Slashdot Mirror
Meet Web Hypochondriacs
prostoalex writes "When Jerome K. Jerome in 1889 described going to the British Museum to read medical encyclopedia and subsequently finding symptoms of almost all diseases in his body, he didn't realize the problem would exacerbate more than a century later. Web hypochondriacs are calling up doctors with requests for prescriptions for all sorts of diseases, since they discovered some similar symptoms on the Web. Wall Street Journal quotes a doctor: 'My impression is that people believe more of what they read than what I tell them. It seems that traditional Western medicine based on scientific evidence is less and less trusted by the general public. Meanwhile, some dubious theory from the Internet will be swallowed hook, line and sinker nine times out of 10.' "
That sounds EXACTLY like the problem *I* have!!!!
I hope there's a cure...
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
2000 BC: Here, take this root.
1000 AD: That root is for a heathen. Here, say this prayer.
1850 AD: That prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.
1940 AD: That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
1985 AD: That pill is ineffective. Here take this antibiotic.
2000 AD: That antibiotic is artificial. Here, eat this root.
2005 AD: That root works! Read about it on my blog!
Unfortunately, this applies to Wikipedia, too. It's a great resource, and mostly accurate. But many things that people post might be hearsay, if only for the fact that they don't cite any sources. Without citations, how can you really trust anything you read there?
WebMD is the worst thing to come along for Hypocondriacs since pneumoconiosis and other sesquipadelian afflictions.
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
Wall Street Journal quotes a doctor: 'My impression is that people believe more of what they read than what I tell them...
Of course! Because you're telling them things like "Stop smoking, don't drink so much, cut down the fat, get some excersize, brush your teeth and watch your diet". Who the hell wants to hear that? Websites aren't so much interested in your health as they are in getting ad impresions, so they probably aren't going to preach.
On the internet no one knows you're a fat lazy bastard with bad habits. [but if I were a betting man, that's where I'd put my money]
My wife will get some symptom, and then scour books and the web for indications of possible diagnosis. I found it funny after a while, but the first couple of times she declared that she had cancer or MS was quite worrying.
The funniest thing is that my wife is a doctor.
Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.
Doctors (their mistakes) are the 3rd leading cause of death in the USA.
- Leading-Cause-of-Death-in-the-US.htm
http://www.healingdaily.com/Doctors-Are-The-Third
This article is a little extreme. Almost half are due to unforseeable drug effects. But still, a good reason to doubt your doctor.
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!
I agree. I have many relatives who are online but not really technology savvy. Not a month goes by that I do not get CC'ed on some ridiculous email. I always go look it up on Snopes and do a reply to all with a link the Snopes article discrediting it. The thing that really gets me though, is a couple of times a year I will get one of these from someone who knows better. When I call them on it, I usually get the same response, "Well I figured better safe than sorry." Some how they just do not understand that by forwarding unsubstantiated false information they are perpetuating the problem.
Insert Generic Sig Here:
Self-diagnosing makes people feel more in control of their health. People perceive doctors as authority figures who take control away from the patients. People do not perceive sources they find on their own as controlling (even though many of the sources do have their own agendas) so they adopt the source's explanation rather than the doctors.
The desire to feel in control is such a powerful drive that people will trade concrete benefits like money or expert advice for the mere illusion of control.
I can't really empathize with doctors on this one. The last 4 or 5 times I've seen a doctor over probably the past 10 years, they have completely kept me in the dark with what's been wrong. I come in with congestion, or a cough, or a sore throat, and the result is always the same, they give me a new antibiotic, an inhaler, and some pseudophedrine.
I end up going to web md or some other website to do research and deduce what my symptoms point to. It seems like doctors no longer take the time to assess symptoms and determine what is actually wrong, they just dispense a few prescriptions, sign some paperwork, and send the patient on their way. It's not wonder that people want to get more info than what the MD profession is offering.
I have been suffering with some pretty fucking bad digestion problems all my life. I have the hershey squirts alot and real bad cramps in my stomach. I went to the gastrointestinal doctor here in my home town for a endoscopy and colonoscopy. He diagnosed me with IBS syndrome and sent me on my marry way saying it was just a nervous stomach. After suffering for 4 more years of that crap I decided to try and figure out what the hell was wrong with me. I googled my symptoms and found my symptoms closely related to Celiacs Disease...Almost identical in everyway to the people with Celiacs of what they described. I went to another doctor the week after reading the Celiacs website and was diagnosed after another biopsy as having Celiacs. Only after using the web to help me find out my symptoms was I actually diagnosed properly. Google saved my bowels from a lifelong of shitting and pain :/
I'm quite a hypochondriac myself. My doctor told me a few years ago that I had General Anxiety Disorder. When I told my girlfriend at the time she asked me "How do you feel about having G.A.D.?"
I responded, "Quite frankly it makes me a little nervous."
Without citations, how can you really trust anything you read there?
I'm sorry, but without proper citation, how can I know that your claim is true?
Well, the simple reason is that people don't trust their physicians anymore. Back in the Elder Days(tm) of Marcus Welby and so on, doctors took an interest in the health of their patients. A relationship was built over time. Finally, when the doc said, "You know, you need to go in and have surgery for this", a patient would do so without thinking twice because of the relationship and the longstanding trust between them.
Now, due to the way that doctors have to practice medicine (if they don't want to lose their shirts), they don't have a choice. 15 minutes in and out. No time to get to know their patients, no time to listen to the little old lady that just needs someone to talk to, no time to do anything but write a prescription and go on to the next patient. Now, when a doctor says, "That article on the internet is full of crap, you need surgery," people ask, "Why should I trust you? I don't know you."
If that doctor REALLY wants to know why people would believe an apocryphal story on the internet rather than him, he needs to look at the type of medicine he's practicing.
Note: This is not to blame him. Generally, with the reimbursement rates he's getting from the insurance plans with which he is signed, he is very limited in the amount of time he can spend with a patient. But the point remains: Speaking for myself, if someone wants to practice medicine on me, I have to trust them first. They've got lots of patients, but I only have one body. And the piece of paper on the wall saying M.D. only goes so far in building that trust.
Karma: Chameleon - mostly influenced by bad '80s New Wave music
Another one (here in the UK) has been where someone is told that there is nothing that can be done for some problem only for them to find out using the web that something can be done about it (usually in another country).
A good example is this story about a baby born with a deformed head who was wrongly told that nothing was wrong and to live with the deformity. Thankfully, in the next four months the baby will be fine.
Not that I'm suggesting that all doctors get it wrong but once in a while the web has been a life-saver.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
MOD parent up! I read this somewhere else on the web, too!!!
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
Is this the same scientific evidence that said "Margarine is good", "Eggs are bad", and "We know about triglyceride problems, but we'll built the Food Pyramid this way because people are too stupid?" I'm sorry, all medical "science" does is stumble around in circles until they land on top of something remotely approaching the truth.
You have a valid point to some extent, but much of what you're talking about doesn't come from the scientific medical establishment - it comes from agenda-driven groups, corporate shills, and govenrment administrations who buy their propoganda. For example, actual medical science indicates that obesity isn't particularly unhealthy. Inactivity, which often accomponies obesity, IS quite unhealthy. But if you get a reasonable amount of exercise, your health isn't likely to suffer from carrying extra pounds until you reach extreme limits, well past what is specified as being obese. In fact, you're likely to suffer fewer problems from being overweight than you are from being underweight. So why is there so much talk about the "obesity epedemic" in America? Because there's a multi-billion dollar diet and diet food industry out there that wants to sustain itself, and it pours lots and lots of money into advertising and propoganda. There have been lots of studies which do not control for inactivity. Those studies show a corelation between being overweight and health problems, and assume a cause and effect, when the real cause is the underlying inactivity. But the flawed studies are still being used to support the "obesity will kill you" claim. There are lots of honest, well-meaning, but misinformed people who really believe that obesity will kill you (hell, everybody knows it, right?) and they're interested in helping save your life.
What does the science tell you about your health and your weight? If you're interested in your health, throw out the scale. DON'T go on a diet but do pay a bit of attention to what you eat. Try to get a few vegetables in your system in between the Big Macs and the beer brats. But most importantly, get your ass up off the couch and get a bit of exercise. If it trims you down a bit, great. If not, don't worry about it. It ain't that big a deal. But that's not what the nutritionist and the diet industry tell you, and their voice is much louder than the actual science.
So please don't confuse medical science with the medical establishment or with the various government guides. They aren't the same thing at all.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
Granted, some B.S. seems to be slowly dying out - astrology and belief in space alien visitations, for example. But others seem absolutely rampant. We are awash in homeophathic medicine, claims of psychic powers, and on and on. And, yes, I include religion in this.
I guess rationality and empiricism just aren't cool these days. Perhaps people mistake skepticism with closed mindedness. Or perhaps, deep down, they just don't care whether what they believe is true or not.
If you have alot of lower back pain but aren't fat, try drinking water ONLY for a few weeks.
Two meanings for this:
1. Go on a fasting diet where you don't eat food but do drink liquids;
2. Drink more water (several more glasses per day) to your normal diet;
The first concept, fasting, is of dubious value. BUT: According to the CRON diet people, and peer-reviewed research into longevity, the ONLY known way to extend the lifespan of a mouse is to reduce their available caloric intake while maintaining a proper nutritional diet. This forces the metabolism into a maintenance-mode (instead of growth-mode) so all energies are put into repairing cellular damage and decay. This method is proven to work in many animals, but is
Sure, you'll be healthy and feel great, but you'll also feel really hungry. Not sure I like the option.
The second is a reasonable response to your kidneys complaining; flush them out and keep them flushed for a bit, but don't go overboard, too much water can really put a strain on your kindeys, too, and in extreme cases (several gallons per day for many days straight) can be toxic, since your body loses electrolytes, and (b) cannot eliminate that much water.
If you constantly crave a certain type of food, whatever is in it may be lacking in your body.
Very true, but misleading. Doughnuts do not apply. If you crave carrots or broccoli or salt, this might mean you need these things or the nutrients they contain. If you crave Ho-Ho's, your body is just being gluttenous.
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
While this may be true, I don't know what's scientific about a typical Doctor's diagnosis. It's just practice of an Art, based on experience. Typically, a Doctor will not setup an experiment and often, they won't even run any kind of instrumented test, they'll just ask you what symptoms you have, make some notes and make a diagnosis.
Is this the same scientific evidence that said "Margarine is good", "Eggs are bad"
No, they never said anything of the sort. YOU, as the general population, took what they DID say and made 3-word sentences out of it because that's all you're capable of understanding.
Medical science is usually very fair about what they know and don't know, it's what happens when the information gets out into the uneducated masses that it changes into some degenerate version of itself.
Maybe if the American Medical Association and its industry didn't keep prices artificially inflated by restricting the supply of doctors, while demand explodes, doctors would be seen as respected members of the community, rather than inaccessible luxuries.
I was in the pre-med track for 10 years, starting in junior high school, and the #1 lesson for everyone is that the system is designed to "weed out" most of the people who want to become doctors. The weeding isn't done on the basis of one's compassion, or one's committment to medical science, or even to one's skill at medical practice. In fact, those essential criteria aren't even in the game until college, or even med school. Along the way, it's just pure competition, mostly measuring how much abuse people will stand, from the program and from each other, before they quit. The system lets people study subjects that get relatively easier grades than do sciences, so they are more competitive numerically. In fact, practically everything that aspiring doctors must do to get into med school selects for people who just want to make a lot of money, are indifferent to the suffering of others (or who relish it), who discard curiosity and compassion in favor of absolute focus on the bottom line: protecting their time and money from any threat, including patients.
Sure, doctors have to deal with insurance (patient and malpractice, at each end) and other dehumanizing bureaucracies when they start to practice. But by then they're in the doctor supply, so it's only the prospect of that that inhibits "people people" from staying in the game. Not only does the med school track select for people ill suited to be "caregivers" (rather than mechanics or drug pushers), it just artificially reduces the supply of people trained to help other people's medical conditions. And of course our high-stress, high-pollution, bad-diet lives create ever more medical problems to treat. The combination supply/demand problem means not enough doctors to treat too many patients, driving up prices, and driving a wedge between the people who need some of the utmost intimacy to succeed in their relationship.
Doctors make a lot of money. Pharma and insurance companies make even more. It's practically all profit: the costs of running a doctor's practice are large only when counting their insurance, which is of course driven up by the supply/demand crisis. We should extract enough of those profits, especially from insurance and pharma companies, to double or triple the number of doctors. We should expand medical schools across the country. Require the top 20% of schools, which depend on public subsidies for their research (which they then sell for profit), to double the number of graduates they produce. We have at least that many people who want to be doctors, including foreigners who need retraining/recertification, that could change the supply picture within 5-10 years. And we should require every med student who receives government subsidies to relocate to an underserved community for at least as long as they were paid to go to school - usually at least 7 years. If they're going to cash in on socialist financing of their careers, the people should get what we pay for: more doctors for more people, not more golfers at Boston golf courses.
--
make install -not war