, we place a table with various sort of alternative medicines; acupuncture needles, healing crystals, copper bracelets, a Christian Science handbook, and so forth.  Now, here's the fun bit:  We stab the test subject with the filthy, rusty knife and see what way sh/e runs.

In order to get a large enough statistical universe to be useful, I suggest repeating the experiment, say, 1000 times or so.

Boru

You and others are presenting a false dichotomy - completely for or against modern medicine. I've noted that antibiotics among other things have been very successful. When you need to present a straw man, your position is obviously weak.

[John V]

And a few hundred years ago, such an infection might've quite easily killed you or made your dick (the one between your legs, not the one currently sprouting from your forehead) fall off or some other horrible, ungood thing happen.
I would have likely died at birth centuries ago due to problems I had with an infected umbilical cord - but thanks to medical science, here I stand today, blessed with the ability to name thee a dickhead ^_^

Yes, antibiotics have been very beneficial. But, I don't see where that excuses 250,000 deaths per year.

[madog]

And a few hundred years ago, such an infection might've quite easily killed you or made your dick (the one between your legs, not the one currently sprouting from your forehead) fall off or some other horrible, ungood thing happen.
I would have likely died at birth centuries ago due to problems I had with an infected umbilical cord - but thanks to medical science, here I stand today, blessed with the ability to name thee a dickhead ^_^

Yes, antibiotics have been very beneficial. But, I don't see where that excuses 250,000 deaths per year.

Have you not taken the time to consider that most people are sick before they die and they usually take medicine?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

This is the same sort of dimwittery that the anti-vaxers use for their demented screed against vaccines - wee Jimmy was given a measles shot and later developed autism.  Therefore, vaccines are bad.

Balance medical wins against medical failures and you'll fucking RUN to a doctor.

Boru

I would disagree that JAMA and BMJ are in the same camp as anti-vaxxers.

I didn't mean them, I meant you. Your thread title was 'Modern medicine-still the third leading cause of death in the US'. The title of the article to which you linked was 'Medical error-the third leading cause of death in the US'.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Good to hear your mum's still about.  I've had two instances in my life where it took skilled medical people, modern technology and (in once case) high transfusions to keep me going.

I propose an experiment.  It requires someone who decries modern medicine, a proper location, and a sharp, rusty knife encrusted with fecal matter.  Here's how it'll work:  We place the anti-modern med individual just outside the entrance to a state-of-the art hospital, say 5m from the doors.  An identical distance on the other side of the individual, we place a table with various sort of alternative medicines; acupuncture needles, healing crystals, copper bracelets, a Christian Science handbook, and so forth.  Now, here's the fun bit:  We stab the test subject with the filthy, rusty knife and see what way sh/e runs.

In order to get a large enough statistical universe to be useful, I suggest repeating the experiment, say, 1000 times or so.

Boru

You and others are presenting a false dichotomy - completely for or against modern medicine. I've noted that antibiotics among other things have been very successful. When you need to present a straw man, your position is obviously weak.

But I'm not presenting a strawman. You're the one citing modern medicine as a leading cause of death. Implicit (apos in advance if I've got this wrong) that is the position that non--modern medicine is safer. So, in my experiment, you'd be given a choice between alternative medicine (AKA 'nutjobbery') and modern medicine (AKA 'stuff that's been proven to work more often than not').

But you raise a fair point - I'd be delighted to be a test subject myself, provided that we improve the scenario by my going into the nearby hospital and you taking advantage of the alternative medicine display. I'll see that your next of kin are notified.

Boru