Doctors Seeing a Rise In "Google-itis"

It's one of the fastest-growing health issues that doctors now face: "Google-itis." Everyone from concerned mothers to businessmen on their lunch break are typing in symptoms and coming up with rare diseases or just plain wrong information. Many doctors are bringing computers into examination rooms now so they can search along with patients to alleviate their fears. "I'm not looking for a relationship where the patient accepts my word as the gospel truth," says Dr. James Valek. "I just feel the Internet brings so much misinformation to the (exam) room that we have to fight through all that before we can get to the problem at hand."

Comments

Hypochondria?

[idontgno]

There's an app for that!

Re:Hypochondria?

[ducomputergeek]

Indeed: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/webmd-mobile/id295076329?mt=8

Re:Hypochondria?

[RingDev]

In a world filled with perfect Doctors, I would agree with you. But in today's world of general practitioners who spend as little time with their patients as possible, individuals must take some amount of the research on to themselves.

My wife for example, is extremely flexible, to the point of being able to touch her fore-arm with her thumb on the same hand, dislocating joints, and other non-normal flexibility issues. She asked her doctor about it and got the basic "Is it causing you pain? No? Ignore it." But while researching another medical condition that she had been diagnosed with, she came across a reference to a genetic disease that causes this type of flexibility. She talked to her mother about it, 60 years old and still quite limber. She talked to her grandmother about it, 90 years old and she can still touch her toes with out bending her knees and join her hands behind her back (one over the shoulder, one under). It was pretty clear that the female side of her family was carrying this trait.

So next time she went to see her doctor, she mentioned the disease and the family history, the doc laughed and told her to leave the diagnosis to the "pros".

A month later when she was going to her new patient exam with her new general practitioner, she brought up the disease and family history. The doc listened, ordered some tests, and discovered that she did indeed have the disease. And it altered the treatment of her other condition.

So I'm just saying, even a good general practitioner won't be able to suss out all of your ailments if they are trying to diagnose you based on a 5 minute interview and what's in your chart. But if you point out some of the research you've done, even if they don't take you at your word, it can be enough to make them want to investigate that same avenue.

-Rick

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of joke is that?

They omitted the sexual organs on a naked medical illustration?

Pitiful.

Re:Hypochondria?

[deathlyslow]

Sounds very much like EDS. If so i feel her pain, my sister and myself both have the symptoms to varying degrees. Good look and glad it was found and more importantly taken seriously. Although it depends on the type/classification of EDS is used to be thought of as predominately affecting females, it can be transferred to the male offspring as well.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Kell Bengal]

It's a good point. I've had a similar experience. I was told by my doctor that I had an incurable condition and would require expensive medication semi-regularly for the rest of my life. I immediately set out to learn more about the illness and upon doing further research I noted that some things didn't quite add up. I insisted on extra tests (just to be sure, doc) and sure enough they came back negative.

Now, a bit of internet reading won't make me an expert, but during my consultation it allowed me to be an active participant and not just a recipient of diagnosis from on high.

Re:Hypochondria?

[PakProtector]

I don't think you understand. Your wife is a rarity.

I am not a doctor. I am studying to be one. I talk to a lot of doctors. The patients who come in who have diagnosed themselves correctly, or close to correctly, such as getting the 'genus' of a disorder or disease correct while the 'species' is incorrect, are so rare that they tend to remember them.

Compare it to a Help Desk worker -- how many callers, per centum, do you think that Help Desk worker gets who would call up, have a correct or nearly so idea about what is wrong, and be calling only to get instructions on how to fix it?

Re:Hypochondria?

[Pax681]

What kind of joke is that?

They omitted the sexual organs on a naked medical illustration?

Pitiful.

ah i think i might be able to assist you in understanding apples stance on that my friends

the only prick allowed on Apple.com is Steve Jobs :P

Re:Hypochondria?

[Lucky75]

Mod parent +1 Please! LOL

Re:Hypochondria?

[Opportunist]

Depends on the caller. Just as much as on the patient.

When you are working with a small set of potential callers (i.e. in-house support, compared to, say, an ISP), you quickly start to know your "patients". You know the ones that call you every time a fart got blocked in their bowels and they want you to cure it (i.e. hold their hands, pet them, tell them to think of something pleasant...), the ones that call, have no idea but will do whatever you tell them, even if that includes making a handstand on their desk, and then you'll also have the ones that know what's wrong but simply lack the permissions to solve it.

You will run into that kind of patients. They know what's wrong with them, but need you to OK check the pills or the operation.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Thelasko]

Yeah, there will always be hypochondriacs. However, in the past, patients used to blindly trust their doctors. These days, doctors have to convince their patients that they have made a correct diagnosis. I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

What are these "sexual organs" of which you speak?

Re:Hypochondria?

[Intron]

I used to have H. Ross Perot coming into my house and showing me pie charts on outsourcing. You're right, it's very painful.

Oh, wait. You're talking about some other EDS.

Re:Hypochondria?

[gront]

Hi! I'm Clippy, your disease assistant. Would you like some assistance today? It looks like you are trying to diagnose syphilis. Sometimes blisters just pop up for no particular reason, like now.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Sad Loser]

IAAD, but an emergency physician so people generally don't have time to look stuff up. Or if they do, by definition, it's not an emergency. And the waiting room is in a Faraday cage, so their iphones don't work either, a very satisfactory arrangement.

When I talk to my GP (family physician) colleagues about this, they say you have to work with it, and this phenomenon always occurred to a certain extent, it's just that in the old days the nutters had to go to the medical libraries, and so were easier to identify. Nowadays, quite rational people look up their symptoms and get things right, and this is good.

There are real medical problems with the internet and increased accessibility of information, but far more than increasing anxiety, I would say worse problems are:

• Astroturfing by pharmaceutical companies - pressure groups, patient groups with suspiciously slick websites
• quack cures
• aggressive libel laws stifling scientific debate which in the old days would have been shielded from lawyers.
• looneys can find each other and associate more easily, and act aggressively to those who do not share their very strange view of the world - e.g. 'Myalgic Encephalitis sufferers' (an alleged condition that is neither myalgic or encephalitis and it is everyone else who does the suffering).
  
  Patients usually give you a clue that they are a looney though, which is very helpful. Favoured tell-tale signs are wearing tinted glasses, a soft neck collar or making notes in purple ink or with RANDOM capitalised words, or using one of those obesity scooter things. But if they seem relatively normal, I listen carefully and explain, because quite often they are right.
  
  BTW, I presume you were referring to this? Although some other conditions can do this as well.

Re:Hypochondria?

[h4rr4r]

I am not a doctor, but have had lots of doctors like the one he described. I almost died in an ER before they found out that stress was not what was causing my hands, legs and face to go numb and become confused. The cardiologist ordered a simple blood test and lo an behold the answer was right there.

Doctors tend think they are artists when they would be better served being engineers and scientists. Not ordering tests and just guessing does not make you a better doctor.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is: Epocrates; as an EMT I use it to help in pill ID and basic medical guessing (EMT's are not allowed diagnose- just report symptoms, but they can guess and rule things out)

Re:Hypochondria?

[harl]

Must be quite the disease. Must be serious impact on the living conditions.

Grandma lived to at least 90 and never even suspected she had it. That's better than most health nuts reach.

What are the short term and long term side effects of the medication for this disease?

Re:Hypochondria?

[SamSim]

"Get a second opinion" has always been good advice in medicine. The internet is not a good place to get a second opinion, but if encourages people to get second opinions from real doctors, that's a net positive.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Organs which are played sexually.

Re:Hypochondria?

[cloudkiller]

I've had a similar experience too and the result, although somewhat debatable, made a profound impact on my life. My wife and I struggled with infertility for years. She has a host of medical conditions that each could play a part in this infertility. One condition involved hyperthyroidism. After some research on the web, people with similar conditions claimed that using a medication to reduce thyroid levels to a certain range helped with infertility. The doctor we brought this up to disregarded our research and cited the acceptable range of thyroid hormone he learned about in medical school So we went back home and did some additional research. We found out that what is considered an acceptable range is debatable and recently that range was changed from a broad range to a much smaller one but this new range was not university accepted in the medical community. Back to the doctor we went (we live in a small town with only one endocrinologist available) and we discussed our findings again and demanded that he medicate my wife. He did and three months later she was pregnant.

In my doctor's defense, he was trying to avoid having my wife need this thyroid medication for the rest of her life. However, to us (her especially) it was worth the chance. Obviously, I'm all for people having access to information. It is our health, our body, our insurance money after all. If this is an inconvenience to doctors too bad, like it or not this is part of your job.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what is the bad point of this "disease"?
I wouldn't call extreme flexibility a disease.

Re:Hypochondria?

[dlgeek]

Compare it to a Help Desk worker -- how many callers, per centum, do you think that Help Desk worker gets who would call up, have a correct or nearly so idea about what is wrong, and be calling only to get instructions on how to fix it?

It depends on what kind of Help Desk. If you're talking about a large ISP or Microsoft, sure, I'll agree with you. However, a helpdesk for an engineering firm, especially one supporting software engineers typically have much more educated users who often can diagnose the problem to a certain point (or even all the way) but don't have the time/inclination/permissions to address it. I would assume that doctors are in the same boat: some have patients like this, a lot don't.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you understand. Your wife is a rarity.

I don't think you understand. The doctor's job is to diagnose the disease. It's not to come to a conclusion based on the limited amount of effort they want to put towards it and then ignore any evidence to the contrary because they don't think the source could possibly know more than them. I've done computer support. The diagnosing part is a lot more similar than most people give credit with 2 glaring exceptions. The first exception is usually lives aren't at risk diagnosing computer problems. And second is with computer problems whether you get it right or wrong is much better defined and much more accounted for. If you fail to fix the computer it's obvious and you're likely not to have a job for long after more than a few failures. That's not the case for medical professionals even though the consequences of mistakes or failure are MUCH higher.

When trying to figure out a computer problem we don't get the luxury of asking a few questions then declaring what the problem is and walking away cause if we're wrong the computer is still not going to be working. We actually have to resolve the issue and fix it. This requires a great deal of detective work and critical thinking including being critical of one's own conclusions and the resulting prejudices. It also requires getting the information required to solve the problem from the people who have it despite their best efforts to not provide it or to provide misinformation. Whether the wife in the example above was a rarity or not all information should be taken into account when making a diagnosis. Should you believe all information? Hell no. But you should follow up to point of convincing yourself that the information is not important rather than just dismissing it out of hand. Unfortunately way too many doctors take your attitude and often end up missing the critical bit of information that was vital to a correct diagnostic as in the case above. Far too many doctors think they're much smarter than they are and assume other people are dumber than they are. Note that the opposite is true of intelligent people. Intelligent have a much greater tendency to underestimate their own intelligence while over estimating that of others.

Re:Hypochondria?

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

Calling help desk with a legitimate problem and getting talked down to is also infuriating. Don't accept the patient's self-diagnosis on faith, sure, but you sound like you're endorsing brushing people off. There's no excuse for a GP not at least looking into something that worries the patient. If you know the research and you can confidently say, "that's not it," then fine. If you don't know, look it up and get back to them. If it's beyond you, refer them to a specialist. All of those things are part of your job description.

If you are really trying to say that we should avoid taking potential problems seriously just because there is a lot of ignorance in the matter, or are trying to say that we should avoid looking into things ourselves and only accept the Diagnosis From On High, I hope your attempt to be a doctor is shot down in flames. No offense.

Re:Hypochondria?

[spun]

I am not a doctor, but have had lots of doctors like the one he described. I almost died in an ER before they found out that stress was not what was causing my hands, legs and face to go numb and become confused. The cardiologist ordered a simple blood test and lo an behold the answer was right there.

Doctors tend think they are artists when they would be better served being engineers and scientists. Not ordering tests and just guessing does not make you a better doctor.

I hate it when my hands, legs and face get confused. My hands put on shoes, my legs try to talk, and my face tries to type.

Sorry, I couldn't help it. But here's a doctor joke to help you forget what I jerk I am.

So this doctor dies and goes to heaven. There's a huge long line at the pearly gates, but the doctor doesn't want to wait. He goes up to St. Peter and say, "Hey, I'm a doctor. Don't I deserve to go ahead of all these schlubs?" And St. Peter says, "First come first server, go wait in line." SO the doctor is waiting, when he sees another doctor walk right up to the front of the line, wave to St. Peter, and stroll on in to heaven. Well, now the first doctor is really pissed, and he runs up to St. Peter, yelling, "I thought you said first come first served, how come that other doctor got in ?" And St. Peter just laughs and says, "That wasn't a doctor. That was God. He just likes to play doctor some times."

Re:Hypochondria?

[RingDev]

I tell ya what, go catch a ball thrown by your child and dislocate a couple of fingers. Pop them back into place the come back here and type about the impact on your living conditions. Go through a couple of joint surgeries and get medically discharged from the Navy after blowing out your knees for the third time, then joke about an elderly grandmother.

All in all though, the hyper flexibility is the lesser of her concerns, but understanding it has allowed the doctors to better treat her primary health concerns.

-Rick

Re:Hypochondria?

[The Archon V2.0]

What kind of joke is that?

They omitted the sexual organs on a naked medical illustration?

Pitiful.

Could be worse. I recall an infomercial for some medical-ish urinary tract health thing that censored the diagram the huckster in a lab coat was using by sticking a white piece of paper over the head of the penis. Not the whole thing, just the head. So you see this diagram that immediately looks wrong and draws attention to the censorship.

But it gets worse. The white of the censor paper blended with the white of the diagram's background at first glance, so I thought I was looking at a drawing of a penis that had been, er, "decapitated". I quickly realized my mistake, but I'd already got the image of a severed penis in my mind.

WAY more off-putting than your standard cross-section. Their attempts to protect delicate TV-viewing penis-fearing psyches made things so very much worse.

Re:Hypochondria?

[h4rr4r]

Good one. I of course meant that after suffering numbness I would become confused. So much so in fact that the ER admitting nurse assumed me to be drunk. It took the word of the police officer that drove me to the ER to convince her I was not intoxicated.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Znork]

Now, a bit of internet reading won't make me an expert, but during my consultation it allowed me to be an active participant

Misdiagnosis is very common, rates around 10%-30% are often seen, so obviously a medical degree doesn't necessarily make one an expert either. Human disease is simply a far too varied field with far too many similar symptoms for doctors to have even a fighting chance to get it right much more than that with the time available for each patient.

Researching on your own has shown to cut down the chances of misdiagnosis quite a lot; at least you can point out possible problems or alternatives that the doctor might have missed or forgotten, or point out symptoms that you may have thought insignificant at first.

It would be nice with more refined diagnosis tools on the net tho; easily accessible and structured decision trees which can guide you through how to both rule in and rule out possibilities would make a good tool for both patients and doctors. Done correctly it could even cut down unnecessary doctors visits and/or increase chances of early discovery of some diseases.

Re:Hypochondria?

[P0ltergeist333]

Good story. Even if people are getting misinformation, at least they are trying to inform themselves, which as you story illustrates, is more than you could say of some doctors.

Re:Hypochondria?

[AusIV]

But in today's world of general practitioners who spend as little time with their patients as possible, individuals must take some amount of the research on to themselves.

No kidding. My grandfather had cataracts. He had read about the condition in a magazine or something, and realized that he had similar symptoms. He went to the optometrist and was formally diagnosed with cataracts. Just a few weeks later, he went back to the same doctor regarding treatment, and the doctor wanted to know who had diagnosed him. My grandfather mentioned reading about it in a magazine, and the doctor started lecturing him about self diagnosis. My grandfather got really confused (which was a common state, as he was getting senile in old age), and my mom stepped in to explain to the doctor that he had diagnosed my grandfather with cataracts.

When doctors can't even remember a diagnosis they made a few weeks earlier, I have a hard time trusting them to make an accurate diagnosis.

Re:Hypochondria?

[misexistentialist]

My wife for example, is extremely flexible

I suspect the doctors got hung up on the the advantages rather than the disadvantages of the condition.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people are too stupid to rationally look at their symptoms and compare them online. If you feel like you have a cold for instance you probably have a cold not some East African Ebola Virus.

Re:Hypochondria?

[ajayrockrock]

On the flip side, I developed a rash on my wrist. Looking at pictures online I diagnosed myself with scabies(!!!), obviously I'm an idiot because the doctor said I have a normal case of eczema (excessive dry skin). So the moral of the story is, when you are diagnosing yourself, it's best to get a second opinion.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Yamata no Orochi]

So what is the bad point of this "disease"?
I wouldn't call extreme flexibility a disease.

Someone already posted this.

Re:Hypochondria?

[IorDMUX]

Just wondering if said condition is Marfan Syndrome, or the semi-related connective tissue disorders (CTD) of [certain types of] EDS, or Loews-Dietz Syndrome.

My wife is on the board of directors of the National Marfan Foundation (which also addresses related CTD's), and runs a chapter in California. If you like, I am sure that she could hook you up with excellent doctors, medical advice, and/or network groups, if you so desire. Also, there is an annual nationwide conference coming up in Houston from July 8-11. It's kind of a big deal.

Feel free to e-mail me if you wish.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Before we had eaten Apples, that how we looked to each other, you know.

Re:Hypochondria?

[darkmeridian]

While it's one thing if a computer doesn't work because the jaded IT professional blows off the user, but it's a wholly other thing if someone dies or suffers because their doctor ignores them. At the very least, the doctor should listen to what the patient is saying. If he doesn't know about the disorder, he can Google it. If he knows about the disease, has it pointed out to him by the patient, examines the patient, and fails to diagnose the disease, then that's malpractice. When it's a matter of life or death, you pay attention to the client just in the off case that he happens to be right.

Re:Hypochondria?

[CapnStank]

I had a sore back and sore throat and went to the local 24hr clinic. They told me I pulled a muscle and that I had a lymph node infection. After taking the medication I broke out in a red polka-dot rash head-to-toe knowing full well I was not allergic to Amoxicillin (bleh spelling). So i booked an appointment with my doctor and he giggled after looking at my rash. Turns out I had mono and the "back pain" was my swollen appendix. The anti-infection medication caused the rash as it occurs when you have mono. He told me a short story about how when he worked in Africa they used it to diagnose mono because of the lack of clean needles for drug tests.

Rambling aside: 24hr doc could have killed me (Potential appendix burst since I was/am very active in rough sports like Krav Maga/Paintball) but my Doctor actually cared enough to look into things and get the right tests done.

Re:Hypochondria?

[thegnu]

The internet is not a good place to get a second opinion, but if encourages people to get second opinions from real doctors, that's a net positive.

I agree that it's not a good place to get a second opinion. It is, however, a good place to do research, and get an Nth opinion. considering that the problem is that doctors mostly refuse to spend an appropriate amount of time with a patient, i have a hard time believing that an intelligent and discerning person should be discouraged from doing research and asking questions on the internet.

my brother had a recurring ear infection. the third time he went back to the same doctor, he told him not to prescribe him the exact same antibiotic ear drops that he'd been prescribed the last two times, because they didn't work. the doctor spent 10 minutes with him, scribbled some shit on a piece of paper, and charged him between 50 and 100 dollars. as my brother stepped out of the office, he looked at the piece of paper. same fucking ear drops.

there's no worse doctor than a doctor who doesn't give a shit, except perhaps yahoo answers.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Kell Bengal]

Actually, this was in my thoughts as I posted that comment. I think it would be a worthwhile tool to put online.

Do you have a lump?
Yes
Is it a big lump?
No.
Is it dark?
No.
Is it somewhere embarrassing?
Yes.
Does it hurt?
No.
Does it leak something?
Yes.
Diagnosis: LeakyLumpyitis
Recommendation: You'll survive.

or alternatively,

Do you have a lump?
Yes
Is it a big lump?
No.
Is it dark?
Yes.
You are eaten by a grue.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Misdiagnosis is very common, rates around 10%-30% are often seen, so obviously a medical degree doesn't necessarily make one an expert either

Expert != infallible; what's the average layman's rate of misdiagnosis? I've seen some really awful misdiagnoses - ones I've corrected - but most misdiagnoses are of the "well, you probably have x, let's try this therapy, if it doesn't work, come back and we'll take another look" - and it turns out to be y or z. Oddly enough, the worst misdiagnosis I've ever seen - mistaking an abdominal aortic aneurysm for appendicitis - actually would have made no difference in outcome if uncorrected, because the patient ended up dying on the operating table that night while they tried to fix his aneurysm.

point out symptoms that you may have thought insignificant at first

This is very valuable. Please always do mention odd little things that occur to you. I always thank my patients for mentioning them even when they're totally irrelevant, because I want them to do it in the future - you never know in advance what tidbits will be important.

Re:Hypochondria?

[thegnu]

I don't think you understand. Your wife is a rarity.

i don't think you understand. doctors who pay due attention and give a shit are a rarity. while an untrained individual is not the best person to investigate and diagnose their ailments, at least you have someone paying attention to the issue. as a matter of fact, i think that if someone goes in and after 5 minutes takes what a doctor says on a serious medical issue to be the absolute truth, they are shamefully uninvolved in their personal wellness.

i think the fact that you're pointing to is that most people don't have such a serious issue that a doctor not paying attention really matters. also, most people are not really all that great at logic, especially if their emotions get entangled in the issue. still, i'd rather have someone with less training paying attention to me 9/10.

Re:Hypochondria?

[thegnu]

But if they seem relatively normal, I listen carefully and explain, because quite often they are right.

this is, in my opinion, what makes you a good doctor. i want to point out that by taking time to address the person's concerns, you help ease their anxiety if they're wrong.

i don't know what the difference is between google nowadays and old wives' tales 50 years ago, either. the solution to old wives' tales is to listen to the person, and correct them where they're wrong. i see a similar solution to the googling.

kudos to you, good sir. :)

Re:Hypochondria?

[The Archon V2.0]

I used to have H. Ross Perot coming into my house and showing me pie charts on outsourcing. You're right, it's very painful.

Oh, wait. You're talking about some other EDS.

Yeah, and the disease changes over time. When I was there the symptoms of EDS* were depression, loss of appetite, unwillingness to wake up in the morning, disrupted sleep schedules, deep-seated hatred of people in power, and sudden joblessness after making an expensive insurance claim.

* Also known as "Brown, Dick syndrome" due to how the CEO's name appeared in your inbox on his regular self-congratulatory newsletters to everyone in the company with an @eds.com e-mail address.

Some bitterness can remain even years after other EDS symptoms vanish.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I don't think you understand. Your wife is a rarity.

Which is kinda the whole point. Most doctors - general practitioner types see the same thing day in and day out. 999 times out of a 1000 basic symptoms have basic causes. So when that 1 in 1000 comes through it is entirely too easy to miss it. Thus it is really the patient's job to double-check the doctor's diagnosis, after all it is the patient with the most to lose. Any doctor which does not accept and even encourage the patient to get independent confirmation is a bad doctor. Maybe they get it from a second opinion, maybe they get it from their own research. Either way, it's the patient's responsibility to follow-up and the doc's responsibility to take the results of those follow-ups seriously.

Sure there are plenty of dumbass hypochondriacs out there, but if you treat everyone as if they are a dumbass hypocondriac by default then eventually you are going to get someone killed.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Monolith1]

she can still touch her toes with out bending her knees and join her hands behind her back (one over the shoulder, one under).

I wish my wife was that flexible

Re:Hypochondria?

[s3ph1r0thcl0n3]

My wife and I have self-diagnosed correctly several times, specifically: 1. lyme disease 2. kidney infection 3. knee tracking problem 4. pinched sciatic nerve Now, I'm a chemist and she's a biologist, so we are not novices at researching, but we have no medical training. But I'll point out that the sources we used to form a diagnosis are a lot better than the one that this news stub cites ;-)

Re:Hypochondria?

[couchslug]

Doctors tend to have "template" responses to symptom sets, but they tend not to use comprehensive checklists (good enough for fighter pilots (Generals included!) , but not medical "royalty". The result is snap judgements, moving on to the next patient in a crowded schedule, and a misdiagnosis now and then.

Re:Hypochondria?

[goose-incarnated]

I am likewise not a doctor, but my g/friend is[1]. The hit ratio is not as high as you would believe it to be during diagnosis. Granted, it's usually above 95%, but still, that's a 1 in 20 chance of a misdiagnosis. Seeing 20 patients a day means a high probability of one misdiagnosis a day. However, since the misdiagnosis does not result in lethal side-effects, no one cares (patient eventually gets better on their own or dies from desperation).


[1] A surgeon, meaning that she did practice as a GP at some point.

Re:Hypochondria?

[swamp_ig]

considering that the problem is that doctors mostly refuse to spend an appropriate amount of time with a patient, i have a hard time believing that an intelligent and discerning person should be discouraged from doing research and asking questions on the internet.

Agreed to a point. It's difficult to take more time with every patient when there's already a one hour wait time in the waiting room, and every second patient has some constelation of unusual symptoms. There's so much noise it's sometimes difficult to find the signal.

Re:Hypochondria?

[RichardJenkins]

It would be nice with more refined diagnosis tools on the net tho; easily accessible and structured decision trees which can guide you through how to both rule in and rule out possibilities would make a good tool for both patients and doctors. Done correctly it could even cut down unnecessary doctors visits and/or increase chances of early discovery of some diseases.

The NHS has already produced a pretty good one. They also have a really good selection of information on their NHS Direct site, and a local rate national helpline to talk about general health related issues. Slightly more geekily, they have a Behind the headlines news site which gives the real science behind some of the more heinously bad medical reporting that some sections of the media engage in.

Plenty of controversy over nationalised healthcare systems: can't fault the NHS's online presence though, it's a real anomaly amongst Governmental efforts on the 'net.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Touvan]

It's this kind of story that gets ignored by the medical community, who still operate on a 1950s authority model. They should be adjusting to an information culture, and embracing information technology. Like it or not, consumer - including consumers of medical servicees - no longer take an authorities word for it. So far the medical community in general have completely resisted this change, and they are losing the prestige they so tightly cling to over it.

Re:Hypochondria?

[aquila.solo]

a one hour wait time in the waiting room

So overbooking is now the patient's fault? Most doctors of any specialty already charge at least a full copay for a late cancellation or no-show. Why do they feel the need to double and triple book things?

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Far too many doctors think they're much smarter than they are and assume other people are dumber than they are. Note that the opposite is true of intelligent people.

Did doctors rape your grandmother to death or something? There are dullards in medicine. There are even arrogant dullards in medicine. But there aren't very many of them as compared to most other fields out there.

I've known a lot of intelligent people from a lot of walks of life. They are often self-effacing in general crowds because it is expected of them, but when you get a lot of very intelligent people together it turns out that they have a very good ability to estimate their own and others' intelligence. They do not suffer fools gladly.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Kirijini]

The patients who come in who have diagnosed themselves correctly, or close to correctly, such as getting the 'genus' of a disorder or disease correct while the 'species' is incorrect, are so rare that they tend to remember them.

Compare it to a Help Desk worker -- how many callers, per centum, do you think that Help Desk worker gets who would call up, have a correct or nearly so idea about what is wrong, and be calling only to get instructions on how to fix it?

I've called tech support a number of times in order to get access to software or patches that I know will fix my computer problem. Some hardware companies don't make their drivers/software freely available, so I have to call tech support if I need an old driver or somesuch.

Same thing with doctors. Sometimes I know exactly what I have, and I go to a doctor for a prescription. Have you ever gotten a splinter, not think much about it, and then it realize it's become infected? You don't need a doctor to tell you that, you need a doctor to give you a prescription for antibiotics.

Sometimes doctors double check for you - like making sure strepthroat isn't mono - but I think that people are right a fair amount of the time when they think they have a cold or the flu, an infected cut, chicken pox, etc. And the internet makes that self-diagnosis easier.

Re:Hypochondria?

[the_womble]

Of course they omitted them - it looks more like an Apple user that way.

Re:Hypochondria?

[theshowmecanuck]

This has more to do with doctors who are too full of themselves. When I was in Saint Louis I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism. When I asked my doctor to explain something about it so I could learn about the condition, he told me that I didn't need to know anything and just take the medicine at the dosage he prescribed. Because I was living and working in Saint Louis and had a good insurance plan, I was able to see a specialist (an endocrinologist) fairly quickly (in Canada it is debatable if this would even be possible since specialists are fewer, and the family doctor's office has to make the appointment assuming he thinks it appropriate... which a dick head like this wouldn't).

The endocrinologist asked me if my family doctor had checked for antibodies. I said no and asked 'antibodies for what?'. He said for antibodies that might be attacking the thyroid and explained it is a good idea to figure out why someone's thyroid is failing, to make sure there was nothing that could cause other issues. He did the test and found I have a condition called Hashimoto's Thyroiditis, a kind of autoimmune disease where the body goes after your thyroid (kind of like a rheumatoid arthritis of the thyroid). If you have HT, it is important to keep your TSH at the very low end of the scale using thyroid hormone replacement (levothyroxine/synthroid) to keep the body from attacking the thyroid. It really is the same lifelong daily medicine used to treat all forms of hypothyroidism, but with Hashimoto's it is important to keep track of levels, more so than other types of hypothyroidism, since with higher levels of TSH the body creates more antibodies to attack the thyroid, which can lead to other issues later on. As well, it turned out I had atypical hypothyroidism in that my TSH levels were above normal but below 10 where levels typical of the condition would be above 90 (can't remember the units). Even though the levels were somewhat low, I still require high levels of synthroid to get my levels to a safe level, on a par with a buddy of mine who had his thyroid removed due to cancer. But my family doctor didn't want to listen since he knew all and I was just a patient. If I would have left it where it was when he told me to not bother understanding or learning about my condition, I would still probably be feeling like shit, fogged out, always cold, depressed, and gaining weight, develop coronary artery disease, which will develop if HT is not properly treated. Also chances of nodules on the thyroid...

I am glad I went to the specialist since my family doctor had not prescribed high enough levels of synthroid. He didn't consider that a patient may be as intelligent or more intelligent than him, was able to understand the condition, and had a higher stake at understanding the disease, since the patient (me) was the one who had it. I fired the doctor and found a better one who was smarter and less full of himself. If you are going to be a doctor, learn from this. You don't know it all. Of course you know more than your patient, but that doesn't mean your patients are not capable of finding out things you don't know. Listen first, judge what you hear, then make a decision on whether to disregard it based on the merits of the information, not on the surety that you are smarter and know more than your patient possibly could... especially since no one can know it all, and everyone is capable of learning something that you don't.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

... and the chorus swells!

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

Compare it to a Help Desk worker -- how many callers, per centum, do you think that Help Desk worker gets who would call up, have a correct or nearly so idea about what is wrong, and be calling only to get instructions on how to fix it?

Quite a few in my experience; probably around the 5% range. When you consider how much feedback the human body gives, I'd think it's equivalent number would be even higher.

Bad help desk workers and bad doctors have a great deal in common. Both consider their opinions to be above explanation. A good professional would take a moment to explain why they came to a certain conclusion, listen to any conflicting information, and take a closer look if something doesn't add up.

Re:Hypochondria?

[ajlisows]

Another thing that is worth checking out is medication given out for treatment. The pharmacists have more to do with this than doctors but both of them are somewhat responsible for making sure drug x doesn't interact wrong with drug y. I know Walgreens and other large pharmacies have computers that look at the patient's drug history and automatically compare it to a new drug and mark potential interactions. I'm sure it works most of the time but it can fail. There is also the case where most of the medications are from the same pharmacy while the new medication is straight from the hospital following surgery.

For some reason friends and family members call me for medical advice or information. Mostly I double check their meds. I actually "figured out" three cases where the drugs should not have been prescribed together. One was especially important because an antibiotic the hospital sent my mom home with after a major procedure happened to keep her crazy pills from working. She started acting batshit insane. Everyone just thought "Oh no, she's going through another episode". I got to thinking, went to google, typed in the names of her antibiotic and crazy pills and immediately found "DO NOT TAKE TOGETHER" plastered on doesn't of sites. It took me all of 3 minutes to pretty much know the two shouldn't be taken together. How nobody involved in her treatment didn't do a quick check is disturbing. And no, i don't remember the names of the medications involved. That is how little knowledge I possessed.

As far as normal diagnosis goes, I had a situation where my sister in law had, uhm, some female problems. She'd been to the doctor three times and never had it taken care of. She didn't know what to do and knew I was "good with medical stuff". She told me what her problems were. First, the years of fantasizing about a me/girlfriend/girlfriends sister threesome (we weren't married at the time) died a quick death. Second, I typed the terms into google. Every hit on the page was the same condition. It was a rare bacterial infection (not sexually transmitted...having to do with the bacterial flora) in there. She called her doctor and asked if they had tested for it. They hadn't. She went and got tested and she had the condition. They treated it. End of story. After the doctor had come back a second time with the same problem, wouldn't you take the two minutes to hit a search engine if you weren't sure? C'mon.

I'm sure there are cases where the online medical information does more harm than good. After all, I work on computers and the things people come to me trying to say can be so ridiculous...I can't image what doctors have to hear. Still, I think having a populous that is able to get information about their diagnosis and treatment from a RELIABLE source, that is great. No matter how good the doctor, pharmacist, or system put in place....there is always a chance something could slip through the cracks. That something could turn out to be fatal. If the information is out there it is something good to follow up on.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Arterion]

If I could prescribe my own medicines, treatments, or surgeries -- and have insurance pick up the tab -- then I'd wholly agree with you. But the doctor is often the gateway (or sometimes barrier) to a treatment. I'm the same way with the help desk. If I am calling, it's to tell them what I need done to fix my problem, because it's something I can't do myself. For example, send me a replacement part, or perhaps alter a configuration setting that I don't have access to. Occasionally, it's something along the lines of a piece of information they might have access to in a service manual or some such that it's public, but that's very rare. On the occasions where you need "expertise", it's usually well into the second or third tier of support. (Like a specialist or surgeon with an emphasis in certain things, who will usually listen to you and do more investigation, because you've already been through the general practitioner, and perhaps even a specialist.)

The bottom line is, in some form or fashion, I'm paying for it, and I'm paying a great deal. Like any expensive service, you ought to get what you ask for, however you want it, within reason. I don't understand why health and education work as a business when it comes to money, but on the service side, you get treated as if you're being done a favor; not as if you are purchasing a service.

Re:Hypochondria?

[nospam007]

"After the doctor had come back a second time with the same problem, wouldn't you take the two minutes to hit a search engine if you weren't sure? C'mon."

He's not paid for success.

If a doctor doesn't take you seriously, fire his ass, be sure to tell him beforehand.

Re:Hypochondria?

[Anonymous Coward]

The doctors naturally tell you that it is a rarity. If you watch a show like Mystery Diagnosis every patient has seen at least five doctors who tell them nothing is wrong with them. I was diagnosed with lupus and when I told my doctor after six months of treatment my symptoms did not match anyone's online lupus symptoms he dismissed my questions in about a second. A second opinion; no lupus. The medical profession is a mess, unable or unwilling to put the effort into patient care or diagnosis when it is complex. The only thing doctors seem to have to fall back on is a misplaced sense of authority.

Re:Hypochondria?

[wwphx]

Last year I had pneumonia twice. Went to a lung specialist with the x-rays, before and after, of both pneumonias. The lung doctor insisted that my 103f fever was caused by asthma. Blood work, twice-vetted x-rays, and symptoms insisted pneumonia, doctor said asthma. My wife found hypogammaglobulinemia (Common Variable Immune Deficiency) online. Went to an immuneologist, pneumonia count is now up to four in five months. He's saying it's caused by allergies and that the chances of it being CVID at my age are very rare. We insist on an IgG test being run, and my level comes back 150 with the low end of the normal range being 694. Now I'm up in the low 900's since starting SCIG in August and have only been sick twice since last June. Turns out the number of people in my age bracket diagnosed is 10%. I'd gladly take a 10% chance at winning the lottery. And the number of people in the study program at NIH that I was just admitted to is over 700. I think his estimate of the number of people with my condition is waaay low.

There are exceptional help desk callers. Heck, us IT geeks who have been working with computers for three decades have to call help desks occasionally whether we like it or not. My wife is a similarly exceptional person in that her father was a pathologist and always talked about his work, she would probably have been an MD had she not preferred astrophysics and astronomy for her doctorate.

After the shitty way I was treated by the lung doctor, and the blinkered way I was treated by an immunologist, I have no problem with my wife researching my current condition and any possible future problems.

Re:Hypochondria?

[shambalagoon]

I couldn't agree more.

Seven years ago I began a slow decline in health that completely ruined my quality of life. I suffered endless migraines, fatigue, abdominal pain, weakness, difficulty focusing, depression, loss of feeling, and social withdrawal. I went to doctor after doctor, and each gave me approximately 5 minutes of their time and couldn't figure out what it was. Very little came up in the standard blood tests.

I had several doctors accuse me of making it up, or saying it's all in my head. Most of the rest just shrugged and sent me on my way. If I had complete trust in medicine I'd have given up and had to live with this forever.

But that's not the kind of person I am. When I felt well enough to, I researched online - examining symptoms, reading up on scholarly articles from PubMed, reading patient cases, bulletin boards. I investigated everything. And 80% of the progress I've made on my condition over the years has been due to my research. I found doctors sorely uninformed on research done in the last ten years - as if after graduating they stopped picking up anything new.

Sure there are hypochondriacs out there. But modern medicine leaves a LOT to be desired, and I'm glad as hell that I have a resource like the internet that allows me to give my condition the attention it deserves.

Re:Hypochondria?

[ukyoCE]

The issue in misdiagnosis (or lack of diagnosis) is not a doctor's lack of smarts. It's a doctor's lack of time.

Rarity score

[UndyingShadow]

I think every website that lists all these varied diseases should put a rarity score next to each illness. That way when you think you've got Wilson's disease, you can look and see with a simple number how unlikely it is.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

That will just make people more convinced their doctor is "lying to them" and they really are the "one in umpteen gazillion" to have some unheard-of disease

Re:Rarity score

[treeves]

Nice idea, but it probably wouldn't work very well. One, people are notoriously bad at estimating risk. Two, if you really think you have the symptoms that fit a particular disease, you'll just assume that "yes I really am that one person in 2.5 million that has this disease". Three, if one in a 100,000 is a "high-risk disease", because very few conditions have higher rates, it'll make it easier to convince yourself that you have it. Four, there is no fourth point.

Re:Rarity score

[dward90]

In my limited, anecdotal, experience, people tend to get extra excited when they think they having something rare. It makes them feel extra "special". It's probably a similar phenomenon to someone who instincively calls any moderately painful headache a migraine: they feel more impressive using a term that doesn't actually apply.

Re:Rarity score

[flyingfsck]

When something is infinitely unlikely to ever occur, it will occur almost immediately. So the more unlikely the disease, the more likely that a hypochondriac will want to have it.

Re:Rarity score

[D Ninja]

Along with that, due to people's natural inflation of their own importance, even if they see 1 in 2.5 million, they won't consider how very small that number is because THEY are more important than the other 2.5 million people who won't get this disease.

Re:Rarity score

[mjdescy]

I think every website that lists all these varied diseases should put a rarity score next to each illness.

I agree completely. Maybe one way to lower healthcare is to automate some of the diagnostic procedures through information systems. More information available to patients is better, not worse, for patient care overall.

Re:Rarity score

[Farmer Tim]

Compared to all the hokum on the net, "unlikely" is gold standard proof.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

Part of the problem is that there are a lot of websites with an "axe to grind" i.e. they are special interests and are out to make "everyone aware" of this disease and often (intentionally?) over rate the seriousness or frequency (incidence) or prevalence of the disease.

Now, not all of this is bad...having a patient who takes an interest in their health is a refreshing change....and I often appreciate the patients asking "but what about disease xyz?" The problem is when the patient refused to see logic and/or trust in the physicians final decision (not that we're always right, just a lot less wrong than you think).

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

Lost a family member to Wilson's. It does happen

Re:Rarity score

[Sepultura]

Most people know how likely they are to win the lotto, but plenty still play. When they see 1:1,000,000,000 all that registers is the first 1, and they say "someone's got to win it, so it might as well be me!" Same thing applies here.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

I have seen the reverse. Used an online dating site for awhile. The numbers were this (as stated by their literature). 1 out of 20 people you like 1 out of 5 you can get along with.

So you are one out of a hundred does not sound romantic :)

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

I would agree, but people keep buying lottery tickets.

Re:Rarity score

[ScentCone]

Polls also show that everybody thinks they one of the top 10% of drivers that are the best, safest, and most experienced behind the wheel. People - at least 93% of them - are just about always wrong about anything involving statistics.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, just googled it. I am pretty sure I have Wilson's.

Re:Rarity score

[h4rr4r]

Indeed, if you do not have blurring of your vision and such you are not having a migraine.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course if everyone (patients and doctors) rule out "rare" diseases strictly on the basis that they're rare, then those who actually have a rare disease will get misdiagnosed. And, of course, the disease will, with a kind of circular reasoning, continue to be regarded as rare. Rarity alone is not proof of anything.

Re:Rarity score

[sjames]

So how do I know you're not just making those numbers up? :-)

Re:Rarity score

[Twinbee]

I think that's a great idea, and ignore the other replies which talk about how bad people are estimating risk. Because one: people can be educated to some extent, at least in the future, and two: for the people who DO understand risk, it will be a massive help.

Re:Rarity score

[Anonymous Coward]

are you sure it's not lupus?

Re:Rarity score

[PaganRitual]

There was a 100% chance that the GP's post making the statistics related joke with an obviously made up stastistic would be followed up by someone making the completely unfunny joke implying that they were making the numbers up, which was actually part of the joke.

See how no one else made that joke? That means it's YOU.

Re:Rarity score

[sjames]

So you're trying to stop the inevitable flow from cause to effect? Are you trying to unbalance the universe or something?

I hereby sentence you to a lame knock knock joke!

Knock Knock!

Re:Rarity score

[Krahar]

In saying that people inflate their own importance, you are suggesting that importance is absolute, since the word "inflate" implies exaggeration of importance above the true, absolute level of ACTUAL importance. In reality importance is always measured in relation to some - WHO is it important TO. There is no such thing as global, absolute, actual, true importance. Of course people are very important TO themselves. If someone else gets sick, I don't suffer the consequences of that. If I get sick, I do suffer the consequences. It's not about inflating one's own importance, it's about perspective.

Re:Rarity score

[Krahar]

That's simply offensive to those of us who do have migraine headaches without blurring of vision. Had about one per week throughout my childhood, and had it diagnosed as migraine by a specialist, after which I responded to medication that mostly doesn't do anything unless you actually have migraine. I tried some pretty strong pain medication that didn't do much before that. You can't imagine the pain of a real migraine headache and playing it off based on your misconceptions is simply aggressive ignorance. I almost missed an important flight because I was incapable of standing up even after taking an overdose of various medications. So go fuck yourself.

Google-itis

[oldspewey]

As made up words go, google-itis is particularly stupid, since it literally means "inflammation or irritation of the google."

Re:Google-itis

[Em Emalb]

I am in agreement.

If I were describing this phenomenon, I'd call it Commonsenseitis.

Because when I see articles like this, it inflames or irritates my common sense.

Re:Google-itis

[psychicninja]

Also, when I first saw it my brain was pretty sure it said "google-tits", which is probably an even more common problem...

Re:Google-itis

[courteaudotbiz]

So what would the word be? Google-sympto-mania? Symptoms related search disease? Or plain stupidity?

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

googlechondria is better to describe the phenomenon, or googlechondriac for the sufferer.

Re:Google-itis

[Sponge Bath]

..."inflammation or irritation of the google."

Apply Bing twice daily. Consult your doctor if symptoms persist longer than a week.

Re:Google-itis

[nevillethedevil]

Depends on how you define "problem"

Re:Google-itis

[Lumpy]

So it should be "Aggravated Doctor-itis caused by excessive googling?"

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatever you do...

DO NOT irritate The Google.

Re:Google-itis

[rtfa-troll]

Apply Bing twice daily

This sounds a bit like chemotherapy. The cure is mostly worse than the disease and, in fact, the only real advantage is the hope that you'll eventually be able to give up on it.

Re:Google-itis

[Locke2005]

Nowhere near as prevalent as "ogle-tits", which is now the leading cause of software engineers losing their employment.

Re:Google-itis

[i.r.id10t]

Nah, thats what fark.com and foobies.com are for

Re:Google-itis

[bunratty]

Malamanteaus are the latest Internet fad. Haven't you heard?

Re:Google-itis

[dotancohen]

As made up words go, google-itis is particularly stupid, since it literally means "inflammation or irritation of the google."

There's nothing wrong with that. The patient thinks that he has 10^100 inflammations or irritations.

Re:Google-itis

[dotancohen]

Also, when I first saw it my brain was pretty sure it said "google-tits", which is probably an even more common problem...

Wait, it _doesn't_ say that?!? Well, off to middle click the next tab over, I almost got suckered into reading that fine article this time!

Re:Google-itis

[Thelasko]

As made up words go, google-itis is particularly stupid, since it literally means "inflammation or irritation of the google."

The sad part is, the term was coined by a doctor.

The increased numbers of patients self-diagnosing online has led to more cases of what Dr. Prashant Deshpande calls "Google-itis"

Sounds like somebody didn't do well on their latin root's and suffixes exam...

Re:Google-itis

[RobertM1968]

As made up words go, google-itis is particularly stupid, since it literally means "inflammation or irritation of the google."

What's worse is, people coming to their own medical conclusions from such research is made worse by the numerous pharma companies in the US advertising to them daily for made up and not-so-made-up diseases. This is probably how much of the searches for such stuff actually are generated.

While Google may be a tool that people use to fuel (or create) their own hypochondria, these pharmaceutical ads are a method to create such in people who otherwise would not travel that road.

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like an accurate enough description for the Doctors that are "inflamed" and "irritated" by it.

Re:Google-itis

[Hognoxious]

Hypertextochondria?

Re:Google-itis

[Hurricane78]

It’s a classic trick of arrogant people: Make up words to lift themselves from the “class of subhumans”.
You see it very often in medicine, management, etc.

The difference being, that there are words that have a very specific meaning that is needed in that profession (like the anatomical directions), and there are other words that have no point besides having a separate word for above reasons.
The second group mostly contains words that simply are the Latin or Greek equivalent for the exact same word in the native language.

Re:Google-itis

[BForrester]

...when I first saw it my brain was pretty sure it said "google-tits", which is probably an even more common problem...

Depends on how you define "problem"

TFA: [The problem affects] "everyone from concerned mothers to businessmen on their lunch break..."

Problem.

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see, when I google "-tits", I get:

"Your search -tits - did not match any documents."

It seems it's impossible to google for documents that don't contain tits in them.

I can certainly see why some people have "irritation of the google." (google-itis). :-)

Re:Google-itis

[Hurricane78]

Considering the “quality” of those textbook, that’s no surprise at all...

Re:Google-itis

[mattack2]

I haven't been in medical school, but what do you mean?

Also, my statement may have been a bit too broad -- I simply meant that the students (at least as depicted on various sitcoms & dramas) keep self-diagnosing themselves with weird rare diseases when they read about them.

Re:Google-itis

[roman_mir]

Oh crap, so what is going to happen to my irritated google?

Re:Google-itis

[Arancaytar]

inflammation or irritation of the google

The doctors are irritated and wish they could inflame Google. :P

Re:Google-itis

[sjames]

Well, there are people quite irritated with Google. They believe it has an inflated ego.

Re:Google-itis

[PitaBred]

On a scale of 1 to Comic Book Guy, how would you describe your Google-tits?

Re:Google-itis

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

"The second group mostly contains words that simply are the Latin or Greek equivalent for the exact same word in the native language."

Seriously, the kind of people who do this are prime examples of hypererudition.

Re:Google-itis

[Reziac]

Which is exactly what Google is suffering from, since the latest site redesign :(

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

Not fair... you can't get a +4 Informative (as of this writing) without a [citation]

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

Speak for yourself! Some of us know how to keep our work and leisure activities separated.

Re:Google-itis

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you've just diagnosed what's wrong with Mr. Steve Ballmer! Quick, send in Steve Jobs for a Macsectomy.

Re:Google-itis

[p-k4]

I'm currently in medical school and you might be amazed at how often Wiki is used as a source to justify an answer.

Bing and decide...

[Dracos]

...which disease you have.

Re:Bing and decide...

[dkleinsc]

Strange thing is I created my sig about a week ago. \/

Re:Bing and decide...

[Thelasko]

What I really need Bing to do is find a good doctor that will take my insurance.

What?!

[jo_ham]

You mean I don't have Ebala?

No, sir, you googled a typo.

I'm sure I have it! Typos are one of the symptoms!

Re:What?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of communitychannel's Dr. Google:

I think I have a rish...
Do you mean a rash?

Re:What?!

[roman_mir]

Oh, god :) You are not going to believe it, but you DO have Ebala (or Ebalo) unless you are totally castrated (totally, I mean nothing left there). If you are not sure what I am talking about, find a translation from Russian of what that means.

Indeed, but...

[dmbasso]

for those scientifically oriented, and aware of our natural cognitive bias, it is a fantastic tool to pin down the real problem, bringing relevant information to discuss with a doctor.

Re:Indeed, but...

[Jerf]

In my experience, my doctor pays a lot more attention after I flash the secret sign of the Bayesian Conspiracy, to show I understand the stats involved. YMMV.

Re:Indeed, but...

[mshannon78660]

Yes to this and to the GP, but it depends a lot on the doctor. My former doctor really didn't listen to me at all, and tended to brush off any symptoms I brought to him (the only reason I ended up getting the knee surgery I desperately needed was that he felt, as a GP, that he wasn't completely qualified to evaluate joints. His exact words were "it's probably nothing, but I'll give you a referral to an orthopedic surgeon just in case."). My current doctor, on the other hand (and a big part of the reason why she is the current doctor for my whole family) is very much willing to listen to, and consider anything I bring up. But she knows that I am quite knowledgable for a layperson, and I only bring up possible diagnoses that are plausible, and worth exploring.

Re:Indeed, but...

[shadowbearer]

  Not only that, but easy access to medical information at least encourages average people to learn something about medicine.

SB

You have to be a real moron

[Tony Stark]

Google obviously isn't the best place to get medical information, these people are twits. If you watch all the past seasons of House you'll figure out what's wrong with you. (hint: it's not lupus.)

Re:You have to be a real moron

[BitZtream]

No, as has already been stated, its Wilsons.

Re:You have to be a real moron

[up2ng]

Every episode of House at some point mentions Sarcoidosis !
I wonder how many people go to their Doctor and claim it?
it has become a game for me and the wife to find it, it usually happens at the first group differential sitdown.

Re:You have to be a real moron

[Tony Stark]

That's because of a few things: Sarcoidosis is a somewhat common autoimmune disease that can affect virtually any and all organs, although it usually starts in the lungs. It's also usually ruled out by process of elimination. So you'll see it early on in their idea-slinging sessions because pretty much it could always be sarcoidosis and it's something that they can rule out as they test for other things. It also goes away on it's own or is easily treatable. And they like to diagnose things that have an answer other than death. I'm not a doctor or anything, I just have in interest in these things. So this is just based on my understanding.

Re:You have to be a real moron

[bertoelcon]

(hint: it's not lupus.)

Except that one time that it was lupus.

Nothing New

[adeft]

There will always be hyperchondriacs and there always were. Technology isn't changing any of that.

Re:Nothing New

[thedonger]

There will always be hyperchondriacs and there always were. Technology isn't changing any of that.

I disagree somewhat. While I doubt technology/Google makes non-hypochondriacs into hypochondriacs, I do think it makes the existing ones worse. The last thing such a person needs is a seemingly definitive diagnosis of the worst thing that could be wrong with them. ("Oh no! A woman with AIDS reported having a rash on her legs. I have a rash. Oh my god!!! I have AIDS!")

And here I thought syllogistic reasoning was so obvious it didn't need to be taught...

Re:Nothing New

[rtfa-troll]

Damnit people; please read the fine comments before responding. The hyperchondriacs are just so convinced that they don't have the disease, they'll never even open their computer, let alone Google it. Just getting them to the doctor in the first place would be a good start.

House, MD-itus

[ghetto2ivy]

I think House has inspired a bit of this as well.

Re:House, MD-itus

[jellomizer]

Well the medical dramas in general. Yesterday I was seeing something on TV how the Crime shows make the world seem more violent then it actually is. I am sure the same thing about these medical shows. In real life House wouldn't be getting a Random Patient once a week, that he finds worthy of his diagnosis. That would probably happen once a year. In the meantime he would probably be visiting people who have been referred to by other doctors who are stumped, in less of an emergency situation but in a well planned scheduled visit, from people around the United States.

Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[StikyPad]

I'll start. My wife had intense abdominal pains which her GP diagnosed as an intestinal blockage, and prescribed liquids, laxatives, and rest.

When she didn't get better, she "Googled" her symptoms, and found that the birth control Yaz had been linked to gallbladder issues, which fit the symptoms. She told her GP -- who had never heard of these side effects -- and had her liver enzymes checked. Sure enough, they were below average. My wife was scheduled for a ($20k) liver function test, and simultaneously taken off Yaz. The symptoms subsequently disappeared, enzyme levels returned to normal, and she opted not to get the test.

Now this may well be a coincidence, as I myself have pointed out, but if it wasn't, it's a clear case where Google-itis saved us 20 grand, since she never would have had the idea to stop taking Yaz if she hadn't found similar cases online.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[StikyPad]

Oops, I believe they were actually elevated levels of enzymes. Regardless, they were abnormal when symptoms were present, and returned to normal after discontinuing Yaz.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

This.

The dirty truth that's seldom told is: Your doctor doesn't know any better than you do. He or she is making highly educated guesses, and that's about the end of it.

Your tribal witchdoctor of years past had less knowledge, but was doing the exact same thing. Science came along and made medicine less of a guessing game, but it can never remove it completely.

From TFA:

No longer is it between a doctor who knows all and a parent who knows nothing.

Show me the doctor who genuinely 'knows all' and I'll show you a miracle worker. It simply doesn't work that way, never has, and I'm sorry if it makes some practitioners sad that the patients have more tools.

As in the case above, however, this is genuinely a good thing for us all.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Grygus]

Not sure that's a counter, actually; I don't think that's the kind of behavior doctors are concerned about. When your wife found the evidence that she may have been misdiagnosed, she went to her doctor to confirm it and get his opinion; she didn't dismiss him as a quack and go all homeopathic on him, or assume that he was an idiot and stop taking his advice seriously.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Monkeedude1212]

This one time, I was pretty sure my doctor misdiagnosed me as retarded. So I googled do-it-yourself brain surgery.

Never had that problem since.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the issue is that using Google provides bad information, I think it's that people will often trust this information more than they should and make misinformed choices as a result. In your case, it was harmless to stop taking Yaz, so why not try stopping? It only becomes a big problem when people want to do harmful things to their body based on information they find online, or needlessly freak out because they mis-diagnose themselves with rare diseases.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

$20000 is a lot of money but liver function isn't something I'd trust to self-diagnosis. I hope the GP okay'ed opting out of the liver function test. Also, are you living in the U.S.? I can't understand how that wouldn't be covered by insurance.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[RobDude]

I've been less than impressed with the overall abilities of the 'GP' doctors I've been to. If you need a common prescription or a sports physical - sure. Beyond that, in my experience, you might as well just ask a nurse. You'll get the same answer.

I had a sore wrist. Went to a GP and he told me not to do pushups and that when I get out of a chair I should hold my wrist like this, and not like that. I looked at him like he was crazy.

I went online, did some research, and concluded that I *most likely* had something called a ganglion cyst. I went to a hand and wrist specialist and said, 'Hey Doc, I think I've got a ganglion cyst in my left wrist.' He took a look and said, 'Yeah, I think you are right'

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell costs $20k other than surgery?! I know of no liver function tests that cost anywhere near that much.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[ptbarnett]

I'll add another anecdote, and we all know that the plural of anecdote is "data".

After taking penicillin-based antibiotics all my life without any problem, I was prescribed Ampicillin.

I developed myalgia in my extremities, and it got so bad I couldn't type. I reported it to the doctor's office, but they didn't make the connection.

After a few nights, I couldn't sleep and I looked up the drug disclosure document on the manufacturer's website. I had to look up the meaning of some of the terms, but when I looked up myalgia, I realized I had found what I was looking for.

The doctor's office called me the next morning before I could call them. I explained that I had found the matching side-effect, and was assured that it was rare. But, I was only one pill away from completing the regimen, and we agreed to finish it.

Once I stopped taking it, the symptoms disappeared. And when I subsequently took a dose (a few weeks later) of amoxicillin with which I previously had no problem, I developed the same symptoms -- albeit much less severe.

After connecting those two events myself and explaining that to my doctor, I've been "officially" declared allergic to penicillin, and all of my medical charts are marked accordingly. I was lucky that I didn't have a severe reaction during the second round. But, it was my own curiosity that identified the allergy.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[rtfa-troll]

That is so wise. Your doctor is, in the end, a tool you use in your own attempt to stay alive and healthy. Understanding doctors and how to use them is crucial. I mostly get great care from Doctors, because I ask them questions in their specialisation; try to be informed in advance. Assume that the doctor does have valid experience and knowledge. Do not assume that the doctor can do statistics (well over 90% of Doctors fail basic tests at explaining statistics in their own field!!!). Do ask questions, but do remain polite pretty much no matter what.

One of the biggest dangers is that doctors get many patients that come along and really don't listen, or, when they do listen, completely misunderstand the basic things the doctor says. If you go in and say something contrary to the doctor's experience, you have to be ready for the doctor to discount your opinion unless you are really good at explaining things.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[HeckRuler]

Of course it's the behavior that doctors are concerned about. Their entire professional skill of diagnosing medical problems can be handed over to an automated game of twenty questions.

Now, we still need them to look at x-rays, make judgment calls on treatments, and a large list of other things that doctors get trained in, but 95% of diagnoses should be automated. It would have a better hit-rate then doctors, and cost a hell of a lot less then the doctor's rate. And don't hand me that bullshit about insurance picking up the bill.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[DriedClexler]

Yes, it most certainly *is* a counter. The doctors are supposed to notice this stuff. I'm sure the doctor knew what medications she was taking. If the doctor failed to consider such a critical possibility, then they have nothing to complain about when patients try to make up for their failings, even if sometimes they go overboard with it.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Geekbot]

Using Slashdot over the years, this has been a recurring theme whenever technology and healthcare come up. Doctors don't know the side effects, prescribe whatever the free sample is that week, and cause medical problems by mis-prescribing medicine with serious side-effects or bad interactions with other meds.

Numerous anecdotal stories tell of lives saved by patients doing their own research. I doubt doctors like it, but we really need to be doing our own research and not completely trusting our doctors. Example after example on here indicate a smart guy with no medical training can pick out better meds than their doctor.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

$20k for a liver function test?! I don't recall ever seeing one over +$500, never mind in the thousands. Either is wasn't an LFT, you got that number wrong or someone really went to town on inflating that price tag

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

The dirty truth that's seldom told is: Your doctor doesn't know any better than you do. He or she is making highly educated guesses, and that's about the end of it.

Your tribal witchdoctor of years past had less knowledge, but was doing the exact same thing.

"Your tribal witchdoctor of years past" wasn't making highly educated guesses based on ~7 years of formal medical education.
On top of all that, in 42 of 50 States, they're reading medical journals and attending conferences/lectures
to keep up the CME credits they need to retain their medical license.

If you want more time with your doctor, pay more.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[CaseM]

That's not what this article is about. The point is that doctors are perturbed that a patient would even dare to google symptoms and bring potential diagnoses to his office.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

"Your tribal witchdoctor of years past" wasn't making highly educated guesses based on ~7 years of formal medical education.

Perhaps not, but they got twenty years of mentoring one-on-one, so that point is effective moot - on education alone.

On top of all that, in 42 of 50 States, they're reading medical journals and attending conferences/lectures
to keep up the CME credits they need to retain their medical license.

Gratz to them?

Doesn't mean they're not guessing, though. If anything, medical journals could well be making it worse. Remember 'oat bran'? It helps! Now it doesn't! Now it does again! Now it doesn't! I don't think people even talk about it any more...

If you want more time with your doctor, pay more.

Your bias is showing...

But even so, how would this help me? My doctor could guess more fervently? Or more frequently? Again, still guessing. Doctors are humans, not gods. I'm certain the doctor would appreciate the new set of golf clubs, but beyond that I'm not sure how 'pay more' solves anything whatsoever.

Further there's no way one particular physician could ever have as extensive a knowledge base or as effective a recall as all of the internet combined would represent.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

Your tribal witchdoctor of years past had less knowledge, but was doing the exact same thing. Science came along and made medicine less of a guessing game, but it can never remove it completely.

Never confuse your doctor for a scientist. They are closer to carpenters.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Hognoxious]

Your doctor doesn't know any better than you do. He or she is making highly educated guesses, and that's about the end of it.

This is true - the human body is a darn complicated thing. And to be honest it's true of mechanics too - a car engine is darn complicated too.

Nonetheless, in either situation, I'd take a highly (and appropriately) educated guess over an ordinary guess any day.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Hognoxious]

"Never noticed that problem since."

FTFY.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Guessing"? To say that medical practitioners, as a whole, are "guessing" is incredibly naive. Does the bridge engineer guess on the load bearing capacity? Does the auto mechanic guess what the appropriate timing is on your timing belt? What about an airline pilot navigating from one airport to another and landing safely? No, no, and no. They use KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIENCE, TOOLS, and INTUITION.

Likening these traits to a medical professional:

• KNOWLEDGE: medical school, journals, CME
• EXPERIENCE: rotations and/or residencies, practicing professionally
• TOOLS: blood tests, ECG, CT, symptoms
• INTUITION. The final one is gleaned through common sense, logic, knowledge, experience and tools.

Guessing? While there may be those at the lower end of the spectrum that may lack in some of these areas, to generalize so is unfair and misinformed.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Beomeph]

I think what you're describing is valid for most of the internet at large. It's selection bias, where people who have had experiences where their own research has proven themselves right will post about their success online. What isn't reported equally is the 99% of cases where this didn't happen, or worse, the person was proven wrong. Of course I totally agree that being informed about your own health / condition is a very good thing and should be encouraged.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

The dirty truth that's seldom told is: Your doctor doesn't know any better than you do.

Yeah, most doctors just spend those 12+ years or whatever it is in med school doing keg stands.

If you mean know in the philosophical absolute certainty kind of sense of the word then of course you're right. But pragmatically, in general, if my doctor tells me I have skin cancer, I'm not going to look to google for a second opinion. Being an informed patient is a good thing, but being that annoying person who knows better because they "know how to use the google" seems like it could easily be counter-productive.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Hognoxious]

Perhaps not, but they got twenty years of mentoring one-on-one, so that point is effective moot - on education alone.

Quantity != quality. You can spend thirty years learning that doing this dance will cure a severed head, but it won't.

Further there's no way one particular physician could ever have as extensive a knowledge base or as effective a recall as all of the internet combined would represent.

Amount of knowledge isn't the whole story. The internet has practically zero analysis ability, and its interface is absolutely not suited for this kind of task.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

Most, if not all of the examples you gave can safely and ethically test their guesses before they matter.

Your auto mechanic can replace that ailing O2 sensor and see if it helps.

Not so much when humans are involved.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Hognoxious]

I'm sure the doctor knew what medications she was taking.

You're sure? You were there, I take it?

I have a cousin who's a doctor and he has olfactory illusions. He can smell booze and fags on people who swear they never smoke or drink. Gravity is very strong at his office too.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

So mechanics, airline pilots, bridge builders, and medical professionals all just SWAG their work first, then test it? The difference being that, with the exception of the medical professionals, the rest can "safely and ethically" test their work before harm is done? Whereas the MD just killed someone? While I'm not foolish enough to implicitly trust my doctors 100%, I certainly don't think they're just guessing.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

Perhaps not, but they got twenty years of mentoring one-on-one, so that point is effective moot - on education alone.

Quantity != quality. You can spend thirty years learning that doing this dance will cure a severed head, but it won't.

Stay on topic. Parent was trying to assert that witchdoctors were untrained. I have already stipulated that they possessed less knowledge, and I'd assume you have already read that in my post before commenting here. So, what's your point, exactly? Both got the best possible educations out of their respective systems and leveraged it to their best possible effect. Ala 'moot point'.

To be completely clear, never at any time did anyone state that dances cured anything. Only that the general practice has not changed, even though the specifics of it have.

I am absolutely certain that hundreds of years of science will make today's physicians look like they were all using leeches and exorcisms, eventually.

Further there's no way one particular physician could ever have as extensive a knowledge base or as effective a recall as all of the internet combined would represent.

Amount of knowledge isn't the whole story. The internet has practically zero analysis ability, and its interface is absolutely not suited for this kind of task.

I'm assuming the individual would do the analysis, obviously.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[arth1]

The auto mechanic has the advantage that he doesn't have to guess. When you say that the engine goes "kerr-plurgh, kerr-plurgh" he doesn't have to prescribe the cure there and then on a running engine, but can shut the car off, start inspecting parts, and putting the engine back together again without causing harm.
A doctor, unfortunately, can't take out your heart and examine it without stopping your engine, as well as causing extensive tissue and bone damage.

Yes, doctors make guesses. Often based on the Pareto principle. Cause 80% of the patients will have just 20% of the possible ailments. In addition, the customer usually isn't the paying customer either -- that's an insurance company that wants statistical results, not individual happy stories. If the doctor wants more paid, he has to improve his throughput.
So the few patients that don't fit the standard assign-cure-to-symptoms scripted checklist get quick guesswork at best, or as many unnecessary tests as the doctor can get away with at worst. Cause, face it, no doctor is going to sit down for hours reading through studies and reports to figure out what could possibly ail one single patient. The insurance company won't pay for that.

Again, insurance companies (and most doctors) are not in the business of making patients well; that's just a side effect of their real business of making money.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

I'm not sure what pirates' treasure has to do with this at all. Please clarify.

Meanwhile, yes:

Mechanics can easily and readily replace parts of a vehicle without any risk that they will kill/destroy the car.

Airline Pilots can operate simulators that accurately represent the precise details of their profession, barring extreme exceptions. Note that aircraft can be flown entirely by computer without human intervention whatsoever.

Bridge builders can craft a model of said bridge and overload it until it breaks. They can individually stress-test each component, etc. They can do all of this without actually harming any actual bridges.

Medicine is, unfortunately, far, far, far more complex than any of the examples you've given thus far.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[BobMcD]

Excellent points, and very well put. Thanks!

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[DriedClexler]

You're sure? You were there, I take it?

I've seen enough of this crap to find it plausible. Doctors try to maintain priesthood image of being unquestionable experts with exclusive access to God^W^W^W medical knowledge, when really, they're not perfect. No matter how much medical school you go to, you can't be expected to know everything, and involvement of the patient is necessary as a check -- because who else will even know the doctor made a mistake, when their response is "no action".

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[caluml]

a ($20k) liver function test

Please tell me that's a typo? Are we talking about the same thing? An LFT? Where they take blood from you, and check levels of substances? Twenty thousand dollars? It's about £50 max, I'd guess.
They're pretty routine over here. Complaining of something? The doctor will take some blood, and tick the LFT box, oh, and maybe the TFT, and some others.

If that's what privatised medicine does for health care, long live the NHS.
Fuck it. Even if I'm completely wrong about it all, long live the NHS.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[dargaud]

I'll continue. My wife has some kind of glandular cancer that's been going on for the last year or so. Recently during a hospital stay she got hold of her whole file and in it was the sentence: "she asks lots of questions". Well, fuck them and the camels they rode onto. If doctors can't answer question for the human beings they are working on, they should change line of work. For something with so many hormonal retro-actions, and since nobody seems to have developed simulation software, I don't see how they can know shit, period. My guess is as good as yours.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[carp3_noct3m]

I view it in a similar light to IT work. For general everyday problems, if you do a "proper" google and your google-fu is strong (read: boolean) then it is almost guaranteed that someone somewhere has had the same problem as you, and has at least an insight or possible answer. The more complicated the issue, the less likely you are to find a reliable and educated answer to your question.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[nanoakron]

I'm a doctor. Which liver function test costs US$20,000? I'm intrigued to know.

Otherwise I call shenanigans.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, I know you're in the middle of an Internet Tough Guy routine, but you want that sentence in there.

You see, that little sentence is a warning to other doctors - don't go in this woman's room until you have thirty minutes or so to talk. You might be surprised how many patients have essentially no interest in their diseases. Very few have more than a cursory interest. So if they walk in there, expecting Mrs. Jones to be a typical patient, they'll be rushed. They'll be late to their afternoon clinic. They won't have time to answer her questions. And she won't be happy with them.

But if they know, they can take the time to sit down and have a discussion. They can go read the chart and re-familiarize themselves with all the minor lab findings. Etc. And she'll be happier for it.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

is she pregnant?

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[PaganRitual]

He or she is making highly educated guesses

I believe that this is, in fact, the point. Of doctors, that is.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[h4rr4r]

How do you figure?
The issue is after Dr.RocketSurgeon tests his guess and the guy dies he keeps his job and goes to screwup someone elses life. I have had doctors kill family members via misdiagnoses, or try medicines on me without any blood tests for effectiveness. The real issue I have seen is dr's are often very laid back and would rather let you die of whatever it is while telling you it is stress than actually try something.

Sure some are great, but many should be back in school.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[h4rr4r]

I have had two doctors so far tell me to take an over the counter cold remedy that would probably kill me. This is based on interaction with something they prescribed, and filled out the pad for on the same damn visit.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[shadowbearer]

  While I agree that it's unfair to make generalizations, I'll point out that the human body is many orders of magnitude more complicated than a bridge, or an automobile, or aircraft navigation, or even the global economy, and there are many, many things we still don't know about the interactions that occur within it.

  While the rest of your points are good ones, many doctors are still making the best guess they can when they are confronted with a range of symptoms and test results that don't fit anything in their knowledge or experience. That's why getting second and even third opinions, especially when one has serious symptoms, is always a good idea.

  I'd also like to point out that the engineers who design bridges don't yet know everything about how bridges react to stress (if they did, no bridge would ever fail); that auto mechanics (especially nowadays with the insanely complicated vehicle systems) can't always make a correct diagnosis the first time, and that airline navigation errors, even with modern instruments and the best training, still routinely occur.

  In fifty or a hundred years it's likely that some doctors and many medical students will be wondering just how we managed to do what we are with our horridly primitive knowledge and tools. Short of a global crash of civilization our knowledge about how the human body works will continue to increase in a non-linear fashion for a very long time, just as it has been for the last half a millennia or so.

SB

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

20 grand for a liver test? You're just making that up, unless you're talking in Lira.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[shadowbearer]

  For that matter, I'd bet (not that anyone could collect on it) that assuming civ doesn't crash, some X number of years from now we will probably have beaten every disease or problem known to us now, and there will still be problems which will stymie even the best medical professionals.

  The assumption that humans will eventually learn (and understand) everything about reality is pure hubris.

SB

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Dan Ost]

Cause, face it, no doctor is going to sit down for hours reading through studies and reports to figure out what could possibly ail one single patient.

Every night, my wife comes home and replays her day in front of the computer. Any decision that she made regarding a patient's treatment that she isn't 100% sure about, she researches. Any test results that seem out of the ordinary, she searches for explanations. Any condition she saw (or suspects she saw), she researches to make sure that the correct details are fresh in her mind when dealing with the patients and teaching her team the next morning.

She expects the same of the residents and med students on her team. If the team has a patient with a particular condition, she expects everyone on her team to read up on the condition and to know the relevant details of diagnosis, treatment, and related conditions. If they don't, then how can they possibly give the patient the appropriate care?

Maybe the doctors you've known were different. Perhaps the expectations at a teaching hospital are different. Perhaps my wife and her colleagues are unusually conscientous about their patient care. But whatever the reason, if your doctor doesn't take an interest in your condition and attempt to understand what's going on with you, get a new doctor.

Based on the doctors I know (and I know quite a few, as you might expect, since I'm married to one), your cynicism is misplaced.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Dan Ost]

Doctors look at a situation, generate testable hypothesis, test those hypothesis, and monitor the results.

If you don't think that's applied science, you are mistaken.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

If only medicine was akin to the bridge engineer. The poster above is correct. They are guessing. You have obviously have never had a complex medical problem or you would know that is true. You can be comfortable in your world thinking "House" will save you if you are ill. The truth is far worse.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[jc79]

You would have had to pay $20 000 from your own pocket (that's equivalent to my entire yearly income) for a potentially life-saving diagnostic test? Can someone explain to me again why there is so much opposition in the USA to state-funded healthcare?

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me describe to you what is an incredibly common set of symptoms, flu-like symptoms. You come in with this. Chances are you have the flu. But it could be any of a great spectrum of other causes. Most likely the doctor tells you to go home and wait a few days (drink fluids, unless of course you enjoy drinking solids). The doctor had to guess. The reason is that while I am sure that tests exist to tell if you have a virus and that it is in fact a flu virus the tests either aren't cheap or aren't quick because otherwise I think they would be used more often.

As for knowledge we as a species still don't know everything about humans or our environment. I could easily be wrong but I don't believe that we fully understand the mechanisms for memory and yet we still try to cure people with memory problems. We don't fully understand cancer (which is unfair since that is an incredible diverse set of diseases) and yet we still try to treat it.

I read an earlier comment that the assumed rate of misdiagnosis is between 10%-30%. I wonder how much of these are misdiagnoses that are effectively moot. If you have bronchitis caused by an infection or pneumonia caused by infection and are treated with broad spectrum antibiotics does it really matter which it is since the infection will most likely be destroyed?

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah... about that.

Let's look at those four things doctors have.

KNOWLEDGE: Came from books. I can read books too.

EXPERIENCE: I'll give you this one.

TOOLS: Yeah, I'd be able to get those tests *for myself*, if the goddamned doctor's unions weren't balls-deep in the legislative process preventing me from doing that, wouldn't I now? Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just go to a lab, get your blood drawn, and get the information without having to drop $200 on an office visit?

INTUITION: Yeah. I can "intuit" a lot better than most people, including my doctor, can.

There, I fixed that for you.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[one-egg]

Me too.

I started feeling funny one day about 18 months ago. Long story short, I typed "heart attack symptoms" into Google; what I found led me to call 911 immediately.

They tell me that I didn't have the actual heart attack (which they called "massive") until I was already in the ER. Google might not have saved my life, but it certainly meant that there was very little permanent damage.

Re:Let the anecdotal counterpoints begin.

[Hognoxious]

And what did you do about it?

Reginald Barclay

[Itninja]

A stinging sensation in the lower spine. It's Terellian Death Syndrome, isn't it?
We agreed you'd come to me before checking the medical database.
Well, this time I'm glad I did. Maybe we can stop the cellular decay before it's too late.
Reg, you don't have Terellian Death Syndrome.
- You're sure?
- I'm sure.
Then maybe it is Symbalene Blood Burn.
No. I don't see anything wrong at all. Wait a minute. There is a slight imbalance in your K-3 cell count.
My K-3s? No!
Barclay, I'm sure it's nothing.

Re:Reginald Barclay

[elrous0]

Considering how often crewmembers of that ship got infected with weird alien viruses, I think Barclay might have been the sane one.

Re:Reginald Barclay

[The MAZZTer]

Didn't everyone in the crew go on to mutate later in that episode? Yeah, I'm sure it was nothing.

Let me share this one

[h2k1]

One woman in my work makes the colleagues to go and look to her feces and feel the bumps in her breast... And she has a rare condition that is called pre diabetes, and once she said that her hymen had closed due to a very serious condition that she had down there.

Re:Let me share this one

[Anonymous Coward]

One woman in my work makes the colleagues to go and look to her feces and feel the bumps in her breast...

Is she hot?

Re:Let me share this one

[h2k1]

If she were hot i would not post this... i would have offered myself to do the full exam

Re:Let me share this one

[Anonymous Coward]

Is she hot?

Well?

Re:Let me share this one

[Anonymous Coward]

I call shenanigans!

Re:Let me share this one

[Farmer Tim]

I'm sure there's some kind of inverse sexual harassment thing going on there.

"She constantly gives graphic descriptions of her genitals and demands we feel her breasts. Oh, and she's a coprophile".

Re:Let me share this one

[harl]

I call bullshit.

One trip to a manager or HR and this is done.

So its so across the line of any place of employment. Even the ones with really broad lines.

Re:Let me share this one

[M8e]

h2k1 didn't mention any fever.

Re:Let me share this one

[h2k1]

And if i tell you that this madam is the payroll processing dpt chief? :)

Re:Let me share this one

[harl]

I call it even more bullshit.

HR would have shut this shit down long ago. Based on that title alone the company is more then big enough.

I have a feeling

[GilliamOS]

That is has been a problem of sorts since the bombardment of TV and print ads for Rx drugs. Why do they feel they need to advertise them? You can't just go and buy them OTC.

Re:I have a feeling

[Anonymous Coward]

"Tell your doctor..." - sheesh

Re:I have a feeling

[Fear the Clam]

Why do they feel they need to advertise them? You can't just go and buy them OTC.

Because this way concerned patients become sales reps for the drug manufacturer.

Re:I have a feeling

[jc79]

In my country prescription pharmaceuticals are not directly advertised to consumers. This is a Good Thing.

Googlitis?

[Culture20]

I had Ebola for five days two weeks ago. Maybe Googlitis weakened my immune system?

I misread the title

[Anonymous Coward]

I read "Google-tits," and I thought, "What about Google-tits is suddenly making them perky?"

Google saved my sight

[GreatDrok]

True story - I woke up one morning and my eyes were both full of floating debris and this circular ring. Also there were lots of flashes in my eye. None of this is a good sign so I googled the symptoms and it said I likely had a detached retina and I should go to hospital immediately. I did, and yes, both retinas had significant rips and needed multiple laser treatments, a couple of vitrectomies and a membranectomy before I was given the all clear. The morning I presented the doctor told me that it was very good that I had come in so quickly because it could quickly have deteriorated to a stage where it wouldn't have been repairable.

Of course, my symptoms were pretty obvious and I had an idea what it was before I even started looking but the first hit said 'go to hospital. Now'. Very good advice. I wonder how often the opposite is true and people use Google and find that it suggests it is nothing to worry about and they don't go to the doctor? My guess is that is rather rare compared with the hypochondriacs who have nothing wrong with them.

Re:Google saved my sight

[D Ninja]

Cool story bro!

And...I am curious how ones retina detaches in the first place. Fall asleep with contacts in? Or...I can't even imagine. Care to share?

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

Rather, the trained professionals saved your sight. All Google did was act as a vector through which you wasted your time searching for something that should have been immediately obvious to you - that something sure as hell wasn't right, and that you needed to get your ass to the hospital. If you needed a Google search result to clue you in, you have some other issues tucked away that need to be tended to (Google them, perhaps?).

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, take the risk that MAYBE they will correctly diagnose and treat you. I prefer to be informed.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

I had the same thing happen to me one morning and searched the symptoms. I remember the recommended answer was to see an Ophthalmologist right away. I waited hours in waiting rooms and then they confirmed what I already knew; that I had a detached retina. But by this time the detachment had already affected my macula (bad news, when trying to preserve your sight).

Re:Google saved my sight

[GreatDrok]

As you age, the vitreous (the jelly part in the eye) starts to liquify. This is normal and it starts around the edges where it connects with the retina and pretty much everyone goes through this. Normally you'll see a rise in floaters in your eye as early as your 40's and it is associated with being short sighted. Sometimes, as the vitreous liquifies, some parts are still attached to the retina and this tugs at the surface and can pull sections away and that is what happened to me in both eyes (Posterior Vitreous Detachment). The ring I saw was a Weiss RIng which is from the area around the optic nerve which was pulled away.

This site covers it pretty well - http://www.agingeye.net/visionbasics/flashesandfloaters.php

Re:Google saved my sight

[xandercash]

That must have been SOME DREAM you were having. ;-)

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer to be informed.

I really hope my sarcasm detector is just off-kilter today, but...

We're talking about Googling medical conditions, not Googling medical conditions and following it up with 8+ years of med school. There's no realistic way a lay-person with a net connection can properly be informed before meeting with their GP, pow-wowing with their OB/GYN, or rushing to the ER. They can fill their heads with all the textbook phraseology they wish, but without proper training it doesn't mean a damn thing.

Re:Google saved my sight

[gman003]

I came down with the flu, I checked WebMD, it said not to bother going in to doctor unless the symptoms persisted or I became dehydrated. So yes, at least one person has followed the instructions not to go to the doctor.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

High blood pressure, and significant nearsightedness (the eyeball approaches a football shape, and the 'pointy' ends are strained) are two conditions that my eye doctor warned me about - she said they could make a retinal detachment much more likely. There are others. Contact lenses sit over the front of the eyeball on the outside - retinal detachment is the inner lining at the back of the eyeball pulling away from the middle layers - other than an infection, lenses (I've worn soft lenses for over 20 years) should have little to do with it. But I did know another woman who was hit on the face, and had a small traumatic detachment - something to do with the eyeball moving fast and stopping faster, tearing the delicate retina away. Laser repair is possible nowadays in many cases, but this was before all that.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

Google didn't save your sight, a doctor did. Are you trying to say that you would have NOT gone to a doctor otherwise after symptoms like that? I'm not saying google is worthless, but a lot of people lack the expertise to interpret what they have read, and it's not just in the medical field either! Hell, I bet half the people that read sites like /. have no idea what they are looking at then try to infer some sort of meaning, and probably screw it up a lot....

Re:Google saved my sight

[timeOday]

I wonder how often the opposite is true and people use Google and find that it suggests it is nothing to worry about and they don't go to the doctor?

Well, I was playing with my little daughter and suddenly her elbow was in terrible pain. I googled it and decided it was probably Nursemaid's Elbow. I did the suggested treatment (turning her palm up and flexing her elbow) and the ligament snapped back into place, and she was immediately better. A trip to the doctor or hospital would likely have taken the rest of the day and cost a lot of money. Yes, any nurse could have fixed it in two seconds, the problem is getting to see anybody takes hours.

So in my case, it did prevent us from going to the doctor, and that was a good thing.

I can see how empowering people is a pain in the butt for doctors and no doubt leads to occasional problems for patients who take too much into their own hands, but, too bad. Tech support has always dealt with ignorant know-it-alls, now doctors must, too.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of us who are severely nearsighted, it's something we have to be aware of. As my eye doc explained it to me several decades ago, severe nearsightendess is often caused by the eye being slightly deformed (elongated) which stretches the retinal tissue a little. Sometimes (rarely) that tissue will start to detach or rip or both.

He basically said that if I started seeing bright flashes, odd shapes, unusual amounts of "floaters" (which, being very nearsighted, are in my vision all the time anyway), or most of the V'Ger scenes from "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" in my vision, I needed to get to a doctor. Immediately.

For the rest of the population, it's apparently still a possibility - usually associated with trauma or degenerative disease, but not always. It's already pretty rare in the nearsighted population, much less the general population.

Fortunately, they can just laser-burn the retina back on, and the mind works around the missing bits just like it does with any retinal damage. Thank goodness for overdesign. :)

Re:Google saved my sight

[pclminion]

Out of curiosity, how is it that both retinas detached simultaneously? From over here in the ignorant chair, it seems highly improbable. What happened?

Re:Google saved my sight

[Anonymous Coward]

The retina is on the back...and the inside, so contacts won't do it. It's usually caused by a blow to the head, so how someone could tear both while sleeping is indeed a good question.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Hurricane78]

Do you know what strikes me as being completely left out of your comment?

Why the hell did your retinas detach??

I mean weren’t you even interested in the actual cause? (And by cause I mean either a proven genetic defect, or something outside of your body that did something to it. [A cause is never just something in your body. Obviously.])
Because if you don’t know the reasons, there in no way you will ever prevent it from happening again the next time. You wouldn’t even know what to prevent. :/
Like running against a wall, taking painkillers, and continuing to run against that wall... yay... way to go!

Re:Google saved my sight

[misexistentialist]

'go to hospital. Now'.

The problem with those instructions is that most people would drive themselves.

Re:Google saved my sight

[PitaBred]

The lay-person knows more about themselves than they could ever convey to the doctor. There most certainly is a place for Googling, but then follow-up with the doctor who has training and experience. I'd rather have someone have restarted their computer before calling tech support than just calling at the drop of a hat. I'm sure a doctor would, too.

Re:Google saved my sight

[Rob_Bryerton]

Did you get in car, and drive on road, to get to hospital?

Re:Google saved my sight

[sourcerror]

. I wonder how often the opposite is true and people use Google and find that it suggests it is nothing to worry about and they don't go to the doctor? My guess is that is rather rare compared with the hypochondriacs who have nothing wrong with them.

Eczema. I actually went to the doctor, but didn't hurry. (Waited a few weeks. Simple moisterizing didn't solve the problem.)

Re:Google saved my sight

[GreatDrok]

"Why the hell did your retinas detach??"

Combination of factors - I am short sighted which makes me prone to PVD which can lead to detached retina, I was likely dehydrated from just having spent 38 hours travelling from Europe to New Zealand so that may have contributed. Frankly, just bad luck. Not going to happen again for the same reasons though, no vitreous in one eye and the other has now done what it is going to do. May get detached retinas for some other reason in the future but for now all clear.

Re:Google saved my sight

[pipedwho]

It also means you will probably come better prepared to provide quality information regarding your own body.

In the process of trying to Google a diagnosis, you may be keyed into preparing otherwise non-obvious external information regarding things like consumed substances, genetic conditions, and/or infectious diseases that the doctor may not know about (ie. a vitamin supplement, a friend with mono, an uncle that died of heart failure at 30, etc).

Then when the Doctor asks those questions, you'll have a quick answer for him. You may also come better prepared (both mentally and physically) to go through a series of possibly intrusive tests.

Fear

[Anonymous Coward]

Having worked in healthcare information, I can tell you that many doctors are afraid of computers and information. When I hear of a rare disease/condition (which I would NEVER get from a TV show like, oh, say, "House") I often google it, but I use information from websites like mayoclinic.com, nih.gov, webmd, etc.- not joe's blog or nancy's health forum. As with all information and research there will be good info and bad.

Computers will improve medical diagnostics- when they are finally accepted (required?) and people can use diagnosis charts and checklists and do some of the background work before seeing the doctors.

On a positive note, most doctors and healthcare professionals are encouraging people to be more informed and involved in the process. In fact, if you're not, you're more and more at risk for medical mistakes. It's your life and health- learn and be informed.

Someday this will all be behind us and we'll wonder why we relied on perception and "gut feel" so much and so many problems were not diagnosed early enough (like my friend's dad who died unnecessarily of an otherwise curable cancer.)

Baloney

[Stumbles]

"...where the patient accepts my word as the gospel truth,..."

I asked my doctor once what the side-effects were for a prescription. He looked at me dumbfounded and never answered my question. That Doctor then became NOT my Doctor.

Re:Baloney

[tukang]

"I'm not looking for a relationship where the patient accepts my word as the gospel truth," RTFS?

Re:Baloney

[Red Flayer]

"I'm not looking for a relationship where the patient accepts my word as the gospel truth," RTFS?

That doesn't mean the doctor should ignore a patient's request for information. At the very least, he should have grabbed his copy of the PDR and looked it up. Ideally the doctor should know the most frequent side effects, as well as any black box warnings, for any medication they prescribe.

But if you really want to know about prescription side effects, etc, ask your pharmacist. It's their specialty -- and if there's an issue with the side effects, they can call the doctor and perhaps get the prescription changed.

Google-itis

[mattack2]

It's a contagious form of medical student disease.

Even though they have textbooks, apparently they do the same thing. (...or at least it's been shown on a whole bunch of medical shows.)

Good with the Bad

[Thelasko]

A buddy of mine had severe sinus congestion. His doctor told him to take Afrin. Over the course of several years, his sinus congestion became worse. His doctor performed all sorts of exotic therapies, and continued to recommend Afrin. Thanks to Google, and Wikipedia, he discovered that long term use of Afrin can cause a dependency, and actually make the symptoms worse. A second opinion by another doctor confirmed his internet diagnosis, and he is doing much better.

Re:Good with the Bad

[BitZtream]

Yea, he could have just read the warning on the bottle to figure that one out.

Re:Good with the Bad

[drsmack1]

Afrin addition is a very well-known problem; if the doctor was not aware of this - well, there may be larger issues there.

Re:Good with the Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. I mean, it says right on the side not to use it for more than three days in a row, and I'd be willing to bet that the little pamphlet in the box even explains that if you do, it will cause even worse congestion.

Re:Good with the Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have: the facts of life.

Re:Good with the Bad

[shadowbearer]

  My last girlfriend had chronic sinus problems for over two years; was told all sorts of things - it was a deviated septum, she had a virus that wouldn't go away, potential brain tumor, etc, etc. After about two years she developed a bad abscess in a tooth, and had to have it removed; the dentist pointed out on the xrays that the infection had been into her sinus cavity on that side for some time. Removing the tooth and a two week course of antibiotics cleared all her problems up in a few weeks, and they still have not returned after more than a year and half.

  None of her doctors, apparently, could read the xrays properly. Seven doctors in two years, nearly twenty thousand dollars in medical bills.

  The relevant part of all of this is that shortly after her problems became apparent, we did some research online and the best fit with her symptoms was a sinus cavity infection. Not one of those doctors listened to that, not one, and two of them derided doing our own research as stupid.

SB

Re:Good with the Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Afrin addition

Is that like modular arithmetic performed in an Afrin field?

Re:Good with the Bad

[drsmack1]

Only when divided by the square of pi.

It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Qubit]

...if Medicine wasn't such a members-only club. There's the "In" crowd and then there's the "Rest" of us.

Take other fields.... writing, education, programming, painting, online stock trading -- anyone can hop online or go down to their local bookstore, get How-To books, and start to do actual work in hundreds of different fields. But not in medicine.

Sure, you can learn some First Aid, and maybe even some more advanced techniques, but eventually you'll have to go to medical school to become a nurse or doctor, or at least attend weekly courses to become an EMT. And there are some safety reasons for training people in this fashion, as well as restricting access to certain drugs to only those people who demonstrably know their effects and interactions.

But just because there are some good reasons, some of the time, to lock up some medical knowledge or access to the tools of the trade, doesn't mean that there won't be hundreds if not thousands of motivated individuals that want to try to tackle their own medical problems the same way they do home improvement projects.

Quoth the doctor:

"I just feel the Internet brings so much misinformation to the (exam) room that we have to fight through all that before we can get to the problem at hand."

So here's one for you: Why can't you fight that misinformation before the patient even steps foot in the exam room? Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online? Won't patients gravitate to the more prestigious sites, especially if doctors point them there?

But I don't think that doctors want patients to ever try to self-diagnose, so they won't ever put this information online. Whether or not the doctors have the patient's best interests in mind, this creates a rift between the two parties, and does little to advance patient-centered health care.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. In my experience doctors provide sod all info about whats going on with you and what the process for dealing with it might be. If I was as bad at keeping clients informed in my role as my doctors are with me I wouldn't have a job!

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Stenchwarrior]

So here's one for you: Why can't you fight that misinformation before the patient even steps foot in the exam room? Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online?

Because then the Dr. is liable for any information that he may have "pointed" you towards. Even peer-reviewed information, while it may cover the majority of the seekers' symptoms more accurately than the pseudo-science, there's that small percentage that would wind up taking the advice and be wrong...then there's a lawsuit.

More importantly, patients might be less likely to come in for an exam based on the information at-hand, thus the Dr. could not bill the standard 992XX code for their $85 office visit reimbursement from the insurance company. Hey, a guy's gotta eat.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Lumpy]

you can.

you can easily learn medicine, you just cant practice legally.

I personally am interested in pharmaceuticals and discovered that contrary to the line of bull big pharma gives us, hard powder pills do NOT drop in potency even 10 years later when stored properly. your old perkadan and Darvoset pills from 10 years ago are still highly potent. and generic low strength Anti-biotics are just as effective years later.

How did I test? the same way they do. Pitri dishes with a growth medium and a incubator. I innoculate the dishes and grow colonies, then innoculate the dishes with a measured dose of fresh and over 10 year old of the exact same antibiotic.... Penicillin. then count the colonies left after 48 hours of incubation.

I saw the same level of kill off. It got me a big A in college for my microbiology project. I can see liquid medicine and liqui-gel pills degrading. but I cant see a hard powder pill degrading when stored right. I'm betting they can go a half century.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[SakuraDreams]

...if Medicine wasn't such a members-only club. There's the "In" crowd and then there's the "Rest" of us.

Take other fields.... writing, education, programming, painting, online stock trading -- anyone can hop online or go down to their local bookstore,

I'm a doctor.
You mean a multi-billion investment fund will take my advice where to invest their clients' money? I should just email them after having read some books?

Or perhaps the city will let me design a bridge? Or maybe I could learn to fly on Microsoft Flight Simulator and give my airline pilot advice during the next turbulent flight I encounter?
Maybe I should barge in and tell the magistrate in court what they should do - I've seen Perry Mason do it and read some books.

"I just feel the Internet brings so much misinformation to the (exam) room that we have to fight through all that before we can get to the problem at hand."

It's very good advice. People are not specialists. You can't be a stock broker or a computer programmer and expect to be a doctor too. It's nice to be able to read up information but don't presume you will understand it, let alone be able apply it.

So here's one for you: Why can't you fight that misinformation before the patient even steps foot in the exam room? Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online?

There are many such sites. In the UK the NHS has sites with information for patients. In the US the CDC (among other agencies) has similar sites. There is also WebMD. http://www.webmd.com/
It's usually helpful to start with your local Health Ministry websites and work from there. As said in the UK, this would be NHS.
There's also the Health on the Net Foundation which 'certifies' sites which contain credible medical information. http://www.hon.ch/

The knowledge is there already or do you want you doctor to spell it all out for you. Should he also take you down to your local library to point out the right section for you?

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[tepples]

Take other fields.... writing, education, programming, painting, online stock trading -- anyone can hop online or go down to their local bookstore, get How-To books, and start to do actual work in hundreds of different fields.

It's interesting that you mention programming because video game programming is another field with entry barriers. You have to do a "residency" of sorts by releasing a successful title for PC before you're allowed to develop console games.

Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online?

I thought that's what WebMD was supposed to be.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Stenchwarrior]

Poop. That first paragraph was supposed to be quoting parent.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[bcmm]

Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online?

The UK's NHS has a website: http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/

Of course, it does tend to err towards telling people to go to hospital/GP if they have symptoms with many possible interpretations, but that is probably the right thing to do. It also gives sensible advice about issues like weight, where almost everybody else is trying to sell snake oil.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Anonymous Coward]

they can stay weel over a century, Shasha had a 55y old psylocibin vial in his lab and it was still active

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Mindcontrolled]

As much as I tend to encourage people to do a bit of science on the side, I have to make a couple of remarks on this, being a biochemist myself. First - your conclusion is wrong. You at best showed that penicillin stays active when stored in dry powdered form. Drawing conclusions to any arbitrary substance is a bit far-fetched. That is a very important thing that you have to learn when doing science properly - how to assess what conclusions you can actually draw from your data.

Second - what where the concentrations you used? If you applied the penicillin at significant "overkill" concentration, you would basically see the statistical average amount of resistant cultures left in both cases. To be sure, you gotta do the experiment at different concentrations, and you gotta duplicate the plates for the experiment and the control, so you can compare the patterns of kill-off.

Third, even if you showed that the potency stays roughly the same, you did not show if there are degradation products which could possibly be harmful for a patient - you would need to do a toxicity assay to be sure that it stays harmless for the patient.

Forth, regarding the remaining colonies - did they survive because of innate resistance or because the antibiotic concentration was too low?

Generally I think your conclusion is probably right, but the data you showed are not sufficient to make that conclusion. What you did is great for a college-level experiment, but in reality, there are more factors that you have to check for. That's why I sunk a couple of years of my life into studying that stuff. As I said, this is not to discourage you - doing science at home is great fun and you can learn a lot, but you gotta be careful evaluating your data. The most important part about science is, at least to me, that you gotta be aware that a single experiment might answer one question, but raises 10 others, on which you gotta follow up.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Princeofcups]

So here's one for you: Why can't you fight that misinformation before the patient even steps foot in the exam room? Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online? Won't patients gravitate to the more prestigious sites, especially if doctors point them there?

But I don't think that doctors want patients to ever try to self-diagnose, so they won't ever put this information online. Whether or not the doctors have the patient's best interests in mind, this creates a rift between the two parties, and does little to advance patient-centered health care.

Wow, paranoia. I mean, I think that MDs are generally condescending to their patients, but this goes above and beyond.

There is no way that the medical community can change wiki to alleviate people self misdiagnosing. Each subject would end up a book of best practices, possible test results, sample cases, complicated jargon, etc. Wiki does what it does well, give a brief description of the subject in language that the general user can understand. The complaint is not wiki misinformation, it is the case that each issue is much more complicated than the average user wants to get into. Hence, medical school.

That being said, there are tons of bad doctors out there, and it is always best to be skeptical of your doctor, and go out and do your own research. My psychiatrist was always interested to discuss what I read on line. I'd recommend her to anyone. My wife went through three bad shrinks until she found one who would listen. YMMV.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Red Flayer]

but I cant see a hard powder pill degrading when stored right

That's a significant qualifier.

How did I test? the same way they do. Pitri dishes with a growth medium and a incubator.

That's not how they test. They test by measuring the amount of active ingredient still present in the pill. IIRC, the pill must have 85% of the stated dose at time of expiry.

The reason some of those older pills may be no good to take is two-fold: 1) Less active ingredient -- after ingesting the pill, the blood concentration of the active ingredient may be below the effective concentration; 2) byproducts of the active ingredient degradation may have unwanted side effects.

I saw the same level of kill off.

Perhaps because the concentration was enough in both cases. But this may not always hold true when you're dealing with medications with narrow therapeutic windows.

Sure, you got an A on your microbio project... but there were plenty of projects I did in college labs that I got A's on that had serious methodological problems.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Anonymous Coward]

What a load of nonsense. You don't need a medical license to get access to any and every piece of medical literature out there. If you don't like paper, have you ever hear of WebMD? Medscape?

Here's one for you: Why is it someone else's job to educate you?

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[microTodd]

Oh man, I wish I had mod points! this is one of the best posts I've seen discussing scientific method and experiments. And it shows exactly why only knowing some of the data can be dangerous to draw all sorts of conclusions from.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[datababe72]

So here's one for you: Why can't you fight that misinformation before the patient even steps foot in the exam room? Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online? Won't patients gravitate to the more prestigious sites, especially if doctors point them there?

But I don't think that doctors want patients to ever try to self-diagnose, so they won't ever put this information online. Whether or not the doctors have the patient's best interests in mind, this creates a rift between the two parties, and does little to advance patient-centered health care.

There ARE websites with reliable medical info on the internet. WebMD and the Mayo Clinic's site come to mind.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Zironic]

Well, I don't know about the US, but in the Sweden they do put that information online, though ofcourse we have public healthcare and the State has a vested interest in having people do as much self-diagnosis as possible to cut down on the cost of General Practitioners so we have both online databases of common ailments and a telephone number you can call to have a nurse help you with more complex diagnosis's (Though if it's serious or you need medication you'll be refered to the doctor)

One of the funkier things we've had implemented recently is that people can send in cameraphone pictures of their strange skin spots to a doctor and they'll be told if it's harmless or not.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Qubit]

I'm a doctor.

Cool.

You mean a multi-billion investment fund will take my advice where to invest their clients' money? I should just email them after having read some books?

Well, they very well might, if they feel like it. In fact, anyone can go and trade their own money whenever they feel like it.

But while I can go and purchase grass seed for my lawn and paint for my house every year, I can't go down to the fix-it-yourself pharmacy and buy whatever drugs I need to fix myself up when I like.

It's weird: I can't decide to self-medicate if I think that doctors charge too much, because... only doctors are allowed to prescribe medicine.

I'm not a die-hard libertarian, but here's a compelling argument that a friend posed to me:
Either the government should let people make their own choices W.R.T. insurance, doctors, application of drugs, etc... or they should provide the whole service, insurance, doctors, drugs and all.

Or perhaps the city will let me design a bridge?

But lots of people use that bridge. I don't have to use you unless I want to...

Or maybe I could learn to fly on Microsoft Flight Simulator and give my airline pilot advice during the next turbulent flight I encounter?

Again, if that plane goes down it affects all the people in the plane and in the crash path of the plane. If you or I go down, it largely only affects you or me.

Heck, we already have laws dealing with DUI, driving while incapacitated, etc... to address the very issue of people misusing drugs.

Maybe I should barge in and tell the magistrate in court what they should do - I've seen Perry Mason do it and read some books.

Again, the magistrate has been elected to that position as it is to the benefit of us all. But if Joe Blow wants to pour some Iodine, Betadine, or high-concentration Caffeine over his open wound, who am I to stop him? (absent mentally unstable people, who I think we already deal with).

It's very good advice. People are not specialists. You can't be a stock broker or a computer programmer and expect to be a doctor too. It's nice to be able to read up information but don't presume you will understand it, let alone be able apply it.

It's not the point that I will apply it. It's that there are so many roadblocks to allow me to even start to get there.

There are many such sites. In the UK the NHS has sites with information for patients. In the US the CDC (among other agencies) has similar sites. There is also WebMD. http://www.webmd.com/ [webmd.com]

Those sites are good starts, but nothing compared to the resources available to doctors. And I've had doctors routinely tell me to disregard whatever I read online...

It's usually helpful to start with your local Health Ministry websites and work from there. As said in the UK, this would be NHS.
There's also the Health on the Net Foundation which 'certifies' sites which contain credible medical information. http://www.hon.ch/ [www.hon.ch]

Good places to start, true.

The knowledge is there already or do you want you doctor to spell it all out for you. Should he also take you down to your local library to point out the right section for you?

I'm a programmer. You and I have the same opportunities to write programs, buy hardware, and rock out with computers. But as a doctor, you have so many more opportunities and resources in medicine...

Here's the biggest thing for me: I hate the fact that Doctors present medicine as so exacting a science -- as if it's something that can explain everything that's wrong with people.

Countless times doctors have admitted that they cannot explain my symptoms. At one point I a

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Reziac]

Whether this is true varies wildly, depending on the drug as much as the format. Some are stable indefinitely; others have a fixed shelf life; still others degrade slowly over time.

Three realworld examples, all liquid injectables (as stored in the fridge) that I have considerable firsthand experience with across several decades:

Epinephrine: when the bottle says it's expired, it WILL stop working within at most a few weeks.

Oxytocin: remains effective for 3 to 5 years after the expiration date, but becomes weaker over time, so needs increased dosage. Soon after it reaches "double dose required", it stops working entirely.

Atropine: I have some on hand that is now approx. 22 years old (stale date was in 1991, which as I vaguely recall gave it a 3 year shelf life) and it still works as good as ever.

Anyway, you can see the danger of generalizing too broadly :)

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[priegog]

Wow. Parent surely will be able to respond to you better, but I'll give it my best shot. First I'll try to condensate your grips with modern medicine to be able to address them in an orderly fashion sometime before the end of the world (2012). Feel free to add any that I've missed. 1) Barrier to obtaining knowledge 2) Inability to get your hands on drugs/doing things yourself 3) The fact that doctors have access to more information than patients do. 4) Doctors don't know everything 1) I don't know what your barriers might be. I, myself, when going to the bookstore to get a book about a subject am not asked for any kind of credentials to acquire them. Please specify where the big difficulty lies. And sure going to medschool is the best way to learn. Why? the same reason going to a university to study ANYTHING is better than just reading up. Methodology, pedagogy, what have you. And as with other professions, you need a licence to practice. This is because you will be issued responsibilities and society has to have some way or distinguishing a doctor from a fortune teller. 2) This is tricky one, but more political than anything. In Europe, for instance your don't need a presciption for nearly as many drugs as you do in the US. But you ARE able to buy drugs for the most common ailments, aren't you? aspirins for headaches and mild anticongestants for the flu. As for the rest of the drugs, well it's a mixed bag. Firstly, most medications can and will hurt a person when used innaproprietly. You might say "it's my body so let me do whatever I want", but if people were (and believe me, they would) dropping by the bunch (and while trying to get better), there would be a general cryout for the goverment to do something. And no, don't even compare it to other substances that are also potentially lethal, because while it's obvious you shouldn't drink bleach, it's not very obvious you shouldn't use heparin to try to fix your hemorroids if you have an active ulcer. And no, all the warnings and instruction manuals in the world will not do it. It's a matter of public safety, like making sure a bridge is well built (or do you suggest they could put up a sign in the bridge that read "this brigde was not built by any engineers, proceed at your own risk" and leave it open to the public? Come on, if people are suieing eachother because they slip on their portion of the boardwalk... what pharmaceutical company would be brave enough to confront THAT? Also, there's the matter of psycotropic drugs, which like it or not is very much related to the drug legality. So that is a legal issue, not a medical one. Oh, and also, there are truly dangerous (as in massively and ecologically) drugs out there, mainly citostatics. You might like to treat that belly pain you woke up with (stomach cancer, according to google) with some cool chemo (or god forbid, radioactive isotopes for your throat pain [thyroid cancer]), but using those drugs would present a great risk to public (and ecological) health. By the same note, if I want to experiment with alternative energy sources, why can't I just go to the hardware store to buy some enriched uranium? 3) This is just bullshit. All the info we have available are the books we buy, the classes we took, the magazines we subscribe to, and a couple of websites with condensed and peer-reviewed data (payed for o), and pubmed; ALL of which you can get your hands without any sort of problem. I dare you, go to pubmed, type some disease you're interested in, and read up on the current research being done on them. Or buy an issue of the NEJM. It's the exact same info your doctor has available. But I'm guessing your doctor will probably be able to exact a bit more of useful information from it. The same way if I bought a book of hardcore python examples and practical uses I probably wouldn't know what to do with it. In that sense, please don't compare practicing medicine to painting your house. the same way I don't compare programming to keeping an up-to-date script for installing my favorite apps for when I do a full rei

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Dhalka226]

But just because there are some good reasons, some of the time, to lock up some medical knowledge or access to the tools of the trade, doesn't mean that there won't be hundreds if not thousands of motivated individuals that want to try to tackle their own medical problems the same way they do home improvement projects.

Erm, what?

Medical knowledge is not locked up. Nobody is stopping you from buying the exact same textbooks as the doctors. Nobody is stopping you from knowing pretty much everything a doctor knows. Pretty much the only thing you can't learn on your own is whatever you learn by cutting up a cadaver.

If you're looking to dispense your own drugs, well, that's not going to happen, nor is it a case of "some good reasons, some of the time, to lock [it up]." It's a horrible idea in most cases, horrendously prone to abuse that people will literally die from. That is the same reason you don't get to practice because you passed the $70 Internet Doctor course. You're going to kill people. Lots of them. If you want to use your newfound knowledge, use it by talking to your doctor and having him run whatever test you want -- most doctors will capitulate even if they think it's stupid.

Why don't doctors create peer-reviewed, well-written websites to counter all of the confusion and pseudo-science currently available online?

People are dumb. Sorry, but they are.

For starters, they believe things for stupid reasons including advertising, placebo effect, "my best friend told me so and he's smart," etc. Do you have any idea how many millions of dollars were made by "HEAD ON! APPLY DIRECTLY TO FOREHEAD!?" It's a ball of freaking wax. Same with most herbal supplements. Some of them work to some degree; most do not. Then there's things like vaccines causing autism, that some people just believe no matter how many peer-reviewed studies on well-written websites tell them otherwise. There's a show on HGTV calling "Selling New York" about high-priced real estate, where one guy brings in "[his] energy guy" to cleanse the bad energies out of an apartment before selling it. What can anybody possibly say to people like this?

Second, I suspect he was trying to be nice. I think the problem is less the bad information as it is people making themselves paranoid. I have, as we speak, little rash spots on various parts of my body and a headache. It could be meningitis and I could be dying as I type. Or more likely, it could be allergies and dyshydrotic eczema since I know I have both. Many highly fatal diseases present as a cold. If people are Googling about it, it means they're already bothered by it enough that they don't think "get some rest and drink lots of fluids" is getting the job done. That's going to instantly tilt their perceptions toward something more serious than the most likely culprits, even with no particular evidence.

Medicine is difficult, especially diagnosing a problem. Lots of things present as other things, and many of those "other things" are "wuh oh, you're dead." They're also uncommon. You have to use a blend of symptoms, tests (if available), previous history and just plain odds to make a diagnosis. Testing for every possible thing not only would be a collossal waste of the doctor's time and the lab's time, but also money on the part of patients and insurance companies (circling back around to patients). It's good that people are becoming involved in their own healthcare, but it doesn't mean it isn't ultimately a waste of time in the vast majority of circumstances.

All that said: WebMD. Peer-reviewed, excellent source of information, excellent and easy way of getting a huge list of what you might have based on your symptoms.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Anonymous Coward]

At one point I asked "Why does drug X do Y to me, when one of the side effects is clearly marked as the opposite of Y?"

Those listed side effects are basically everything that someone during the clinical trials reported as a problem while taking the drug. They often bear absolutely no relevance to what that drug is likely to cause, or would be expected to cause, based on its pharmacology.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[shadowbearer]

  I agree with most of what you said, but I would like to point out that there are many people who are proficient in more than one field, or specialize in more than one sub-field across disciplines.

  People who have the ability to specialize in one field are generally smart enough to understand many aspects of science across other fields. A good solid grounding in the basics of science - which is the idea behind multiple class requirements in college - generally gives one enough background to go further, if they have the time and ambition to do so.

  The easier access to information, knowledge and education nowadays makes such skill diversity a lot easier than it used to be.

  It's a shame that so many bright kids are using that access to become proficient lawyers, real estate agents, and stock brokers ;-)

SB

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Qubit]

I'd love to respond, but right now my eyes are feeling strained by having all of that text in just one paragraph.

If you could please reformat that a bit, I'll take a crack at it.

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[Qubit]

At one point I asked "Why does drug X do Y to me, when one of the side effects is clearly marked as the opposite of Y?"

Those listed side effects are basically everything that someone during the clinical trials reported as a problem while taking the drug. They often bear absolutely no relevance to what that drug is likely to cause, or would be expected to cause, based on its pharmacology.

But why didn't anyone tell me that?

Why can't the doctors give me more information?

Some might say that I'm asking too much of doctors, but as a computer scientist I am saddened that doctors don't have (or aren't applying/sharing with patients?) a database of knowledge about drugs, interactions, possible symptoms, etc...

If the doctor doesn't know about something, why don't they want to know more from me? Why don't they say "Well, we have no idea why this occurred, but could we please take your data and try to use it to find out for other people?" or even "we'd like to run more tests. It might hurt a bit, but it could help us to get a better picture, and in aggregate could advance medicine."

Re:It wouldn't be so much a big deal...

[priegog]

I know, sorry, I really tried (in different browsers even), but there seemed to be a problem with /. at the time I posted it.

It's not like I love a disorganised lump of text splattered on the screen or anything...
Oh, look, I had my comments settings screwed up (weird since this hadn't happened before...). So ok, I'll just paste it here.

Wow. Parent surely will be able to respond to you better, but I'll give it my best shot. First I'll try to condensate your grips with modern medicine to be able to address them in an orderly fashion sometime before the end of the world (2012). Feel free to add any that I've missed.

1) Barrier to obtaining knowledge
2) Inability to get your hands on drugs/doing things yourself
3) The fact that doctors have access to more information than patients do
4) Doctors don't know everything.

1) I don't know what your barriers might be. I, myself, when going to the bookstore to get a book about a subject am not asked for any kind of credentials to acquire them. Please specify where the big difficulty lies. And sure going to medschool is the best way to learn. Why? the same reason going to a university to study ANYTHING is better than just reading up. Methodology, pedagogy, what have you. And as with other professions, you need a licence to practice. This is because you will be issued responsibilities and society has to have some way or distinguishing a doctor from a fortune teller.

2) This is tricky one, but more political than anything. In Europe, for instance your don't need a presciption for nearly as many drugs as you do in the US. But you ARE able to buy drugs for the most common ailments, aren't you? aspirins for headaches and mild anticongestants for the flu. As for the rest of the drugs, well it's a mixed bag. Firstly, most medications can and will hurt a person when used innaproprietly. You might say "it's my body so let me do whatever I want", but if people were (and believe me, they would) dropping by the bunch (and while trying to get better), there would be a general cryout for the goverment to do something. And no, don't even compare it to other substances that are also potentially lethal, because while it's obvious you shouldn't drink bleach, it's not very obvious you shouldn't use heparin to try to fix your hemorroids if you have an active ulcer. And no, all the warnings and instruction manuals in the world will not do it. It's a matter of public safety, like making sure a bridge is well built (or do you suggest they could put up a sign in the bridge that read "this brigde was not built by any engineers, proceed at your own risk" and leave it open to the public? Come on, if people are suieing eachother because they slip on their portion of the boardwalk... what pharmaceutical company would be brave enough to confront THAT? Also, there's the matter of psycotropic drugs, which like it or not is very much related to the drug legality. So that is a legal issue, not a medical one. Oh, and also, there are truly dangerous (as in massively and ecologically) drugs out there, mainly citostatics. You might like to treat that belly pain you woke up with (stomach cancer, according to google) with some cool chemo (or god forbid, radioactive isotopes for your throat pain [thyroid cancer]), but using those drugs would present a great risk to public (and ecological) health. By the same note, if I want to experiment with alternative energy sources, why can't I just go to the hardware store to buy some enriched uranium?

3) This is just bullshit. All the info we have available are the books we buy, the classes we took, the magazines we subscribe to, and a couple of websites with condensed and peer-reviewed data (payed for o), and pubmed; ALL of which you can get your hands without any sort of problem. I dare you, go to pubmed, type some disease you're interested in, and read up on the current research being done on them. Or buy an issue of the NEJM. It's the exact same info your doctor has available. But I'm gue

Of the two people in this room...

[Anonymous Coward]

..one person actually cares about the patients health. Is it the one who made an appointment to go through an uncomfortable examination because they felt like something was wrong, or the one trying to squeeze as many credit ca... people through his business in an hour as possible?

Do your own research people. Go to your doctor armed with information, and don't let them brush off your concerns. Will your doctor like it? No, he went to medical school, and who are you to think you'd know something about your body that he didn't see in the 1.3 minutes he spent in the room with you so far?

To be fair, TFS seems to promote the idea of the doctor actually spending a few minutes with the patient doing the same types of searches they were doing at home, and when my daughters pediatrician did this for me and my wife around the H1N1 scare, we left feeling much better, so, I don't know.. am I building a strawman? I've heard it both ways.

There's an app for that too!

[NicknamesAreStupid]

Actually, a whole bunch -- http://blog.openmedicine.ca/node/223 . Given the rising cost of health care, this will certainly be a growth industry.

People google because family doctor are useless

[BurningTyger]

Family doctors are pretty much useless. Why do I need to book for an appointment, wait like 30-40mins at the clinic even though I have an appointment, and only able to talk to the doctor for 5mins?

I went to do my annual check-up with the family doctor a year ago, and I complained to him about my day-time sleepiness. The doctor simply dismissed it as "bored at work". I basically had to google the symptom myself afterward to discover that I might have sleep-apnea, and then book another appointment to tell the family doctor to just give me a referral to see a sleep specialist to do more comprehensive test. Lord and behold, my self-diagnose was confirmed by the sleep lab, and I even knew that the treatment would be CPAP before the sleep doctor suggested it.

The point of the story is, yes, there will be paranoid people who suspect they are dying of rare diseases because of their headache and whine to their doctor all day. For most people, they are better off googling their own symptom first, get a general understanding of what could be the cause of it, so that you can better talk to your family doctor on what test to do and which specialist to see.

Hey, you don't go to see a car salesman before doing your homework, why go see your doctor without getting a better idea of your own health?

Re:People google because family doctor are useless

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe your crappy HMO is the reason they don't spend a lot of time with you. Health Care is harder on doctors who run their own business than it is for anyone else. If they get paid the same regardless of how much time they spend with you, then there is a time limit to talk to you before they begin breaking-even or losing money thanks to America's crappy insurance. That time limit is usually 20 minutes.

Re:People google because family doctor are useless

[plurgid]

Damn straight.

It's not that your family doctor is useless, it's that the medical system doesn't have your best interests as a primary goal. The primary goal of the U.S. health system is to maximize the amount that any given practitioner can bill your insurance company.

This is why, 3 years ago I went to my family doctor and said "my stomach hurts and I shit a whole lot". He referred me to a GI, who almost sight unseen went "crohn's disease!".

Two years into that, none of the (extraordinarily expensive) treatments were working, and I had to hit google. There were a lot of things that didn't add up, and I didn't necessarily jump to my own diagnosis, but I knew one thing: for damn sure this wasn't Crohn's disease.

Eventually I had to *demand* to be referred to a research university, where presumably there were still some inquiring minds in the medical field (thank God I was right about that).

It turned out I had cancer (and the treatment has gone amazingly well). That would NEVER have been discovered in my hometown, if I'd chosen to just blindly trust the word of my local doctors.

Locally they would have simply continued to pump me full of very expensive chemicals that did not work.

Everyone gets their payday, the patient continues to need treatment, and the system hums along like perfection ... except the patient doesn't necessarily get any better. Everyone is taken care of except YOU.

In this day and age you have to take responsibility for your own care, and if you have generalized diagnostic logic skills (as many of us techies do), then they are absolutely invaluable, and google can save your life.

So if the price of having this tool at our disposal is that *some people* freak out and hassle their doctors too much ... well so be it.

Re:People google because family doctor are useless

[hammeraxe]

My experience of the amazing UK NHS system started with my "doctor" googling cough medicine. After that she diagnosed me chest infection and prescribed antibiotics, ignoring the numbness in my left arm. At the end of the day it turned out to be a heart related issue, again diagnosed by google.

I would argue that the availiblity of quality medical info on the web is a necessity. There is always some guesswork invovled, but the more info you've got, the more educated the guess. And I do think that MY educated gueses on MY health issues are probably just as correct as the average nurse's.

Re:People google because family doctor are useless

[vlueboy]

For most people, they are better off googling their own symptom first, get a general understanding of what could be the cause of it, so that you can better talk to your family doctor on what test to do and which specialist to see.

We geeks do not trust users to program our VCR (ugh, too old an example, but specific) or clean our spyware successfully. People suck at applying knowledge and following detailed, long-winded instructions. Halfway through a page, normal people will do self-selected bias and shut out anything implying that the illness is not their own.

The simple fact that slashdotters are good with machines and programming means we can also give and follow instructions well; understanding risks of googling and fairly weighing evidence to really prove that doctors suck. However, we are not doctors. The problem really is that for every benefited slashdotter there is a few fools doing it wrong. My mother gets dangerous emails about "if you have x symptoms, you probably...," "drink such and suck to cure cancer" and malevolent powerpoint slides with fake, non-traceable statements. She wanted me to save her if she ever got a seizure... her email said that bloodletting with needles can stop a seizure. I had to work hard to find her proof that it was a hoax and an attempt to land someone with an extra problem to what they were already having.

Of course, the sensible thing is google for "hoax" and "fake," weigh evidence, to leave the second opinion to a different doctor who doesn't see you everyday. Just like with coding, a second pair of expert eyes can solve more than we normally can't see past with just one.

Re:People google because family doctor are useless

[vlueboy]

Forgot to say that your normal doctor feels that all your questions are just extra work. An alt doctor whom you're paying to see has a clean slate, and feels the obligation to find why you think you have the problem.

The alt doctor's being fresh to an educated slashdotter's case and blind to records misleading a primary doctor is what spells success.

Plus I'm sure very few people are willing to sound stupid. Few will comment on how they had a dangerous brush googleitis and their doctor saved them from doing something stupid.

Patient misdiagnosis up %800

[woodsrunner]

Have to agree with you. Once pharma advertising budget surpassed pharma research it was game over.

Although it is a slightly different game than the googlitis

.... not to say the two can't combine for a mega-cocktail -- especially when you consider pharma advertising recombining with GoogleDNA adsense.

Have for sometime really been hating looking up health info online. It's just chucked with so many experts exchanges.

I think we're starting to go back on the pendulum started by Susan Sontag who was an early advocate of taking control of your health back when doctors would often conceal diagnosis from patients as to not excite them.

I googled my itis.

[Delusion_]

Turned out to be bursitis. To be fair, I didn't really google it but went to webmd so I didn't end up in hypochondriac hell. It was very specific about every symptom I had (swollen elbow, the sort of pain, the warmness), and it gave me a reasonable diagnosis (don't mess with it, use the body part as little as possible, see a doctor if it doesn't stop being swollen in about two weeks). It saved me a doctor's visit, but more importantly, it gave me peace of mind.

I'm very well aware that sites like those, particularly online versions of the DSM IV, are hellholes for developing hypochondriacs, but when used responsibly with reasonable expectations, sites that are more professional in tone can be very useful. And if you don't like what you read, or it gets worse, well, you get to make the call about going to the doctor instead.

Not the reason for Exam Room computers

[BenboX]

Physicians need to start putting computers in exam rooms not because of Google-itis, but because we desperately need to start using electronic medical records.

An extraordinarily low percent of hospitals are using EMRs. Source: study by the New England Journal of Medicine, reported here in the American Medical Association:

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2009/04/06/gvsc0406.htm

Forget Google-itis, how about having a system where if one doctor prescribes a medication, an alert immediately pops up warning the physician that this patient is also taking another medicine that will cause severe reactions if the two are taken together?

Imagine an industry that has extremely high-tech factory production equipment (Advance MRIs, Gamma Knife non-invasive surgical devices), but has the back office operations run entirely on post-it notes and shuffling paper back and forth on shopping carts. Get the systems in there to prevent dumb medical mistakes and improve cost efficiencies. Preventing Google-itis is a small amusing beneficial side effect.

Ben

now listen here...

[nimbius]

this is medical medicine...its complex, dangerous quackery not well suited for the average person...you need years of institutionalization before attempting it, and google will usually just suggest crazy things like a healthy diet and exercise...this is counterproductive to your well-being as it distracts you from your television.

We, the medical community, have contracted ineffably large pharmaceutical conglomerates and enlisted their superior knowledge of your symptoms in order to diagnose and treat many major illnesses you may, or may not, or may in the future should you decide to, be suffering from. Conveniently and enlighteningly peppered throughout your favorite episodes of House, the informative commercial programming from bloated clearinghouses of pharmacopoeia are designed to ensure you the lay-consumer are well armed should you decide to change, increase, or consume ever more of these life preserving drugs through your responsive and caring doctor-type sales representative.

dilbert replayed there health plan with google

[Joe The Dragon]

dilbert replayed there health plan with google

Information is bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Information is bad, leave it to the specialist!

I've been diagnosed with ADD, went to the neurologist to talk if I should take any drugs. The guy prescribes me something, I google the medication before buying, and it was some hardcore anti-seizure drug with a lot of bad side effects. Went to another doctor, and he said WTF. Google saved me money and my health.

Most of the doctors I have met, love when pacients look up to them and trust every single word they say. And they hate it when people try inform themselves.

My doctor DOES this!

[StCredZero]

I think every website that lists all these varied diseases should put a rarity score next to each illness.

I'd want such scores for the opposite reason. My doctor Googles everything I tell him about, and concludes I never have anything. He doesn't "suffer from" his patient's Googling. That's how he practices medicine!

Oh thank god!

[xandercash]

If Google is wrong, maybe I really DON'T need a hysterectomy and a vasectomy.

WTF

[Anonymous Coward]

I spent years looking for reasons I use linux on google, I came up with aspergers as a self diagnosed issue.

It's called "cyberchondria"

[tepples]

Wikipedia lists sources that have referred to it as cyberchondria.

Re:It's called "cyberchondria"

[networkconsultant]

cybercohondira a rare form of inflamation related to the availability of rare symptoms and near instantaneous access to all sorts of useless information, in other news an entire district of Bangalore has been sacked due to another symptom of google use ogle-tits.

Re:It's called "cyberchondria"

[Nematode]

cybercohondira a rare form of inflamation

I think you have malamanteauitis...

Doctors are the problem not the solution...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well if we want to get right down to the brass tacks of the issue...

PEOPLE ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE DOCTORS DONT DIAGNOSE ANYMORE!

Sorry for the shout... but the facts are quite apparent... 99% of the GPs (general practitioners) ONLY care about the symptom and what drug they can perscribe to (in most cases) MASK it. You doctor wants to see you walk into his office and the next thing he wants you to do is WALK BACK OUT as quickly as humanly possible.

Anyway... sure let the doctors and medical societies MOCK and LAUGH at 'the great unwashed public' as they try to self diagnose... but %#*(%*() if the %(*%()$ ^ doctor isn't going to diagnose you then what choice do most / all people have?!

Work the problem

[fermion]

This happens everywhere. No one wants to work the problem. They want to provide a solution and complain when you don't implement it. We see this in software all the time. So client comes in and says 'I want t a web site that looks like this and has these pages.' As responsible professionals we ask 'what is it you are trying to do', not to pad billable hours or because we don't want to do the work, but because we know that to often the client has been told the solution, independent of whether it is a reasonable solution for the problem at hand.

I can understand why people do this with doctors though. I have gone into exams for a particular problem, have sat through the exam thinking we were working the problem, and then be given so stock drug that may or may not solve the problem, never being told what the problem is. When ever diagnosis seems to be for the benefit of the pharmaceuticals...

Coping with Afrin addiction

[tepples]

PROTIP: As you finish a course of treatment with oxymetazoline nasal spray, use it in one nostril at a time, alternating between doses. This way you can still breathe through the rebound congestion.

Re:Coping with Afrin addiction

[paulej72]

Thanks for the tip. I never thought of doing it that way before.

Internet (possibly) Saved My Life

[dannydawg5]

This happened Feb, 2004.

2 months after finishing college and starting a new job in a new area, I woke up one morning with an odd stomach pain. I didn't think anything of it, so I went to work. By lunch time, the pain did not relax at all. It didn't get worse... just a steady piercing pain. I told a co-worker I was taking a half day. By 5pm, I was starting to get really worried because this was not a normal feeling stomach pain, and it was still there.

I went to Google and typed in stomach pain, and that's when I was starting to really get worried. Several websites started directing me to Appendicitis. After reading more, I had all the Appendicitis symptoms except "nauseated". I called a friend, and he said, "Nah, man! It's probably just something you ate! You said you aren't feeling nauseated, right? I'd wait until you were nauseated."

I had crappy insurance. I didn't want to go to the hospital unless I needed to, but since everything I read online was pointing to Appendicitis, I eventually decided that peace of mind was worth an out-of-pocket exam, so I jumped in the car and drove myself to the ER.

I went to the front desk, and he asked, "What do you think is wrong?"
I said, "I think I have Appendicitis."
"All right, fill this out and sit over there."

When I got to finally see a nurse, I said, "I think I have Appendicitis."
"Does this hurt?" "Yes."

When I got to finally a doctor, I said, "I think I have Appendicitis."
"We'll run some tests."

They ran a blood test. Came back positive.
They ran some x-ray type test. Came back positive.

By 10pm, the doctor came and said, "You have Appendicitis." By 5am, they were operating on me.

Google-itis helped me

[Wyatt Earp]

I'd had an operation in my neck which was pretty deep in for a nerve tumor.

After it, I noted intense pains when I was hungry and then after a few months super sensitive skin on my cheek and face on that side. After trial and error, I figured out that the pains came from my salivary glands, so eating hurt, some foods were worse than others. I went to the doctors and they couldn't figure it out, some though it was my jaw, they looked at ear and were talking about breaking my jaw and reseting it.

I was watching Downfall and reading about the various Nazis on Wikipedia as I watched it, along comes Magda Goebbels and I read about Trigeminal neuralgia. I paused the show and asked my girlfriend to listen to a list of symptoms and tell me if it applies to my condition.

"The disorder is characterised by episodes of intense facial pain that usually last from a few seconds to several minutes or hours. The episodes of intense pain may occur paroxysmally. To describe the pain sensation, patients may describe a trigger area on the face, so sensitive that touching or even air currents can trigger an episode. It affects lifestyle as it can be triggered by common activities such as eating, talking, shaving and toothbrushing. The attacks are said by those affected to feel like stabbing electric shocks, burning, pressing, crushing, exploding or shooting pain that becomes intractable."

We emailed my doctor and she had me come in for a face to face, then referred me to someone else and he diagnosed it. Later that year I was accepted for a Medtronics nerve stim which had reduced the pain by 80-90%.

Without my case of Google and Wiki-itis, I may not have ever been diagnosed.

Re:Google-itis helped me

[RebelWithoutAClue]

IANAMD, but here's my 2c. Have you been tested for celiac ? Might be worth checking out a gluten-free diet anyway. Good luck.

Re:Google-itis helped me

[Wyatt Earp]

Yes I have and I'm good. Besides, the symptoms for celiac don't correspond to what I had/have.

As for gluten-free...I'd rather die than be gluten-free. I grew up on a Wheat farm and I love my wheat, rice, beer and vodka.

Re:Google-itis helped me

[RebelWithoutAClue]

Well, just so you know, you will only have to give up the wheat. Rice, vodka are fine. Beer may or may not be a problem.

Would you be willing to give it up, if it meant your neuralgia went away ?

Just saying it's worth a shot. Cheers.

Re:Google-itis helped me

[Wyatt Earp]

My neuralgia went away now that I can jam it with my nerve stim.

And I got neuralgia from nerve damage, not from gluten.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/gluten-free-diet/MY01140

And I wouldn't go gluten free, a gluten-free diet is wheat, barley and rice free

Re:Google-itis helped me

[RebelWithoutAClue]

You are wrong about the rice, but it's cool.

Somebody need to read this

[Anonymous Coward]

http://books.google.com/books?id=Qk7bOlZ0knoC&pg=PA12&lpg=PP1&dq=three+men+in+a+boat&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

So my wife was dying...

[Call Me Black Cloud]

...or so she thought. She was convinced she had a brain aneurysm. She'd had an MRI that maybe showed something and the doctor called telling her to get a higher-res MRI that day. She started searching on-line and became certain she had an aneurysm and she could die at any moment. She thought about writing notes to the kids, making a video, all sorts of "I will be dead in 48 hours" things.

The subsequent MRI and follow-up with the neurologist showed no aneurysm, no cancer, no abnormalities. Or as I helpfully pointed out, "see honey, I told you they wouldn't find anything in there."

My preferred term for "google-itis" is cyberchondria...I've long called her a cyberchondriac. I'm hoping her "brush with death" will help cure her of that.

Google doesn't charge for an opinion

[alangerow]

When I can get a free estimate from an auto mechanic, but have to pay a specialist just to ask me 10 questions and take my pulse & blood pressure (which I can do for free at most super markets) ... I'm going to Google my symptoms first so see if I can save $100+ from a doctor just telling me "take some aspirin and drink plenty of water." If doctors are so concerned, maybe they should offer preliminary screening services at a competitive price as Google ... free.

Google has found me an answer...

[CoryD]

..three times. I have gone to doctors over a span of years who have never correctly diagnosed a few issues I have. Always saying it's one thing or another. Well, over the last five years I've diagnosed, presented and suggested treatments for each issue to my present doctor. I have hyperhydrosis of the palms. It's not severe, but it definitely makes shaking hands or trying to open a pickle jar problematic. I had a GP who had never seen this type of issue before, and wanted to schedule me for specialist sessions with both a neurologist and a dermatologist. I told him to let me think about it as I was living paycheck to paycheck at the time, and had cobra health care that wouldn't cover it. Fifteen minutes of searching online gave me an answer to what the issue was. To which I presented to the GP, he looked up, and verified. Which subsequently answered my next problem, dyshidrotic eczema; which randomly affects my hands. Again, not in a severe manner, and isn't noticable unless I were to point it out, but something my GP couldn't identify himself. In the end, both of these were caused by a third issue, an allergic reaction to certain metals in my diet. For each of the issues Google was able to identify, diagnose, and offer treatment plans for. All of which my GP researched after being presented with and acknowledged. If I had gone to the specialists would I have been diagnosed correctly? I'm sure I would have. So does this mean I am as well versed as a specialist over a standard GP? No. But it certainly has saved me cash along the way.

insurance company obtains your search history?

[peter303]

I am rather paranoid now about companies such as Anthem-WellPoint canceling your insurance for pre-existing conditions or errors on your insurance application when you get something serious. Next they'll obtain your search history to see if you were aware of pre-existing symptoms. Inurance contracts will probably bury such permission in the fine print at some point in the future. Furthermore, I google strange diseases when I hear of friends' and relatives' illnesses or read something quirky in the newspapers.

Theoretically this practice called recision goes away in four years under the new health care law. However, there have been several newspapers already about insurance companies looking for all loopholes around this law.

Re:insurance company obtains your search history?

[h4rr4r]

To me it seems like either they should then refund all your premiums or deal with it. If you buy a car and fail to get the carfax it is too bad when years later you find out it was in a wreck.

Google can quickly solve this

[somejeff]

Query: "My <any of the above/> hurts"
Google: "Did you mean.. to ask your mother?"

That's a very cynical attitude...

[Burning1]

..one person actually cares about the patients health. Is it the one who made an appointment to go through an uncomfortable examination because they felt like something was wrong, or the one trying to squeeze as many credit ca... people through his business in an hour as possible?

That argument only holds water if you can show me examples of doctors who aren't overloaded.

If your doctor is *voluntarily* accepting more patients than he or she can handle, while other doctors are being under-utilized, then yes, you could argue that your doctor is greedy.

However, if all doctors are overloaded (as would be suggested by your comments,) then there really are only two alternatives: turn away patients, which will not receive any medical care, or attempt to fit as many patients as possible into the available time.

The quality of care will suffer, but everyone will be seen.

You can argue about whether or not that method is the best way to provide medical care, but you really can't make the argument that the system exists out of greed.

I'd be very surprised to find that Doctors themselves like the way the system is currently operating.

Wikipedia and ER

[wdavies]

First of all, no offence, but who is Doctor Valek? and SouthTownStar.com? Bring me a refereed journal article next time...

As a counterpoint to all the anecdotal Google saved my life (and I have no problem with the claims), was the time 6 months ago when I went to the ER after I had misidentified my swollen uvula as the epiglottis, and after googling swollen epiglottis, found out I was likely to die if I didnt get to a hospital (which is true). When I got there, the ER doctor was pretty amused, and sent me home with a hard copy of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatine_uvula after he googled it for me... then my wife laughed a lot.

W

Re:Wikipedia and ER

[Reziac]

I see your problem -- your throat was installed upsidedown ;)

For me the reason to do this, is...

[Hurricane78]

...that sadly doctors are mostly full of shit. What I mean is that they are so mind-boggingly arrogant, even when they are not even remotely up-to-date. An example is the typical 60-year-old doc who hasn’t had a further training for 30 years, but does still say “There is no cure.” instead of “I don’t know a cure (yet).”, as if he knew that there never ever could be a cure, ever, because if he doesn’t know it, it can’t exist.

My brother told me, that that is a big problem, and well-known as the god complex.

And that is not the worst part. The worst part is that doctors seem to have no interest at all in actually finding the cause, and removing it. Instead you get everything you need, to hide away the symptoms. Pain killers, and all kinds of pills that only “make it go away” as long as you take them. Half the doctors I had to do with even acted insulted, when I demanded that they pursuit the actual cause, and tell me what it is.

Nowadays I don’t even bother anymore, and just learn the stuff myself. I only go to a doctor if I need to do tests, for surgery, or for stuff that I can’t get without a doc signing it off.

Especially in everything brain- or behavior-related they still live in the dark ages.

Google has its uses

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is invaluable for identifying health problems that haven't been around for long enough to have permeated the medical community. For example:

My wife and I developed a condition where for several days everything we ate/drank had a very strong metallic, sour, soapy aftertaste. Our doctors had absolutely no clue what the cause was. A quick Google search identified the problem as coming from eating oxidized pine nuts. The problem has only begun being reported within the last two or so years (likely as a result of some new cultivation technique or reaction of some new preservative being used), and so is not well known within the medical community.

The Doctors can bite me.

[charliemopps11]

I was sick for 6 years. Every few months I got a little sicker. I kept going in... they flagged me as a Hypocondriac. It was suggested that I see a shrink. I kept getting sicker. They started intentionally performing unconfortable procedures on me like colonoscopys, prostate exams, pin prick exams, etc... to try and stop me from coming in. Finally my symptoms started to increase exponentially over a few weeks. My hands were shaking so violently that I couldn't type any more, my vision blurred. I felt like I was having a 24hr heart attack. I started googling things... went to the doctor and asked them to test my thyroid. They said they didn't think that was necessary. I DEMANDED IT. Finally they relented and tested me. I had graves disease. A few weeks later they irradiated my thyroid and put me replacement therapy. I was so sick for 6 years that it prevented me from going to college, from getting a promotion... it ruined countless familly vacations all because my health plan didnt bother to do a $30 blood test on me. The Drs can screw themselves. They don't care about you, me or anyone but themselves. I pay more for health insurance than I do for my Fing house, I'll demand any damned test I please. The director of patient relations at my NEW HMO (yes I switched) knows me by my first name. I have her desk phone now. I plan to be a problem patient for every doctor I ever meet.

Same for my ex-roomate

[phorm]

I went to bed and heard her moaning and groaning in the next room, and figured that she was just having some fun with her BF. When I got up in the morning, I found her in the living room, doubled over in pain, and still moaning (with the useless BF just watching). I called in that I would be late to work, and took her to the hospital/emergency. We waited for a long time in the (empty) waiting room, to see some nurses (and one person who may or may not have been a doctor) who took a quick look at her and came up with the conclusion that as she'd recently had a period they were just menstrual cramps, that she was being overly complaintive, and told me to take her home.

Luckily we ignored that advice, waited around a bit longer and a doctor who knew what he was doing. After a quick X-ray, it turned out she had an ectopic (sp?) pregnancy. Essentially sperm and egg had met in-tube during her period, and it was then developing in her tubes rather than the uterus. It's a dangerous, and potentially fatal, condition. She was rushed to a bigger hospital, and they were able to take care of things.

If we had gone home straight off as told, she might have ended up dead or at least severely damaged and/or unable to have children in the future.

Re:Same for my ex-roomate

[flappinbooger]

My grandpa (late 70's IIRC) passed out. Fell down. Had history of heart problems. Went to the doctor. Doctor said "blah blah blah" and then "take two aspirin and call me in the morning". Grandpa, feeling basically ok, did that.

Problem was, Grandpa was having a stroke. The bleeding kind, not the blockage kind. Aspirin is a blood thinner. You do the math.

So, he died, many months later, moaning and incoherent in a nursing home from brain damage caused by stroke.

I do miss my grandpa...

Re:Same for my ex-roomate

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine this was a long time ago, no? Aspirin hasn't been recommended as a pain reliever for a long, long time for that very reason. (It's the reason that Tylenol can advertise that they're "the pain reliever hospitals use most".)

Actually, it sounds more like an epidural hematoma than a stroke, given his lucid interval (look it up if you're curious). Let me guess: he went to sleep that night and never really woke up?

Re:Same for my ex-roomate

[Anonymous Coward]

Waited a long time in a hospital before you even saw a doctor? Clearly you're not an American, our system is designed so that such a thing never happens.

Oh, wait, it looks like the fix was an abortion. She, the doctor, her boyfriend, you, and your entire family deserve to die and rot in hell. How dare you sacrifice that beautiful, defenseless fetus that might have gone on to cure cancer and create world peace! Murdering scum!

Sleep Apnea

[BenEnglishAtHome]

Sleep apnea is one of the best cases for reliable self-diagnosis. Or maybe "partner-diagnosis". If you're sleeping with someone who has a bad case of sleep apnea, you'll know it. You just may not know what to call it.

I had sleep apnea when I was in my mid-20s. I didn't know what it was. This was 30 years ago and doctors weren't aware, either. All I knew was that I was waking up in the middle of the night with my heart trying to pound it's way out of my chest.

My GP sent me to a cardiac specialist of some sort who did a stress test and diagnosed me with "Hyperkinetic heart syndrome". He put me on beta-blockers. Over time, he convinced me the beta-blockers were saving my life, so I kept taking them even after my mother saw an episode of Oprah that talked about sleep apnea. She had heard me sleep and had an immediate epiphany. I went to a sleep lab and got diagnosed. (Wanna know how long ago that was? The sleep lab was the biggest in Houston at the biggest hospital in Houston and it only had two beds. A tech had to monitor and write down readings from analog gauges every few minutes, all nite, for three nites. And the CPAP machine that I received had an external pressure regulator that was set with a really hi-tech tool: a big ol' screwdriver.)

Yet, nobody thought to take me off the beta blockers. Look up the side effects and know that I suffered from the worst of them (at least, the worst of them from the point of view of a generally-healthy, heterosexual male in his mid-20s to late30s) for more than a decade.

I respect doctors. I've seen them do amazing things. But I don't trust them and never will. Everything they tell me, I verify. Back in the day, that meant reading lots of thick, boring books. Now it means Google. And I'll never apologize for it.

Any doctor that tells me not to look up information online or who complains about patients who do so is a doctor that I will only visit once.

medical voodoo

[Anonymous Coward]

The sad truth.....there is very little science in medicine.

Doctors tend to get an excellent medical education which teaches them a ton of information. They then use that information, and their personal experience, as their foundation for testing and diagnosis. Unfortunately, that is not real science. Far too much personal bias. Far too little recognition that there are things they personally haven't seen yet, but are common knowledge elsewhere. Real science would include far more testing and recording of observations.

Have you actually read your medical records or charts? Chances are good that you are more familiar with them than your doctor and his/her 30 second speed-read. Those "records" would get laughed out of an 8th grade science fair. My insurance application has a more comprehensive medical history. It is time to move medicine out of the dark ages.

I have 5 children. We moved around the country alot. I have confronted multiple doctors during 2 pregnancies and at least a dozen different sick visits, when they were just flat-out wrong in their diagnosis. These are seperate incidients with different doctors, at different hospitals. That's ridiculous considering I'm an IT guy and never spent a day in Med school.

Little things like a doctor saying "Looks like she has the flu, it is going around. Give her some fluids...." and me interrupting and saying "no, you quack, it's the frickin chicken pox, like I put on the form and told the tech when I brought her in. Why don't you actually trying LOOKING at my child? The clear little blister-like things might be a clue."

Doctors don't like informed patients

[jurgen]

Ok, I don't have any hard data, but it seems to me that in reality today for every patient with mis-informed "Googleitis" there are ten or more people who are getting better medical care because they are informed about their condition or even have already correctly self-diagnosed. Some of the comments right here to point.

But doctors are upset because they are not used to having informed patients. They are used being the godlike arbitors of secret knowledge whose judgement will be trusted 100% because of their degree. But in reality of course they are human and all too fallible, and even more so nowadays that they are increasingly simply pharmaceutical salesmen rather than healers and don't really have or take the time to actually know their patients.

Before doctors found it easy to be confident... because hardly anyone ever questioned them. Now things are getting a bit more difficult. Poor doctors? I'm finding it difficult to be sympathetic.

There may be a lot of information of questionable quality on the Net, but overall I have not a shred of doubt that the empowerment the Net has brought to the individual in this regard has been a boon to public health.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[sourcerror]

There may be a lot of information of questionable quality on the Net, but overall I have not a shred of doubt that the empowerment the Net has brought to the individual in this regard has been a boon to public health.

I agree. If you want to double-check you can always go to the library, but at least you have some pointers. On the other hand: do patients get any kind of "proof" that the diagnosis they got from the doctor is correct? You know the, [citation needed] way. I don't see anything wrong with making doctors more accountable towards patients.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[Vexorian]

Ah really? Informed patients are one thing. But there are topics in which google is just an easy , easy way to get utterly, and catastrophically misinformed. Also, the disinformation is hard to distinguish for most people. Say you are a science geek that can at least recognize conspiracy bull from actual information, good for you. But what about the other people that don't enjoy of this benefit? Most of them just end up falling pray to complete BS.

This is the sort of things you can learn at "Google U" : http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/05/jenny_mccarthy_shows_off_her_knowledge_o.php

This is not "empowerment" it is the opposite, it moves people back to the dark ages in a way.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[Carlos Matesanz]

While i might or might not agree with you, you shouldn't be taking the comments here as representative. No slashdotter is going to admit he googled his sympthoms, acted like a prick with his doc and later realized he was wrong all the time.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[jurgen]

Google U? WTF? Look, people with political or religious agendas have always managed to find or manufacture information that supports their viewpoint, this has nothing to do with Google or even the Internet.

As for ignorance and dark ages... long before the Internet there were anti-vacciners, and flat-earthers, and black helicopter conspiracy nuts. But looking at your sig, I have to tell you... there *is* one thing moving is back to the dark ages, and that's the piecemeal enclosure of the noosphere by so-called "intellectual property".

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[jurgen]

I'm not basing my opinion on the comments, I was just pointing to them as examples. And while people may not like to admit that they "acted like pricks" even when they realize it, you don't really have any reason to think that anybody participated in this discussion ever did so.

Folks this "Google-itis" behavior can't be that common precisely because people don't want to look like idiots in front of their doctors or others. Sure there have always been hypochondriacs, and today they are armed with Google which makes them even more annoying to Doctors. But pretty much, that's all there is to this.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[Carlos Matesanz]

I for sure preffer having as much information as posible at "arm reach" and I can live with the inconvenient of some people misusing that information (even if they were a majority). I was just sayin' it's much easier to find examples of "google done right" than otherwise from users as it's easier to find rants about "google done bad" from doctors than any of them admiting a patient was right in the first place. The colour of the glass, you know.

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely true. Add a speedy decline of medicine in the last twenty years due to the insurance industry making medicine the jumping monkey to their organ grinder and you have our whole problem in a nutshell

Re:Doctors don't like informed patients

[Anonymous Coward]

I think your ratio is reversed and you have far too much confidence in people's ability to intelligently read and apply information. Selection bias and all that.

While yes being an informed patient is a good thing, fighting with doctors because you KNOW what you have (and going to another doc when this one doesn't ever agree) is a horrible drain on the system 9 times for every 1 that's a legitimate misdiagnosis.

Google-...what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one that read the headline as "Google Tits?"

Practicing Medicine

[tonyfugere]

Many others have already stated situations where research prevailed and the doctor's prognosis was inaccurate or just plain lazy. My wife is also on the same boat having been diagnosed intestinal issues when it was a cyst on her ovary. Two years and four doctors later, she's finally being treated properly.

What we have learned from our experiences is that there is a reason why doctors PRACTICE medicine. Sadly, it seems that some need more practice than others.

Two sides to the coin.

[DarthVain]

Your health, your responsibility. Period. Many doctors can be dismissive, usually with good cause, that is their experience. However even good doctors can be surprised. None are suspecting that rare condition. The only way they will test for it is if you are insistent. Some not even then, in which case you shouldn't be afraid to see a new doctor. The internet is a powerful tool, and can be very useful for a savvy user. One just has to be aware that not all sites are reputable or of the same quality. Also there is a lot of things out there, and to not get worked up about what could be wrong with you and looking at worst case scenarios. Finally, your not a doctor, so using your own judgement and what you can glean from the internet, go see a doctor is you feel the need to. True story: I felt I was having trouble breathing and chest pain. This was dismissed as stress (I was young 30). However having read too much about worse case, quickly turned into panic attacks and anxiety making it worse in a sort of feedback loop. Anyway I figured it out, but it wasn't fun. During this time I remember talking to a friend of mine who gave me the speech about being your own health advocate, and being responsible for your health not a doctor. When she was younger (early 20's) she was dismissed by many doctors, but through persistence was diagnosed with cancer. Which she beat. However had she not been as persistant things might have been different. She was young, and healthy, and it was a rare diagnoses, but it happens.

So I guess what I am trying to say is that:
1) Ultimately your health is your own responsibility using the internet to help you is a good idea,
2) However temper your imagination, and try not to get worked up about possible outcomes.

Re:Two sides to the coin.

[r0kk3rz]

Indeed the internet is a useful tool. I personally google drug names to check that they are a common prescription for whatever affliction my doctor thinks ive got, and if there are any side effects that my doctor forgot to mention, or didnt know about. The important thing is not to completely dismiss your doctor, or if you dont trust him/her that you find a different one.

Doctors Suck

[Doc Ruby]

There are some good doctors, but they're very few among the many who suck.

These days doctors mostly just see as many patients as they possibly can per hour, look for symptoms identified by drug corps, order standard tests run by labs and returned with diagnosis attached, then prescribe drugs. They're just gateways to testing and drug corps.

Of course they don't want to talk about what you googled. That just slows them down. And they often don't have any deeper understanding of the diagnosis and treatment they're charging for than google gave you.

We need more doctors, with rigorous periodic testing for them to keep their licenses. And published track records of their accuracy in diagnosis and treatment. Increase the supply to meet the demand, force them to compete with each other, watch quality increase as price decreases. And watch us all get healthier from it.

Reason to question the doctor

[Anonymous Coward]

There is reasons to question the doctor. My dads doctor claimed he was just tiered and over stress - no blood test or any test. Just a visual guess. After 5 trips to the doctor and my dad insisting something was wrong we convinced the doctor to do a simple blood test just to humor him... turned out to be stage four cancer... 97% survival rate if it was detected and treat when he first came in with the issue. To bad it was too late - he died two weeks later.

Humm now will goof ball doctors like that running around do you even have to wonder why people are actually interested in their own life and well being?

With good reason...

[Bhrian]

A friend's wife spent three weeks at a 'top' US hospital where many tests were performed. None of twenty-two doctors could diagnose what was wrong, and each passed the issues on to the next doctor. My friend listed the symptoms and posted them on a medical advice forum called 'wrongdiagnosis.com'.

When several people on the forum suggested a diagnosis that fit all the symptoms, he printed out information about the diagnosis and gave it to the primary doctor. The doctor studied the information, ordered yet another test to verify the diagnosis, and said he was right.

So, after 22 doctors performing tests, not one could suggest a diagnosis that fit all the symptoms. A post to a free forum yielded better information that was verified by the primary doctor.

There are good reasons people study health and medical information online before seeing a doctor.

Re:With good reason...

[PPH]

Its called the wisdom of the crowd. Even if you confine the answers to a set of experts in the field, odds are that one or more of them might spot something that the primary physician had missed.

Western Medicines Fault!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats because Western Doctors are lazy a**holes and merely use cookbook medicine.

Want the truth on this? DO A STUDY!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, we can exchange lots of opinions. Does all this medical information on the internet help or hurt overall? One way to find out, just as with any proposed medical practice. Do a study. Until then, no one really knows.

Nurses and Maybe Some Doctors Google Symptoms To

[AaronLS]

My friend was at the doctor's office for a sprained ankle and witnessed the nurse Google sprained ankle treatments!

doctors make plenty of mistakes

[yyxx]

Retroactively, it's often pretty easy to tell whether a doctor got it right or not. In my experience, doctors make mistakes fairly frequently, maybe about 1/3 of the time.

Wish more people would google on nutrition etc....

[Paul Fernhout]

"The Food Pyramid of the Insane"
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/debunking-diet-myths-the-food-pyramid-of-the-insane.html

Not that these doctors all agree, but there is a lot of overlap and they cover the essentials (typically lots of organic veggies, fruits, beans, nuts, seeds, maybe fish, vitamin D, and very little processed foods or factory farmed meats):
http://www.drfuhrman.com/
http://www.drmcdougall.com/
http://www.drweil.com/
http://www.mercola.com/
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml

Occasional fasting may help some conditions, too:
http://www.healthpromoting.com/Articles/articles/PleasureTrap.htm

This is a good video about the future of medicine based on nutrition, including teaching people how to shop at the grocery store, how to cook at home, and how to order in restaurants to stay healthy:
    http://www.drmcdougall.com/health_10_day_program_video.html

Another video on curing disease by better nutrition:
    "Eat For Health - Joel Fuhrman, M.D."
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPiR9VcuVWw

Someone (not a doctor) who puts a lot of these ideas together into cooking advice:
    http://www.andreabeaman.com/
"Read Andrea's inspiring story, The Whole Truth - How I Naturally Reclaimed My Health, and You Can Too! A story you can relate to as you make diet and lifestyle changes in your own life. Learn how to make health-promoting food taste absolutely scrumptious with the Eating and Recipe Guide. Infused with humor, in depth knowledge about food, and over 120 easy recipes, this is a wise tool to have in your kitchen."

A group helping communities be healthier by changing their public infrastructure:
    http://www.bluezones.com/makeover-about

Anyway, most disease in the USA could be prevented by better nutrition, moderate exercise, less stress (like through meditation), good sleep, adequate vitamin D from sunlight, more and better community interactions, more positive thinking, and a few other similar basic things.

Re:Nurses and Maybe Some Doctors Google Symptoms T

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not? After all, the biggest value of medical education is a familiarity with diseases in general and the language to describe them precisely. I can read Up To Date and be... up to date on the latest diagnostic and treatment regimens in very short order.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

actually I don't feel well and I'm lazy cuz of it- my name is Mindy and I'm 27 and disabled and undiagnosed

I had abdominal pain, blood in my stool, and a history of wretched period cramps. I googled my symptoms and came across endometriosis. Everything I experienced pointed straight as an arrow to endo, so I went to a gyno and told her that I thought I had endo and explained my symptoms. She readily agreed that it sounded exactly like endo and scheduled me for a lap and ablation. Sure enough I do have endo. When the surgery offered no relief, like it was sposed to, I went back to her and she said to me that I couldn't possibly be in pain like I claimed because she had cured me. Having done research I knew that wasn't possible, so when she prescribed Lupron I looked that up and decided I wasn't' putting myself through that. I called her office to tell them I wasn't making an appointment for the Lupron injection at all as I already have been experiencing hair loss, respiratory problems, and when you have the mental diagnoses I do you don't welcome mood swings into your life. I asked to come in for a uterine scrape to be sure I don't have cancer and my doctor refused to see me unless and until I came in and got my Lupron injection. They'll do it for free, even, they have samples. I was crying in pain every time I saw her or spoke to nurses on the phone, so clearly my body is tryin to tell me etwas. So keep in mind that some doctors are just drug pushers in clean white coats. By googling the things I experience I found an MS support forum and have learned that almost all of my ills can be attributed to that. Now I'm in the process of ruling out everything else. After I had a couple of experiences of swelling and pain in my fingers after touching cold objects I googled THAT and found out I have Raynaud's. I hadn't even been sure that it was related to the cold since there are so many random things, but now I can avoid that painful experience thanks to google.

There is a historical reason for that

[dbIII]

Since there were many quacks, confidence tricksters and perverts happy to take peoples money or play with them we ended up with medicine being a regulated profession.
We'll get a reminder in a few years when someone famous dies at the hand of a naturopath and it gets a lot of press, or when a pervert is caught using a front of some sort of "complimentary" medicine to fondle little girls. It will just be another generation learning that if you are going to give somebody a lot of personal power over your life, health and death they should be trustworthy.

Get your vaccinations you mangy mongrels

[rubies]

I had pertussis last year (although I had been vaccinated as a child) - the GP dismissed my guess out of hand despite the signature cough.
He finally shrugged and ordered a blood test, I was right. Ordinarily I wouldn't give a damn but you have to be very careful not to spread it to infants for whom it can be fatal.

Google-itis is bollocks, there's a much bigger problem in people finding bogus information about vaccinations on the web and not getting their kids done.

Re:Get your vaccinations you mangy mongrels

[Anonymous Coward]

Your GP probably had never heard it. I had pertussis when I was in medical school; the really prominent cough happened during spring break, so I never actually had it in front of one of the older doctors. A few months later, I was studying, and it hit me... I had pertussis. I've never seen another case.

Re:Get your vaccinations you mangy mongrels

[rubies]

That might be so, but here in Australia we were having something of a minor epidemic of pertussis and there were prominent health warnings about it especially with respect to infants. Sure, adults don't generally get it anymore thanks to the previous rounds of vaccination but the incidence is rising with the rise in ASS (that's Adult Stupidity Syndrome).

Same song, different singer

[LoudMusic]

Sure this is probably inflating an existing problem, but "before the internet" people were either self diagnosing or getting 'advice' from friends that was equal to what they're finding on the internet these days.

"My aunt Luann had a rash just like that and she died six months later."

funny, but sometimes it works

[reason]

Back in January, I had a few symptoms of what I assumed was a minor illness, typed them into wrongdiagnosis.com, and it suggested I had pneumonia. I chuckled at this ridiculous idea, and at myself for Googling in the first place, but took myself to the doctor when I felt worse the next day. The real diagnosis? Pneumonia.

so why do GPs act like "Level 1" Help Desk workers

[Anonymous Coward]

You have the nail squarely on the head about why it is a problem that patients are doing this and simultaneously managed to cluelessly identify (with your IT analogy) why it is also a problem that doctors are forcing patients to have to try to do this.

In the world of health care, the various flavors of Nurses are "Level 1" Support and most Doctors are your "Level 2" Support. In both IT and health care it is right and good that folks have to start by seeing the less knowledgeable diagnosticians available as Level 1 Support.

But at least in the IT world, once you've run through those and been passed up to the next level of help they don't go back to assuming you've got a basic problem that could've been helped by Level 1's standard scripts and make you jump through those hoops again. Patients have been forced to try to self-diagnose because their Doctor won't spend time to actually *think* about the diagnosis until the third or fourth visit and that can range from expensive to painful all the way up to deadly.

I'm still p-o'd at my GP for pushing me with cough suppressants, inhalers and other crap for weeks when there was a known (to the CDC, anyway) outbreak of pertussis going on all because he was too lazy to wait the 5-10 minutes for my next paroxysm wherein he could have heard a textbook-classic 'whooping' cough. I was persistent enough about insisting that I had whooping cough rather than asthma that he finally sent me for a blood test ... which confirmed the whooping cough.

Unfortunately too many doctors are still trained with obsolete information about the rarity of zebras. Per the National Lung Health Education Program, in a series of 75 patients with chronic cough lasting longer than 2 weeks, 21% had pertussis.

I think this was a Brady Bunch episode...

[Polo]

Wasn't there a Brady Bunch episode where one of the kids reads a medical reference book and concludes from some of his (quite general) symptoms that he's going to die of some rare disease?

This is just the internet doing what medical reference books used to do.

Rare does not help if you actually got it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in Sweden. We have 10M citizens. Earth has 6B. Thus it is only 1/600 chance that I am swedish, right? Thus we can dismiss the silly notion with no further concern.

Richard Feynmann and his wife

[VShael]

Anyone who reads (in "What do you care what other people think") about how his wifes TB was misdiagnosed, after he himself had done some research, would know never to completely trust the doctors.

The doctors are just as big a problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in a nursing home and quite frequently come into contact with GPs in my small city. The fact is, many (most actually) are arrogant and just don't care. They frequently ignore information provided by the nurses relevant to the residents condition and their response to almost any problem is to prescribe antibiotics. They/re extremely reluctant to prescribe any sort of pain relief medications to palliative care residents, most of the time recommending we just give them panadol.

The local hospital frequently returns residents we send there for more serious issues without doing anything, or in a few cases running tests unrelated to what we sent the resident there for and doing nothing about the illness they were supposed to address. More often then not, they return residents sent there the same day they arrive (keeping in mind we never send a resident to hospital unless it is very serious as we know they will recieve better care with us).

Even non elderly patients are treated poorly quite frequently in this city, with the most common response it would seem is for the doctors to prescribe either antibiotics or antidepressants. To give you an idea of just how bad it can be here my flatmate was prescribed Zoloft after seeing the doctor because she couldn't keep any food down, and i had to see five different GPs before one ordered a blood test and determined i had glandular fever. The previous four kept prescribing antibiotics.

Is the power cord plugged into the wall?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like with computer/network troubleshooting, doctors are taught to look at the most likely and simple things first. Computer jocks are lucky in that most customers don't try to trouble shoot their computers before calling us. OTOH, everyone has a body and thinks they are expert concerning it ... when we are not. Some people are pre-conditioned to think they are "special" and "different" since their mothers told them they were. It isn't usually true. Statistically, 99% of us are the same.

For a computer that isn't working, you don't check the 3rd RAM stick if it doesn't boot at all. You check that it is plugged into the wall, there is power in that socket, the PSU is powered on, the power connections are all connected (reseated) first. That's what doctors due too.

I have a relative who couldn't get a diagnosis for issues for over 10 years. She kept looking and looking. I still think it is in her head, but I'm not her. She discovered she was allergic to her favorite cognac in the process. My family has 3 MDs and they all believe the issue is in her head. Her insurance doesn't cover mental health issues. Fortunately, she joined a cult which is providing the needed mental support to her. I think she is just bored and needs to get a job, exercise and eat right to solve all her issues. At least she won't be sitting at home feeling "everything."

A little knowledge....

[ElmoGonzo]

I was talking about this with my doctor yesterday and we agreed that while there are arguments for becoming informed about your own diseases and conditions, it's very difficult to look at the big picture when you don't know what the other half-dozen or so variables may be. I'm fortunate to have a family physician who will take the time to discuss the big picture with me as it pertains to me but I'd never be so foolish as to think I know everything about it.

Are you feeling lucky ? ... punk!

[freaker_TuC]

Redefines Google's "I feel lucky" button...

.. you've got at most a month to live diagnosis
.. suicide for all ads
.. consult your on-line shrink now
.. you are pregnant diagnosis, when stung by a bee
.. start smoking ads

bring 'm on! ;)

Obligatory Jerome K Jerome

[alexo]

Three men in a boat, chapter I.