Search the KHIT Blog

Sunday, May 12, 2019

"This doctor posted online in favor of immunization."

An infuriating article in The Boston Globe.
This doctor posted online in favor of immunization. Then vaccine opponents targeted her
By Liz Kowalczyk

Dr. Monique Tello was attending a medical conference last fall when a speaker on social media suggested the physicians search themselves on Google. Why not, thought Tello, an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital.

She was stunned by what she found.

More than 100 negative one-star reviews and derogatory comments had been posted about her on popular physician rating websites.

“Ignorant, and could care less about her patients,’’ she recalled one poster writing.

“Danger,’’ another warned.

Tello soon discovered these comments were not from people who had been her patients, she said, but instead from anti-vaccine activists. The reviews on the websites Vitals and Healthgrades began pouring in last August, soon after Tello wrote pro-vaccine commentary on another doctor’s Instagram account…
Read all of it. Simply infuriating. See @ScienceBasedMed's voluminous postings on the vaccination issues.

Dr. Tello is fighting back. e.g., on Facebook:

Bullying and cyberbullying of physicians is becoming an enormous issue, especially now that so many of us are trying to have more of an online presence. Many of us have experienced being bullied online through comments on out pages, fake bad reviews, and more. Sometimes if can be massive groups that decide to attck like the antivaxxers or fans of a particular person or group. We need better education and support when this happens. I hope this can be that place. Please share your stories so we can learn from you. Please ask your questions so you can learn from others. Please post anything you think might be valuable to fellow physicians this may be happening to.
I'm not an MD, so I can't join (it's a closed group). If you're a doc, join up and fight back. What's next with these lunatic people? Actual assaults? Death threats? Attempted (or successful) murders of vaccination proponents (like have happened over the abortion issue)?

Enough of this Idiocracy stuff.



Saw a book review on STATnews. Bought the book immediately.

From the Amazon blurb:
From a giant of health care policy, an engaging and enlightening account of why American health care is so expensive—and why it doesn't have to be
Uwe Reinhardt was a towering figure and moral conscience of health care policy in the United States and beyond. Famously bipartisan, he advised presidents and Congress on health reform and originated central features of the Affordable Care Act. In Priced Out, Reinhardt offers an engaging and enlightening account of today's U.S. health care system, explaining why it costs so much more and delivers so much less than the systems of every other advanced country, why this situation is morally indefensible, and how we might improve it.
The problem, Reinhardt says, is not one of economics but of social ethics. There is no American political consensus on a fundamental question other countries settled long ago: to what extent should we be our brothers' and sisters' keepers when it comes to health care? Drawing on the best evidence, he guides readers through the chaotic, secretive, and inefficient way America finances health care, and he offers a penetrating ethical analysis of recent reform proposals. At this point, he argues, the United States appears to have three stark choices: the government can make the rich help pay for the health care of the poor, ration care by income, or control costs. Reinhardt proposes an alternative path: that by age 26 all Americans must choose either to join an insurance arrangement with community-rated premiums, or take a chance on being uninsured or relying on a health insurance market that charges premiums based on health status.
An incisive look at the American health care system, Priced Out dispels the confusion, ignorance, myths, and misinformation that hinder effective reform.
Stay tuned. Relatedly, see my posts going to "An American Sickness" and "Are we overcharged for health care?"


My latest Science Magazine hardcopy arrived today. Loaded with cool stuff, including this (firewalled, alas):
Building upon foundations for evidence-based policy
There is no natural constituency for evidence-based policy. It should, by rights, be the public who wants the most from their government (and their public funds). But the public, like most politicians, is often not aware of the ins and outs of evaluation methods and evidence. Think tanks and academics have long filled this gap and will likely continue to play key roles. But legislation signed into law in early 2019 could transform the way U.S. government officials design programs by introducing more scientific evidence into the process…
Very interesting. I will be all over this stuff. I'm already dissecting the legislation it cites.


We need "evidence-based" deliberation more than ever.

More to come...

No comments:

Post a Comment