Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Logical mom
Participant
2cents
“I don’t know why u keep referring to “proven fraudalent study”. Nothing was ever proven fraudulent about his study! Not in Any court…ever!”Wow, you really thought that this the slam dunk argument?!
Courts do NOT decide if this is fraudulent or not, in fact courts use the data and studies that are published to arrive at a conclusion, the people sitting on the bench (judges) are not trained in conducting scientific research.
I am sure you knew all of this, yet you still decided to make this statement, because it makes you sound intelligent, you are just coming across as screwed up and willing to further the agenda regardless of the facts that are available to all.
Regarding Proffesor Walker Smith, as usual grab whatever you can to support the theory, regardless if it is true or not.
The case was only if the Proffesor acted in good faith and How he treated his patients, the judge cane to the conclusion that there is not sufficient evidence to support that the Proffesor knowingly did something wrong. And just like tye other co authors who retracted when they realized they were duped he should have also not lost his license.
This has nothing to do with the proven fraudulent wakefield study.
So your a supporter of Andrew Wakefield?
Below is from the BMJ, this is why the rest of the world does not buy into your fear mongering, we want what is best for our children and refuse to accept garbage science and fraud.
Authored by Andrew Wakefield and 12 others, the paper’s scientific limitations were clear when it appeared in 1998.2 3 As the ensuing vaccine scare took off, critics quickly pointed out that the paper was a small case series with no controls, linked three common conditions, and relied on parental recall and beliefs.4 Over the following decade, epidemiological studies consistently found no evidence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.5 6 7 8 By the time the paper was finally retracted 12 years later,9 after forensic dissection at the General Medical Council’s (GMC) longest ever fitness to practise hearing,10 few people could deny that it was fatally flawed both scientifically and ethically. But it has taken the diligent scepticism of one man, standing outside medicine and science, to show that the paper was in fact an elaborate fraud.
In a series of articles starting this week, and seven years after first looking into the MMR scare, journalist Brian Deer now shows the extent of Wakefield’s fraud and how it was perpetrated (doi:10.1136/bmj.c5347). Drawing on interviews, documents, and data made public at the GMC hearings, Deer shows how Wakefield altered numerous facts about the patients’ medical histories in order to support his claim to have identified a new syndrome; how his institution, the Royal Free Hospital and Medical School in London, supported him as he sought to exploit the ensuing MMR scare for financial gain; and how key players failed to investigate thoroughly in the public interest when Deer first raised his concerns.11
Deer published his first investigation into Wakefield’s paper in 2004.12 This uncovered the possibility of research fraud, unethical treatment of children, and Wakefield’s conflict of interest through his involvement with a lawsuit against manufacturers of the MMR vaccine. Building on these findings, the GMC launched its own proceedings that focused on whether the research was ethical. But while the disciplinary panel was examining the children’s medical records in public, Deer compared them with what was published in the Lancet. His focus was now on whether the research was true.
The Office of Research Integrity in the United States defines fraud as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism.13 Deer unearthed clear evidence of falsification. He found that not one of the 12 cases reported in the 1998 Lancet paper was free of misrepresentation or undisclosed alteration, and that in no single case could the medical records be fully reconciled with the descriptions, diagnoses, or histories published in the journal.
Who perpetrated this fraud? There is no doubt that it was Wakefield. Is it possible that he was wrong, but not dishonest: that he was so incompetent that he was unable to fairly describe the project, or to report even one of the 12 children’s cases accurately? No. A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross. Moreover, although the scale of the GMC’s 217 day hearing precluded additional charges focused directly on the fraud, the panel found him guilty of dishonesty concerning the study’s admissions criteria, its funding by the Legal Aid Board, and his statements about it afterwards.14
Furthermore, Wakefield has been given ample opportunity either to replicate the paper’s findings, or to say he was mistaken. He has declined to do either. He refused to join 10 of his coauthors in retracting the paper’s interpretation in 2004,15 and has repeatedly denied doing anything wrong at all. Instead, although now disgraced and stripped of his clinical and academic credentials, he continues to push his views.16
Meanwhile the damage to public health continues, fuelled by unbalanced media reporting and an ineffective response from government, researchers, journals, and the medical profession.17 18 Although vaccination rates in the United Kingdom have recovered slightly from their 80% low in 2003-4,19 they are still below the 95% level recommended by the World Health Organization to ensure herd immunity. In 2008, for the first time in 14 years, measles was declared endemic in England and Wales.20 Hundreds of thousands of children in the UK are currently unprotected as a result of the scare, and the battle to restore parents’ trust in the vaccine is ongoing.
Any effect of the scare on the incidence of mumps remains in question. In epidemics in the UK, the US, and the Netherlands, peak prevalence was in 18-24 year olds, of whom 70-88% had been immunised with at least one dose of the MMR vaccine.21 22 Any consequence of a fall in uptake after 1998 may not become apparent until the cohorts of children affected reach adolescence. One clue comes from an outbreak in a school in Essen, Germany, attended by children whose parents were opposed to vaccinations. Of the 71 children infected with mumps, 68 had not been immunised.23
But perhaps as important as the scare’s effect on infectious disease is the energy, emotion, and money that have been diverted away from efforts to understand the real causes of autism and how to help children and families who live with it.24
There are hard lessons for many in this highly damaging saga. Firstly, for the coauthors. The GMC panel was clear that it was Wakefield alone who wrote the final version of the paper. His coauthors seem to have been unaware of what he was doing under the cover of their names and reputations. As the GMC panel heard, they did not even know which child was which in the paper’s patient anonymised text and tables. However, this does not absolve them. Although only two (John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch) were charged by the GMC, and only one, the paper’s senior author Walker-Smith, was found guilty of misconduct, they all failed in their duties as authors. The satisfaction of adding to one’s CV must never detract from the responsibility to ensure that one has been neither party to nor duped by a fraud. This means that coauthors will have to check the source data of studies more thoroughly than many do at present—or alternatively describe in a contributor’s statement precisely which bits of the source data they take responsibility for.
Secondly, research ethics committees should not only scrutinise proposals but have systems to check that what is done is what was permitted (with an audit trail for any changes) and work to a governance procedure that can impose sanctions where an eventual publication proves this was not the case. Finally, there are lessons for the Royal Free Hospital, the Lancet, and the wider scientific community. These will be considered in forthcoming articles.
What of Wakefield’s other publications? In light of this new information their veracity must be questioned. Past experience tells us that research misconduct is rarely isolated behaviour.25 Over the years, the BMJ and its sister journals Gut and Archives of Disease in Childhood have published a number of articles, including letters and abstracts, by Wakefield and colleagues. We have written to the vice provost of UCL, John Tooke, who now has responsibility for Wakefield’s former institution, to ask for an investigation into all of his work to decide whether any more papers should be retracted.
The Lancet paper has of course been retracted, but for far narrower misconduct than is now apparent. The retraction statement cites the GMC’s findings that the patients were not consecutively referred and the study did not have ethical approval, leaving the door open for those who want to continue to believe that the science, flawed though it always was, still stands. We hope that declaring the paper a fraud will close that door for good
Logical mom,
All the points you raised were already discussed, including aluminum (which btw is not in the mme vaccine) and Wiliam Thomson (which like you said, is fake news).
Repeating them just because your bringing it up again, makes no sense.
Mindful,
Protocols are based on evidence, hence the term evidence-based medicine. Unlike twisted anecdotal evidence that cannot be replicated, If you consider being open-minded when people fall for scare tactics spread by people that have nothing on what to base their scare tactics, this is actually called fear mongering and misinformation.
furthermore, as I have mentioned multiple times, the doctors and other providers have no monetary gain to follow the latest recommendations and evidence. The ‘alternative’ movement which defies evidence based medicine, has based its entire marketing and business module based on scaring people with made up garbage claims.
Twisting anything that seems on the surface as if it furthers their cause, regardless if the true facts point to the direction they want or not, is not called being open-minded. In fact, this is the way a lot of people view this, the scientific community bases everything based on scientific evidence, regardless of what the results show, even if it means admitting that what they thought all along, was not fully accurate.
On the other hand, the alternative movement is hanging on to their beliefs, now they just have to find facts that support their belief, as each ‘fact’ gets uncovered and shows other than what they stand for, they move on to the next twisted fact. Yet the bottom line is, regardless of the scientific evidence the end result must always be that the medical community is wrong and that they are right.
This is the opposite of being open-minded, this is fraudulent and dishonest. completely inappropriate to be advising people and scare them into their belief.
Mindful,
If you do not mind, to be more specific about the ‘stories’ with diagnoses and treatment with the outcome.
We all say we want the same thing, which what is best for us and our families, yet just saying that something happened without even having to provide the details, is not appropriate.
Mindful,
As noted, the ‘alternative’ world has a lot to gain from spreading false claims and scaring people into buying their services.
Otherwise, why are you bringing up OB doctors, the lithotomy position has been practiced for a very long time and is the most accepted approach for many reasons, there is not much data to recommend any other position, there are other positions that are used for certain situation.
With regards to encephalitis, not sure if this is in response to the Hannah Poling story, encephalitis and encephalopathy are not the same.
So now its that people ‘detox’ from vaccines, what toxins are you referring to, and what people have not been able to ‘detox’?
All of this is based on assumptions, including the assumption that doctors just have booklets that guide them on step by step, same is with the police and CPS, they have it in their protocol to omit any reference to vaccines associated with killing the SIDS babys.
At least understand why the vast majority refuse to play along with this theory of yours.
sariray,
Why are you spreading false information regarding Hannah Poling?
You write, go look up the story about Hannah Poling, yet you write your own version of the events.
Its a pretty straightforward story, Hannah was diagnosed with encephalopathy caused by a mitochondrial enzyme deficit, the timing of the diagnosis was in line with the normal age of diagnosis.
Yet the family decided on litigating the vaccine companies, they ended up with a settlement without going through a hearing, this is the government and the family agreeing to settle this and not go to a full hearing.
In fact, it has been proven that Hannah had a defect, this had nothing to do with vaccines.
Another point, the immediate death or seizures is nonsense, the immune system does not immediately react.
Furthermore, if this causes death and lifelong disability, why are only a select few affected by the vaccines?
Besides, this would mean that all EMS personnel, ER staff (doctors, nurses, technicians, and other staff) together with the parents and primary care physicians are all in with the conspiracy.
Oh, also the medical examiner, police officers, and detectives and child protective services.
All these people get involved with each SIDS case.
How are the payouts to all these people done? is Hatzoloh also involved, do each of their members get a handout or just the people on top?
So many people involved in each and every single SIDS case, yet we still have to believe you that the real cause was vaccines.
fyi, the majority of cases in the vaccine court that were successful, were provider error or allergic reaction.
This is why there is a vaccine court. (from wikipedia)
Makes a whole lot more sense than the silly conspiracy theory you buy into, in fact that would be almost impossible to pull off, the more people involved, means its harder to pull off, these many people, extremely unlikely, more like impossible to pull off.
In the 1970s and 1980s, a controversy erupted related to the question of whether the whole-cell pertussis component caused permanent brain injury in rare cases, called pertussis vaccine encephalopathy.[3] No studies showed a causal connection, and later studies showed no connection of any type between the DPT vaccine and permanent brain injury. The alleged vaccine-induced brain damage proved to be an unrelated condition, infantile epilepsy.[4] In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association called the connection a “myth” and “nonsense”.[5] However, before that point, criticism of the studies showing no connection and a few well-publicized anecdotal reports of permanent disability that were blamed on the DPT vaccine gave rise to 1970s anti-DPT movements.[6][7] In the United States, low profit margins and an increase in vaccine-related lawsuits led many manufacturers to stop producing the DPT vaccine by the early 1980s.[3] By 1985, vaccine manufacturers had difficulty obtaining liability insurance.[8] The price of DPT vaccine skyrocketed, leading providers to curtail purchases, limiting availability. Only one company was still manufacturing pertussis vaccine in the US by the end of 1985.[8] In 1986, to correct the situation, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), which established a federal no-fault system to compensate victims of injury caused by mandated vaccines.[9][10]
To add to what DY said, you also need to stop making up reasons as to why certain stuff were done.
While you are free to accept conspiracy theories as to why there is a vaccine court, don’t be perplexed when the rest of the world just doesn’t buy it.
Can anyone post what Reb Chaim said?
Did he say not to vaccinate, or he only said that schools should accept all children even the ones that are not vaccinated?
Furthermore, did he say it at a time that there was an outbreak? Because the poskim that have now come out (in writing) that everyone should vaccinate, did not say this before the outbreak.
Anonymous,
I agree with you that there is room for people to exercise their free will.
However, I strongly disagree with you about the notion that there is this conspiracy pushing vaccines. In fact, I will argue that the ‘following’ and cult-like anti-vaccine movement makes it seem like it is the other way around.
In fact, the false scare tactics seem to support this notion, If all this is, is some people questioning and hesitations about the evidence based medicine, why make a movement with hotlines, why not just do what you believe is the right thing to do and move on?
To me it seems pretty straightforward, there is a huge industry that is completely dependant on spreading false information against evidence-based medicine, this is the only way they are able to further their ‘alternative’ practices, these people have their entire livelyhood built based on the idea of convincing people that evidence based medicine is a problem and they offer a solution.
Once again, I ask you, for the sake of having an honest discussion to disclose what the life threathaning event your child had, what the diagnosis and treatment were. How else can we take you seriously?
So same scare tactic, different angle.
Now it is the SIDS that are caused by vaccines, All you have written is that you have read that SIDS is ‘probably’ due to vaccines. So from scaring people about autism, you add death, you should really be ashamed of yourself for using these unfortunate cases that have nothing to do with vaccinations to further your cause.
Anonymous,
A. Would you mind posting the discharge summary provided by the hospital of your child that “almost diesd” from a vaccine shot?
B. Can you quote the exact language of the letter quoting Reb Chaim?
Anonymous,
Not sure which planet your on, but the Bedatz and others have come in writing very clearly about vaccinations.
Your conspiracy like talking sits well with the scare tactic way of the anti vaxxers.
Talking about money involved, you probably meant the money made by those practicing alternative medicine, they use scare tactics and twisted anecdotal stories to get people skeptical and scared to follow evidence based medicine.
They have a lot to earn from making up claims and planting skepticism against accepted medicine, in fact they are probably completely dependent on spreading this nonsense.
A. Its rabbonim that called them these names.
B. What rabbonim have come out in writing in support of defying accepted medical opinion?
Alternative is not necessarily more natural than evidence based medicne, nor is natural more safe than synthetic.
There are some medications that are natural yet they are not without side effects.
Alternative usually means, not evidence based, not tested, not regulated, why would that be beneficial?
Not heard the interview yet i have personally researched the topic and have come to the conclusion that vaccines are effective and safe.
Saying that you personal vaccinate, seems like your trying to come across as credible, however you are trying (very hard) to spread doubt and confusion regarding vaccines.
A. Aside from yourself no one is accusing anyone of beinf emotional.
B. Not sure why you say the subject is being avoided. This thread is hyper focused on ‘the’ subject.
C. If vaccines work, you have nothing to fear. Are you arguing that they are not effective?
D. Nothing to worry, this keeps on coming up as if this is some gotcha question. If the question gets a satisfactory response will you pass it on to the rest if the cult?
1. Children younger than 12 months are generally not immune.
2. Acquired immunity regardless if it is from vaccine or from having the measles virus, has been shown to only provide immunity 95-97% of the times, this means that out of every 100 people 3-5 are unprotected.
3. Immunocompromised patients are unprotected.In summary, we care for our babies, those that are not fully immune and the sick.
E. Your ending statement, telling us to look aroyand see who kids are healthier, is this to imply that unvaccinated kids are healthier?
is this your personal anecdotal observation?Interesting statement for someone thats not all over the place and not emotional (your argument, i dont think it matter if someone is emotional or passionate about something)
Crone
ParticipantAppreciate your efforts yet not sure to the reason on why you have posted the article from BMJ, It does not question the efficacy or safety of vaccines, it merely puts it in perspective, and in the authors perspective.
Truthishidden,
If you make claims, do not expect people to accept them without providing some backing to the validity of these claims.
Once Your at it, why not just state that global warming is the cause to auto immune deficiencies, your exposing the level of dishonesty and ignorance associated with these claims.
To summarize:
Anti vaxxers have this ‘belief’ that.
a. Measles is beneficial.
b. vaccines do not really help.
c. Components in the vaccines are dangerous.
d. Vaccines cause autism.
e. The entire vaccine business is a multi trillion dollar business, the entire world aside from them are involved and are being paid large sums to be part of the conspiracy.
f. Measles is not dangerous.While the above has been proven to be incorrect, It is important to point out the hypocrisy of the Anti-Vaxx movement, the people involved are guilty of precisely what they accuse others.
The majority of people pushing the anti-vaxx movement have a huge interest in pushing this agenda, they are usually involved in ‘alternative’ (read: unproven and unable to withstand clinical trial) medicine.
By capturing audiences that will buy into their agenda, using scare tactics against established evidence based medicine and misrepresenting the data, they gain followers and monetize from it.Why else are so many people emotional about this topic, this should be scientific fact finding discussion, instead of a fundamentalist religion style arguments which makes no sense.
If this issue is so confusing to you, why don’t you consult with your daas torah, why are you resorting to hotlines and conspirators?
Crone,
So now the argument against vaccines uses medical research by doctors and pharmaceutical companies?
a. It is not been proven to be preventive, rather used to reduce tumors. Basically this means that regardless if the patient had measles in the past or had a vaccine against measles, It will not change their future chances of getting or not getting the disease, rather the virus can be used as an attempt to reduce the tumor.
Stating that contracting measles prevents cancers is inaccurate and misleading. In fact if one already has antibodies for measles it makes the viral treatment less effective.
b. The treatment trials actually injected the patients with an attenuated modified virus, does this now mean that vaccines are preventive against cancers? of course they are not, yet there is hope that with continued research (by big pharma and spooky doctors) they will eventually be able to use modified viruses as part of certain treatment modalities against some cancers.
Regarding your comment about measles just being a nuance.
a. There is a high admission rate especially for younger patients with some requiring ICU admissions due to the severity of the symptoms.
b. The data suggests that there are permanent disabilities and potential delayed mortality’s associated with the measles virus.
Are you suggesting that the facts and science are incorrect?
chan56
ParticipantRegarding your claim to aluminum in vaccines, I will not enter your premise and what you have posted, You do not need any studies to tell you that Hi levels of aluminum are detrimental to humans (and sheep).
However, this might come as a shocker, MMR vaccine does not contain any aluminum, despite what the anti-vaxxers have been preaching, the MMR vaccines do not require an adjuvant.
The other vaccines that do contain aluminum have been extensively studied in many clinical studies and trials. If you were to compare the exact amount of aluminum those vaccines contain, you would notice that they are far less than what is in baby formula and even in breast milk.
But I am sure that you already knew that, based on your ‘knowledgeable’ claims.
Question to the Anti-Vaxxers,
If we were to go through each claim and appropriately address it, would you then concede and vaccinate?
If the answer is not in the affirmative, then we are not having a fact-finding discussion, rather a religious debate, which this is not.
Medicine is bad, but being sick and unhealthy is worse.
Its not even a troll topic, most would agree with what you posted.
chan56
Participant“The CDC sells 4 billion dollars worth of vaccines each year and is HEAVILY invested in the vaccine program”
I respectfully ask you to back up your claim, there are certain principles that must be agreed upon when entering a discussion, upon which claims can be built.
Wow, Using misinformation to come across as educated, is dishonest and instead of accusing the ‘medical establishment’ of lying, I will accuse the posters and the ‘anti-vaxxers’ of the very same accusation as well as fear mongering.
a. Dr. Marcia Angell, to use this as an argument against vaccines is silly, she is a big believer in science, in the very same claim against published data she also makes the claim that alternative medicine has gained popularity yet, in reality, we should not acknowledge them, as only pure science should play a role, her concern was that we no longer use pure science in medicine to the extent that we should use.
If this makes you say that the science that we have on vaccines and immunology is not there, you are reading this wrong.
b. William Thompson, this is a big one, he ‘admitted’ that there is a cover up.. in fact its the other way around, the mere fact that this was taken out of context and used as if this is an admission to covering up the that there is an association between vaccines and autism, is simply dishonest and shows on what the entire religion of the anti-vaxxers stand.
What he said, was while there have been many attempts to recreate the suspected conclusion, yet no correlation was able to be found, (check PubMed 14754936) yet what he said was that after slicing the data, there seems that African American children with autism seem to have received vaccines earlier, this does not mean there is a correlation, nor is there an explanation why among a specific race children with autism have received vaccines at a younger age.
They came up with explanations that are plausible, yet in no way does the data suggest that there is a correlation, which has been proven to be non-existent.
Is there a way to ensure that the corn is bug-free?
Has any kashrus organization provided any guidelines in this matter?
Ubiquitin,
I gave my opinion. Not the facts. The real truth is that i do not know. The rest of what i have written, just disregard.
Now, just reread your post once again.
“My question is simply do you think patients brought in by Hatzolah have better outcomes than similar patients brought in by another agency”
Simple, what does simply mean? No, not simply because the same people that work during the day in EMS and at off hours volunteer for their local Hatzoloh, no. not simply because the wording on the sides of the ambulance are written in hebrew. no.
Maybe due to the fact that they had a quicker on scene response.
Maybe due to the fact that they had resources and able to deploy them rapidly.
Maybe due to the fact that they cared, therefore, went the distance and were not simply doing their job.
Maybe due to the fact that they went to a different facility that was not the nearest, which had better resources that contributed to the favourable outcome.So no, not simply because they came in with Hatzolah.
ubiquitin – For now I will try to refrain from responding, I do not want to get caught up with this back and forth, seems like you were trying to score some points. not sure what the agenda is.
“Though sadly there are a few anecdotes in the reverse (admitedly far less)”
I guess its an alternative way of saying that they are not a perfect agency, They are just a bunch of humans after all.“This may or may not surpirse you but Ive met patients brought in by EMS who survived”
Thanks for the awareness.ubiquitin, You asked what I think, I cannot prove this, yet my answer would be as following.
Most patients, probably no difference in outcome, mainly because the majority of patients are not that sick that outcome is even a factor.
From the very sick patients, Yes some have a better outcome due to the resources of hatzolah.Again, this is my personal opinion, not sure why you would want my opinion.
For instance, I am familiar with a particular skilled nursing facility that for some reason decided on not calling Hatzolah when they have a sick patient. The nursing staff (completely non jewish) protested and requested that hatzolah be the primary EMS agency for the facility.
ubiquitin – Sorry that I attributed those comments to you, this is not a debate and not trying to win anyone over nor am I trying to put anyone down, sorry if it was taken that way.
Regarding the outcome of patients, I do not think that such data exists and why would any hospital even try to gather this data?
Yet anecdotally people have situations in which time was of essence or where the dedication and caring had a difference in patient outcome.
For example, someone I know that had a widowmaker heart attack (LAD) with massive global ST elevations. This patient had a 17 minute dispatch to cath time (!). This means 17 minutes from when the first ring to hatzolah was made until this patient was on the table. These patients have a very high mortality rate.
Another example, Hatzolah brought in a patient which the attending ER physician refused to activate the cath lab, the paramedics contacted the cardiologist on call and were able to get the patient to the cath lab, I doubt that FDNY medics or any other EMS would have done that. This pt would have been diagnosed as an NSTEMI and had a scheduled cath during regular business hours, if he would have survived. (this patient had a 100% occlusion).
By no means am I mocking EMS, nor am I saying that there is data to suggest that outcome might be different depending on the agency that manages the patient. But given the choice most people would chose speed, dedication and resources vs a municipal agency.
Health,
No one is lying, you said such an article exists, (you have not yet produced the article), I pointed out that the dynamics are different. Comprehension my friend.
With the call volume, you call me a liar, but then say you doubt.. you either know or you do not.
Regarding the multi-tiered system, Is that your opinion or is that the consensus? Does it make sense to tie up an ALS only crew for a BLS call when a different ALS crew has to cover the next call in the area?
The progressive systems have two-tiered systems, such as Kings county medic one, it makes sure that there are adequate resources available at all times, it also makes sure that the medics treat patients that require ALS care instead of being tied up with patients that can adequately be managed by BLS, they can also downgrade the patient to BLS after appropriately assessing the patient, so they are exposed to more higher acuity patients and retain their skills and knowledge.
To put it in context, even on a busy shift, a single tiered ALS truck can respond to BLS only calls, vs a tiered response system would have these medics respond to ALS only calls. Which means more experience and more exposure to sicker patients. As Hatzolah does.
ubiquitin – I responded to your post earlier not sure why it disappeared, I will respond once again.
You mentioned two examples, strokes and heart attacks. The time windows you posted are correct, yet the context is incorrect.
Heart attacks, true hospitals have door to balloon or door to cath time, yet this by no means represents patient outcome. Time is muscle and minutes matter. If there is an occlusion in one of the blood vessels supplying the heart, the heart is getting injured and dying. the earlier that is taken care of and reperfused means fewer chances of the patient going into cardiac arrest or having permanent chronic heart failure (basically means less dead muscle or less dead meat in their chest).
Hospitals have ‘heart stats’ and ‘MI teams’ that are activated by EMS on the field, these patients are of the highest priority in the emergency room, they bypass all the normal procedures and are usually immediately are taken to the cardiac cath lab, no one sits around waiting even just one minute. Everyone knows that every wasted minute means more dead cells.
Paramedics can diagnose some heart attacks, they can activate the cath lab from the patients home so that the team in the hospital can begin prepping for the procedure. they can also initiate first-line treatment all the while the ambulance is pushing traffic to get to the patients home. which is why a grass routes EMS response makes a lot of sense. All of this reduces the overall time from onset until treatment and without doubt results in better patient outcomes.
Strokes, true there is a 3 hour window (or 4+ hour window that some comprehensive stroke centers have adopted) yet this is just for the cut off time, basically it means that once the patient is out of the time window the risks of administering tPA overweigh and is withheld. By no means does this mean that time is not of the essence.
Time is brain, every minute that elapses more cells die, EMS will usually make a stroke notification, neurology will await them at the door, the CT scanner will be cleared upon EMS’s notification, these patients are immediately taken to the scanner and treated. Everyone knows that minutes matter, minutes are what make a difference between no or minor neurological deficits versus major irreversible deficits. Minutes are what make the difference between a favorable and unfavorable outcome.
Besides, the time window is just for ischemic strokes, with hemorrhagic strokes, these patients are bleeding out and can have increased intracranial pressure, all in a matter of minutes, these are very high priority patients that usually require immediate airway management and neurosurgery.
Please do not state publicly that minutes do not matter when it comes to heart attacks and strokes, they do! If anyone is experiencing any symptoms of a heart attack or stroke they should immediately without delay call whichever EMS they prefer.
Why would someone say that compassion and dedication is inferior to a small paycheck? in fact, if compassion and dedication are lacking the care is probably watered down.
A lot of healthcare facilities in the areas that Hatzolah covers use Hatzolah as their primary EMS agency in an emergency, they do this by choice.
bk613, Just saw your post about the number of ‘jobs’ a paid EMT or Medic will see on a shift. It is not true, they will normally see 2 or 3 patients on a regular shift.
EMS has a lot of downtime and no one is rushing to leave the hospital to make themselves available for the next job.
EMS is a very low paying job, very few have this as their primary job or stay at this for a long time.
Health – if you have the article point to it. I highly doubt that there is such an article that discusses the dynamics of Hatzoloh for many reasons.
1) there are no other volunteer ALS agencies.
2) most volunteer agencies have 18 year olds or 70 year olds on the active roster. Hatzolah has middle aged people, many of them having a lot of years of experience.
3) Unlike the majority of volunteer BLS agencies, Hatzolah has a robust system with many of its members that are otherwise involved in the medical industry, including working for other EMS agencies as paid personnel, nurses, PAs and even doctors.
bk613 – I think that you are mixing up two different concepts, Hatzolah is by no means a DIY agency, they have the very same requirements that any other agency has. Their EMTs and Medics go to the same schools and colleges that any other EMT or Medic goes to. they have the same certification and license as well as the exact same continues education requirements that anyone else has.
Regarding the exposure argument, the average EMT and Medic in the 911 system does not do this full time, most 12 hour shifts see an average of 2 calls. Furthermore, a lot of 911 systems are not multi-tiered which means that if the caller gives a nature that would require paramedics, the medics will be dispatched and stuck with the transport, this is a waste of time and resources, this also means that some medics might have lower acuity calls their entire shift. This does not happen with most hatzolah systems.
Furthermore, most hatzolah systems are very busy and have high call volumes. divide these calls among the number of active members, this gives them a fair share of exposure.
Health, can you explain this better?
So you got burnt.
Thats what this is all about, you getting burnt from the Frum PC?
Not sure why my post was removed, (had to be visible for some time as CAD responded to it).
Yet I find it weird that one who practices medicine would not know the off label uses for albuterol, its pretty common stuff.
I would think that terbutaline would be given as a tocolytic instead of albuterol.
First Mazel Tov!! May you be zocha to have lots of nachas from this and other grandchildren.
What i would probably do, have a basic even in shull as per their guidelines, then have a family meal at home with maybe a handful of close friends or extended family for the meal.
Not really sure what the issue with this article and video is. It is self understood that when someone enters the race for any political office especially the presidential office their every move will be scrutinized and publicized. Where ever they might be going or whatever they will be doing, there will always be cameras clicking and recording.
Furthermore, she appears to be a bit frail and is not just being helped up to a normal walking position. The video starts off with her already being assisted, after the slip she gets additional assistance and continues the walk while being assisted from both sides, (like a rebbe..).
This is silly, mods can one of you explain what is going in here?
What would be interesting is to calculate how many generations or years it would take to reach the current world population.
Bump.
Harav belskys son has an english Sefer on this topic. He claims to have done extensive research and concludes that all of this originates and is based on avoda zarah.
If we believe that we can understand Hashems ways, that would mean we are limiting Hashem to only what our minds can grasp, when in reality its way greater than we perceive.
What might seem like a tragedy might turn out to be for our benefit.