Well it looks like the Democratic nomination just keeps getting more complicated by the minute. Last night Clinton pulled off some victories in Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio. A while back (in a post titled Hillary Healthcare 2.0)I wrote about the healthcare plan proposed by Hillary. My intention was to highlight the plan so that others who are interested in medicine might get a clearer picture of this. I had hoped to do a comparison of all the major candidates.

Well it looks like some other people have done the work for me. I found this site: Health08.org. It had all the candidates and what the proposed (as far as healthcare is concerned). Now, they only list McCain, Clinton, and Obama since they are the only ones left in the race. So just keep in mind that the site changes as the political landscape does. So if you’re reading this 10 years from now, they probably won’t have anything left.

Hope it helps for everyone getting ready for the November elections.

Last year CNN ran an article written by Emily Breidbart, then a second year medical student. It’s an interesting read. At times I do feel that it is a struggle to protect my own idealism. But maybe she is doing a better job than I. Because I’ll admit, at times I find myself downright cynical — even comically cynical. But that’s another story. Anyways, in her article, Emily writes about how her curriculum, at times, seems to revolve around preventing lawsuits than the patient’s health.

Fortunately, this hasn’t been the case for me at my school during my first year. I think there has been the occasional mention of the litigious nature of the profession. And I think we (as students) have all heard plenty of stories about it. So it isn’t like we are ignoring malpractice. I’d say that they, and by they I mean the professors who teach us, choose to focus on the patient.

Who knows? Maybe one day Loma Linda’s curriculum will have to change. Maybe someday they will have to place the fear of litigation into the heart of every incoming first year. I hope not, though. Because a society in which doctors are afraid to treat patients is a society in trouble.

Oh, and check out Emily’s article “Med student struggles to preserve her idealism” over at CNN.com.

Related Posts: Dr. Phil, have you heard of… HIPAA?

Gabriel Bouys / AFP-Getty Images file

I really don’t want to turn this into a gossip column. And I definitely don’t want to turn this into a cebrinews site. But a couple weeks ago I did post about the medical debacle between Britney Spears and Dr. Phil.

I posted because it was, in my opinion, an example of very poor judgment on Dr. Phil’s part. You can read that post if you want. I’ve linked to it above.

Anyways, this post is just a little more medical news. A follow-up, I suppose.

In Dr. Phil’s non-professional (since he claims his visit was just as a friend and not a pscyhologist), Britney Spears needs serious mental help. At least that’s what he said before. Anyways, it appears she just might get the help she needs. Good for Brit.

Britney Spears has been placed under a 72-hour “mental health evaluation hold.” For complete details, click the picture above. It’ll take you to the news story.

Sorry for not summarizing. I’m stressed. Finals next week. And now, its back to the books!

I WANT a bionic eye! Well who wouldn’t? If you’ve seen the television show on NBC, then you know what the bionic eye can do.

I read an article over at MSNBC.com titled “Vision of the future seen in bionic contact lens.” It looks like we, and by we I mean we as a society, may be getting closer to bionic eyes. Or, at least, bionic contact lenses.

As I understand it, a contact lens has been made at the University of Washington that has circuitry embedded in the lens. The researchers hope to one day be able to use the lenses to project an image at the retina.

In effect, the user, and the user only, would be able to see images projected by the lens into their own eyes.

Check out the story for more. (I’d summarize here but I’m trying to avoid the whole copyright infringement thing… for legal reasons).

I recently saw an episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. It’s always an interesting way to get my news. But he did one segment which I’ve included below. Check it out.

I was gonna write about how surprised I am to hear that increased gambling was listed as a side-effect. But I figured that any way I found to convey my disbelief in such absurdity would kind of be overshadowed by Jon Stewart.

If anything, just remember to know what the side-effects are of any medication you take.

Related Posts: Britney Spears Now In Doctors’ Hands

Copyright 2008 Brad Barket / Robyn Beck / Getty Images

News on the street, and by street I mean Internet, is that Dr. Phil paid a little visit to a certain celebrity (whom I’ll refer to as Ms. S) on Saturday (January 5) at Cedars-Sinai Hospital. She had been there since Thursday after her standoff with police.

Well after his meeting with Ms. S, Dr. Phil released this statement to Entertainment Tonight:

My meeting with Britney and some of her family members this morning in her room at Cedars leaves me convinced more than ever that she is in dire need of both medical and psychological intervention. She was released moments before my arrival and was packing when I entered the room. We visited for about an hour before I walked with her to her car. I am very concerned for her.

I am neither a doctor, nor a HIPAA expert, but I did sign the form and take a little class about it. Isn’t this situation a breach of doctor-patient confidentiality? Dr. Phil, shame on you!

I suppose he might claim that he is not her doctor and she isn’t his patient. So in that case, he is not bound by doctor-patient confidentiality.

According to one article by TMZ, Ms. S was totally “blindsided” by the visit:

People on the 7th floor at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center say the doctor arrived about 7:30 AM Saturday. We’re told [she] did not invite him in; she didn’t even know he was coming. Sources say it was [her] parents who told Dr. Phil to go to the hospital. When he walked into her room, we’re told, a blindsided Britney walked out — and eventually came back.

Maybe Dr. Phil’s defense can be that he was an invited family guest? I don’t think so. Further reading of that article reveals that Dr. Phil would like to do a television intervention of the pop-star anonymous celebrity patient.

Hmm.. so Dr. Phil comes in at the request of the patient’s parent. And then he decides to use this opportunity to generate some publicity for his television show?!? Who in the world got him on the air?? Oh, wait.. Oprah! Oprah needs to pull him in for a little sit-down.

I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one thinking that this was inappropriate. Another article at TMZ reports that many psychiatrists have criticized both Dr. Phil and Cedars-Sinai.

the hospital should not allow any doctor who does not have in-patient privileges into a patient’s room, unless that patient has given prior consent. TMZ has learned Britney had no idea Dr. Phil was coming to her room and indeed when he walked in she became agitated and walked out.

The psychiatrists were pretty much unified in their opinions. One claimed to be “outraged and disgusted” about the whole situation. Another called Dr. Phil’s actions “intrusive and inappropriate.” Yet another criticized the Cedars for allowing Dr. Phil, who doesn’t have practicing privileges there, to see one of their patients without her knowledge or consent.

Out of line. The whole situation was absurd from a patient confidentiality standpoint. When dealing with any patient, their privacy is so important. Which is why every single medical blog (at least that I know of) has a very clear privacy statement. No patient identities are to be compromised. Doctors, in order to do their job well, must be able to get the complete story from their patients. And patients, in order to open up, must feel confident that what they share to their doctor will stay between them. Its a simple ethical issue, and a legal one as well.

*****

Update (January 7, 2008): Today (January 7) MSNBC.com is reporting that Dr. Phil has decided to pull his special on Ms. S. He said that the situation is “too intense” for him proceed.

Dr. Phil’s statements and actions have sparked a lot of criticism in the media. He defends his actions by saying he was not acting in a professional capacity when visiting Ms. S. You can check out the article at E! Online - Dr. Phil Defends Britney Visit, Calls Off Special.

Update (January 12, 2008): A complaint against Dr. Phil has been filed with the California Board of Psychology. The complaint, filed by another psychologist, claims that in going to counsel the pop-star, Dr. Phil was practicing psychology without a license. This is a serious charge, and one the board might hand over to the District Attorney for review because practicing psychology without a licenses in California is a felony.

Dr. Phil has never been licensed to practice psychology in California and retired his Texas license in 2006.

The complaint also says that a petition to remove Dr. Phil from the air is going around.

More can be found at TMZ.com: Psychology Board Investigates Dr. Phil.

Update (January 18, 2008): USA Today is reporting that Dr Phil still believes his meeting with Ms. Spears was appropriate. However, Dr. Phil says, that he regrets making a statement about it afterwords. Quoting from the article:

“Was it helpful to the situation? Regrettably, no. It was not, and I have to acknowledge that and I do,” the talk show host told his audience Thursday during taping of a Dr. Phil episode that will run Monday.

“I definitely think if I had it to do over again, I probably wouldn’t make any statement at all. Period.”

More can be found at USA Today - Dr. Phil says he regrets statement on Britney.

Sources: TMZ.com: Brit Blindsided by Phil — Hospital Acts Curiously, TMZ.com: Psychiatrists Slam Phil, Cedars, Entertainment Tonight, E! Online - Dr. Phil Defends Britney Visit, Calls Off Special, TMZ.com: Psychology Board Investigates Dr. Phil, USA Today - Dr. Phil says he regrets statement on Britney.

Source: MSNBC.com - Doctors often dole out placebos to patients

In a recent MSNBC.com article, I discovered that many physicians prescribe placebos. The researchers claim that half of the doctors surveyed admitted to prescribing a placebo to a patient at one point.

One of the authors of the study, Rachel Sherman (a medical student), said that this “illustrates that doctors believe expectation and belief have therapeutic potential.”

One part of the article made me wonder… It said that some doctors tell their patients that they are prescribing a placebo (4 percent of doctors surveyed). Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of prescribing a placebo? Maybe these doctors missed that lecture in medical school. Wait, no.. we learn about placebos as early as high school! Why in the world would you tell your patient, “It’s a placebo”?!?

I just find it amusing that doctors prescribe placebo. I suspect that a number of these cases would be for patients, or their parents, who insist on getting some sort of medication even though their physician says they have nothing to worry about.

It makes me wonder if I’ve ever been prescribed a placebo. Although I’ve never insisted on taking something. I don’t think my mom has ever insisted to the doctor that I be prescribed something either.

Personally, I think that the only time I’d be tempted to prescribe a placebo is for an insistent patient. I realize that there are ethical objections to the practice, though.

In a perfect world, maybe there would be no need for informed consent. The patient would have complete trust in the doctor and the doctor would be perfectly competent. Of course, in a perfect world, there would be no need for doctors…

The holiday season is here. Are you trying to think of what to get that special someone? Well in the spirit of giving, I shall give a suggestion. For that special scientist in your life, or maybe just science nerd, you can give the gift of knowledge. Knowledge of his or her personal genome, that is.

A company now offers to sequence DNA commercially. Just collect some saliva and mail ship it to them. Oh, and don’t forget your $999 check.

Yup, for less than a grand, a DNA sequence can be bought!

Brave new world.

Oh, I almost forgot. You’ll want the link to the company’s website, right?

It’s 23andMe.com

Sources: New York Times

Related Posts: Doctor Salaries, A Problem Overseas Too

Sources: American Medical Association, American Medical Student Association, Center for Studying Health System Change, New York Times

Last year (2006) a story published in the New York Times reported something troubling. Physician salaries are on the decline.

the average physician’s net income declined 7 percent from 1995 to 2003, after adjusting for inflation, while incomes of lawyers and other professionals rose by 7 percent during the period.

Some people do not think that this decline is a problem at all. Even with the decline, physicians are still making a decent salary. They aren’t going hungry. Maybe they have to forego a brand new S-class, but doctors don’t live off of welfare. And with the ever-increasing costs of healthcare, physician salaries just don’t seem as important.

It is very important. This country is headed towards a severe physician shortage. New medical schools are opening up and existing schools are expanding their freshman class sizes in response. Producing more physicians each year is not enough. Physician salaries must increase as well.

The shortage we are expected to go through is in the primary care segment. As it is, the current state of healthcare encourages doctors to enter high-paying specialties. New graduates are not flocking to Pediatrics, Internal Medicine, and Family Practice. Take a survey of any freshman medical class in the country. Many will share their desire to go into radiology, surgery, orthopedics, plastics, or dermatology.

Why? Frankly, for most, it’s because that is where the money is. Those specialties are the quickest way to get out of the enormous debt incurred during medical training. According to the American Medical Student Association (AMSA), the median debt for students at a public medical school is over $119,000 while those that go to a private medical school will carry a median debt of nearly $150,000. On top of debt, physicians make approximately $48,000 during their years during residency — which lasts at least 3 years. It could take up to 8 years for a thoracic surgeon to complete his/her training.

The stereotype of a lawyer is someone whose focus is on the number of billable hours. On the other hand, the stereotype of a doctor is one of compassion for a patient. While stereotypes can be dangerous, it is possible that in some ways they may give us a glimmer of reality.

The kind of people that go into medicine are usually people who truly care about the health of their patients. It is not a career chosen solely based on financial reasons. Today’s medical students are aware of the huge costs of training and the low reimbursements from insurance, medicare, and medicaid.

But there are many people who would make excellent doctors. They have all the right qualities but choose to go into other fields. They are discouraged from pursuing a medical career by working doctors tired of rising costs of malpractice insurance, declining salaries, bureaucratic hassles, and long workweeks. A career in medicine just does not seem “worth” the time and effort (see AMA Response to declining physician salaries).

Declining physician salaries are a big problem. It’s a big problem for the medical community and a big problem for the patient. If they continue to fall more and more prospective medical students will decide not to go into medicine because it is not “worth” it. Medical school graduates will continue to avoid primary care for higher paying specialties. And doctors will continue to order diagnostic procedures that bring in more revenue.

December 1, 2007 is World AIDS Day. Last year I wrote a short post summarizing an MSNBC article about how AIDS has changed America and you can find that post here.

Over the past two and a half decades AIDS has transformed from a strange and unknown disease associated with gay men into a global pandemic whose effects have reached into all levels of society.

The problem is that we still don’t know how to fight it. We can’t stop HIV. Sure, we seem to have had success in delaying the onset of AIDS in HIV Positive patients (i.e. Magic Johnson), but that requires a very expensive cocktail of anti-viral medication. We know that HIV is not a death sentence, but the majority of people who test positive do not have the resources to get this sort of treatment.

At this point, the most effective weapon in the fight against AIDS is information. That’s what World AIDS Day is all about — raising awareness about the disease and its prevention. Through another medical blog, I found a post at The Unofficial Stanford Blog (TUSB) titled HIV/AIDS Awareness Ads You’ll Remember in the Bedroom.

Below are a couple of Ads I found. All four were made by the same organization. The last three can be found at TUSB:

According to TUSB, the Ads were created by

a French NGO called AIDES (”aide” means “support” or “help” in French), which was founded by Daniel Defert in 1984 following the death of his partner, philosopher (and former Berkeley professor) Michel Foucault. AIDES now operates in over 70 small towns and villages within France, and is recognized as one of the most important European HIV/AIDS NGOs.

I’m not too sure how to describe the Ads. It definitely has its “shock value,” which is usually a good thing when it comes to grabbing an audience’s attention. Maybe I’d use the word “disturbing.” I suppose it makes its point, though..

Finally, to finish up this post, I’d like to provide a link to an excellent, well-written post titled HIV, AIDS, safe sex, & fornication: Personal, religious, medical and social viewpoints. It’s written by another Jeffrey. He is a medical student at Monash University in Australia working on a 5-year MBBS degree.