Articles related to BUSINESS & POLICY

A strongly worded opinion piece in The British Medical Journal argues that evidence-based medicine has been corrupted. Specifically, the editorial piece argues that the pharmaceutical industry’s responsibility to its shareholders means that priority must be given to their hierarchical power structures, product loyalty, and public relations propaganda over scientific integrity.

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) is taking issue with the US Senate’s recently passed legislation that will make daylight saving time (DST) permanent starting in 2023. AASM cautions that this permanent change would lead to health risks that include adverse cardiovascular events, mood disorders, and motor vehicle crashes. The group advocates for establishing permanent standard time instead.

Admit or treat them on an outpatient basis? Too often it is the health plan that makes the decision, leaving the medical team and patient to bear the burden.

MedPage Today has published a rebuttal to an article published in The Washington Post newspaper where a pair of economists criticize physicians and the expense of medical care in the US. The rebuttal takes issue with the assertion that doctors are “muggers” and co-conspirators in “taking money away from the rest of us,” as well as the ways in which healthcare costs are quantified in The Washington Post article. The author of the rebuttal stresses that there is a lack of respect towards physicians today that is driving many people from medicine.

Is there a link between climate change and poverty? Does hate affect the risk for chronic health conditions? Is telehealth the model for medicine’s future? Or will something much more ancient be reestablished? How will the Millennial worldview affect how medicine is practiced? This archive of top physician TED talks is worth your while.

For patients being prescribed isotretinoin, there used to be three risk categories: women of reproductive potential, women not of reproductive potential, and males. The new risk classifications are two: those who can become pregnant and those who cannot. This change was based on stakeholder feedback that gender-specific language can be a barrier to access for patients who do not identify with the previous gender-specific patient categories.