Friday, August 24, 2007

anti-euthanasia talk

  SPUC  Kensington & Chelsea  Branch
 
Dear  Medical Matrix readers,
 
You  are all very  welcome  to  hear  Miss  Teresa  Lynch,  founding  Chair,  talk  about  the  aims & achievements  of  'Nurses  opposed  to  euthanasia'.  The  group  supports  nurses  and  other  medical  professionals  threatened  with  having  to  let  patients  die  in  hospitals  today ~ http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/noe/   I  enclose  the  aims  of  NoE
          7.30p.m,  Tues.  25th  Sept,
              24  Smith  Terrace,
           LONDON,  SW3  4DL
        (All welcome;  Admission  free  of  course)
The  nearest  tube  is  Sloane  Square & walk  down  the  King's  Road,  left  into  Smith  Street,  right  into  Smith  Terrace;  there  is  free  meter & single-yellow  line  car  parking  around  Smith  Terrace  after  6.30pm.
 
Here  are  some  relevant  links  http://www.spuc.org.uk/ethics/euthanasia/
 
SPUC's  free  Pro-Life  Times  ( http://www.spuc.org.uk/pro-life-times/  &  prolifetimes@blueyonder.co.uk )  constantly  opposes  euthanasia.  Might  you  be  interested  in  submitting  an  article  about  euthanasia-related  matters ?  I  trust  you  are  aware  of  our  division  'No less Human'  for  those  with  disabilities  http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/no-less-human/
 
See  also  http://www.spuc.org.uk/about/pfn/  (we  can  provide  100s  of  leaflets  about  'Patients First'  if  you  know  of  those  interested),  and  links  to  relevant  books  at  http://www.chninternational.com/no_water_no_life_bk_by_g_craig.html  and  http://www.argospress.com/Resources/medical/book-0253205174.htm
 
All  kind  regards.
In  defence  of  life,
 
William Jolliffe  (Branch  Secretary), 
 
24  Smith  Terrace,  LONDON,  SW3  4DL;  Tel. 020 - 7352 - 7212 / Mobile 07973 - 510 - 144
williamhmjolliffe@yahoo.co.uk
www.jolliffephotos.com



Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The Ethics of Cosmetic Surgery

 
 
Advances in plastic and reconstructive surgery have revolutionised the management of patients suffering from disfiguring congenital abnormalities, burns and skin cancers. Aesthetic (or cosmetic) surgery refers to plastic surgery performed to improve physical appearance in the absence of pathology. The demand for aesthetic surgery has increased in recent years as our culture has become more concerned with image and appearance.
 
Many regard aesthetic surgery as a panacea for their personal and relationship difficulties. This may reflect modern image-obsessed popular culture, but it can be due to deep-rooted insecurities. Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDB) is a psychiatric syndrome, characterised by a pre-occupation with a non-existent or minimal cosmetic "defect" associated with persistent attempts to have the defect surgically corrected. BDB is increasingly recognised, and may be becoming more prevalent.
 
In the National Health Service (NHS), finite resources limit the availability of aesthetic surgery to those who suffer significant psychological distress due to their appearance. In the independent healthcare sector, aesthetic surgery has increased in popularity, reflecting increased consumer demand.
 
In 1979, Beauchamp and Childress published Principles of Biomedical Ethics, in which they presented four "principles" that have since been adopted as the ethical basis for contemporary UK medical practice. They argued that these principles "bridged" high-level moral theory and what they described as "low-level common morality". These principles included: respect for autonomy, beneficience, non-maleficience and justice. Whilst these principles were developed to guide physicians treating those suffering ill health, they provide the ethical framework which underpins modern surgical practice.
 
Respect for Patient autonomy
 
In general, competent adults have the right to decide whether they wish to undergo a surgical procedure. Providing they are given sufficient information, on which to make an informed decision, patients' wishes must be respected. Information must include the risks of surgery together with alternative options. These principles still apply to aesthetic surgery where patients are not suffering from an "illness".
 
Beneficience
 
This principle requires medical practitioners to act in patients "best interests". Undertaking surgery to improve a patients self-image and esteem is acceptable. However, defining patients best interests can be very difficult. Many people experience real pain, discomfort, social handicap and suffering because they are self-conscious about their appearance. This group benefit from aesthetic surgery.
 
Non-maleficience
 
This principle ensures that doctors never act against patients' best interests or in a way that may harm a patient. Consultant plastic surgeons may decline to operate on patients if they do not believe that surgery is in patients' interests. Surgeons are reluctant to operate on those with unrealistic expectations, as the risks of surgery may outweigh any benefits. Patients with serious health problems are at increased risk of suffering complications under general anaesthesia, and again the risks may outweigh the benefits. All such assessments need to be made on an individual basis. In the past, there has been a perception that surgeons have a potential conflict of interest in the independent sector. No surgeon would ever proceed with an operation merely for personal pecuniary gain. All surgeons take their duty of care to their patients very seriously.
 
Justice
 
This principle requires doctors to ensure that medical care to available to all. Equitable access to healthcare is regarded as a basic human right. However, resources are limited and it is not possible for the National Health Service to provide aesthetic surgery for all those who would like it. "Rationing" takes place on the basis of clinical need. Inevitably, this introduces subjective judgments about whose need is greater. In the private sector, those who can afford to pay can undergo surgery.
 
 
 
With appropriate patient selection, aesthetic surgery can offer excellent cosmetic results. Patients must undergo thorough pre-operative assessment and counseling before surgery. This may require expert psychological assessment. Surgeons must ensure that patients' expectations are realistic. Surgeons need to explain the likely benefits of surgery, alternative non-surgical options as well as the risks of surgery and anaesthesia. Patients need to make an informed choice regarding whether surgery is right for them. Consultant surgeons and consultant anaesthetists treating patients, undergoing cosmetic procedures, should be on the General Medical Councils' Specialist Register. Surgery should only be undertaken in premises that are fully-equipped, with resuscitation facilities and staff trained in advanced life support. Clinics and hospitals providing aesthetic surgery should be registered with the Healthcare Commission.
 
 
For further information:
 
The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
References
 
Beauchamp and Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Fourth Edition.
Oxford. 1979


Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Andrew Wakefield: Galileo or Shipman

There is a free circus in town, or rather in the Coliseum, for the next month. Get your tickets at the GMC, and hear good doctors made fools of trying to defend an open mind.

I spent the morning at the GMC, on Euston Rd, where they will decide whether Andrew Wakefield is a son of Satan or a misunderstood honest researcher doing his best to make sense of a complex topic. This morning's session was one of the supporting or warm-up acts, Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet. Horton is one the few remaining voices for free medical thought, fewer since Richard Smith left the British Medical Journal.

The first few hours raised the following questions

The procedure - Can the GMC set the standard, prosecute offenders and judge the case? All in all, a bit like the Inquisition

The GMC Panel - ? fit for purpose - too early to say - none of them said very much.

The prosecution, 'Miss (married) Smith' more of an actress than a barrister - perfect pitch, excellent vocal modulation, and a full range of styles. She was able to encompass serious, pitiful, scathing, patronising and even attempt humour, using a wonderfully contrived Sloane-style diction, within one speech. RADA 1985?

The defence, I warmed to the defence Barrister, sensible, down to earth and very aware of the size of the storm in the GMC teacup. Everyone should have one.

The question to be decided Galileo or Shipman? - Not Shipman, as no patients have ever come to harm as a result of Dr Andrew Wakefields clinical activity. But you can't tell that from the size of the party.

Galileo? Yes and No! This is not a big controversy, these are not ideas that will shake the universe. MMR and autism are they associated? the paper about which there is all the fuss, actually concluded that there was no evidence that they were.

However, what did Galileo actually change? were his ideas earth shattering? not immediately but they opened the floodgates to allow scientific thought to think the unthinkable and unseat the Church from its position as the arbiter of knowledge.

Wakefield is guilty of looking for a cause for autism. Autism, like Alzheimers, like Polycystic ovaries, like heart disease did not exist in Galileo's time. They are all conditions of which we do not know the cause. They are spreading faster than the plague in the middle ages. The plague left a third of the population dead. By contrast, these diseases are big business. The healthcare industry provides reliable growth, year on year. The economy of health would bankrupt America and most of the Western world.

As doctors we are taught that we do not know the cause of these conditions. We tell you, our patients that we do not know the cause of these conditions but take these drugs, and it will all get better.

But we know the cause of everything else, we know how computers work, how to get rockets in space, we know what caused the World Trade Center to collapse, we even know how to predict a hurricane. But we don't know the cause of diseases that are unheard of in the developing world, that people only get when they move to the West, diseases that are rising in incidence year on year, that even in the West occur more often with an unhealthy lifestyle than with an unhealthy lifestyle ??? has anyone in the audience got any ideas??

Are they
1) - Visitations from outer space
2) - Down to processed food, the way we live and what we do to ourselves
3) - Caused by viruses at the neuromuscular junction *


Even twenty years ago these diseases were rare, dementia in the under eighties was rare, so rare that if a 'youngster' became demented, they warranted a brain biopsy. Now dementia is so common patients rarely even get a CT Scan. Polycystic ovaries were called SteinLeventhal syndrome and went to a specialist clinic. And type II diabetes - there was no type II diabetes.

Andrew Wakefield dared to ask what causes Autism. We live in a cause and effect universe, that is not an unreasonable question.

So if you can think what might be causing the current epidemic of disease, from glaucoma to dementia, from diabetes to cancer - answers on a postcard please

The first correct answer wins a cat and the editor's decision is final




* Recent answer from a Teaching Hospital consultant when asked what he thought caused irritable bowel syndrome.


Copyright (c) Dr. Liz Miller

http://www.drlizmiller.co.uk

Friday, August 03, 2007

Just as you thought it was safe to go into hospital

Finally, even the BBC has noticed that there will be no doctors on the hospital wards this week as doctors complete their biannual migration.

Yes don't be ill - this month, or next month, or anytime before Christmas. If you want your doctors trained, I would recommend you time your illness for early January 2008. Just after the Christmas break. By then, the doctors will have been in the job for five months, and should know what they are doing.

Research (I love that word, its covers more than Elizabeth Arden over 55s make-up) shows that in Industry it takes five to six months before a person has learnt their job well to be of value to their company. Which is almost exactly the time, when we get ready for the next round of medical chairs.

This year there is a severe shortage of chairs, leaving approximately 10,000 doctors without a job. Many of these are top class graduates, not great at filling out forms and describing themselves in 100 words or less, but prize winners, first class students, able and willing.

Political correctness has gone beserk. It is has been decreed that all doctors must compete on an equal footing. In order not to give bright hard working graduates an unfair advantage, they hvae not been allowed to mention their class of degree, their prizes or any other achievement gained during their student years. So the decision as to who to employ has been made largely on their ability to fill out a form. Bureaucracy begets bureaucracy!

The bureaucrats are in the process of making medicine in their own image. Form filling rules. It no longer matters what happens to a patient, or what you learn from your experience only that you fill in the correct accident form to make sure you are 'covered'. This system will only work if doctors are selected from an early age, on their ability to fill out a form properly. This suits 'Sensitive-Individuals' that is fear-driven, task not people-focused individuals who are not fit to be let out on their own in a mortuary.

It is amazing how much has been lost in the present sandstorm of confusion

1)Modernising medical careers - a way to shorten and cheapen the way we train doctors
2) An IT collapse and fiasco providing a diversion worthy of the French Resistance to make sure no one noticed exactly how many doctors would be unemployed.
3)10,000 unemployed doctors
4) Everyone swapping jobs August 1st - so just make sure you aren't ill.

And now, as everyone is going on holiday, lets take our illnesses abroad.

That comment is truer than I realised. I have had an interesting conversation with a Refugee liason worker, the days of medical tourism are over. Refugees now go to Italy and Germany for their medical care, rather than the UK. It may be easier to get treated here, but the quality is not what it was.

That story reminds me of the time I had a suitcase stolen and lost half its contents. The other half were left with the case, round the corner. I couldn't bear to wear anything that had been left with the case - after all if it wasn't good enough to be stolen, it definitely wasn't good enough for me.

So if our health care isn't good enough for an asylum seeker, why is it good enough for us?

(c) Dr. Liz Miller

http://www.drlizmiller.co.uk

Thursday, August 02, 2007




MEDICAL MATRIX is part of RED CUBE MEDIA LIMITED © 2007, All Rights Reserved. Company No.: 6309631 VAT No.: GB 863 7338 95.