Causing a necessary epidemic

Anna Sant

I wanted to premiere this blog with a reflection that led me, a few years ago, to refocus my activity of corporate communication and marketing to the healthcare sector, an exciting sector in which there is a tremendous vocation by all its actors to provide the best service to their “clients". However, paradoxically, and this is the reason for this article, despite this strong vocation that led our professionals to practice the profession, it seems that nowadays, not only do patients feel that their expectations are not being met, but the same professionals are more alone than ever in the struggle to offer better assistance to their patients. A study of 800 patients hospitalized in the US in 2011 showed that more than 80% of them considered empathy as a basic factor for success in treatment, but only 53% believed that their referral centre was providing it.

What are the objectives of cancer prevention programs?

Vinay Prasad and Adam Cifu in "Ending Medical Reversal, Improving outcomes, Saving lives" affirmed that in order to interpret the meaning of secondary cancer prevention programs, three objectives must be kept in mind: 1) cancer ought to be discovered ahead of time, 2) specific mortality ought to be reduced and 3) overall mortality should be decreased.

The authors say that what really matters is objective number 3, given that the first two are purely instrumental. After all, if a healthy person accepts a screening, this is supposed to be because he or she wants to live longer. Unfortunately, the data shows that preventive programs (cancer of the colon, prostate, breast, cervix and lung) obtain the following results (with small nuances among them): a) objective 1: achieved, b) objective 2: weak, and c) objective 3: not reached.

Medical schools: reductionism versus empiricism

The current competitive drive has reached the medical schools to the extent that it now delivers batches of new doctors with higher scientific preparedness whose priorities are influenced by their impact, competitiveness for research funds and, to a lesser extent, clinical practice. Young doctors know that in order to fight for the most coveted positions they will have to show a curriculum full of publications, while the clinical skills, although present, will not be the element that differentiates them. What is apparent is that educational reforms are part of the mechanism which is focused on academic success.

Are we all mentally ill? On the subject of Allen Frances

Allen Frances, psychiatrist professor emeritus of Duke University (USA) led the working group that developed the DSM-4 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). I follow the activity of the author, always critical and always documented on Twitter (@AllenFrancesMD) and, unfamiliar with the framework of psychiatry, a question began to run through my mind. How could it be that someone who had led the fourth edition of the DSM, was now the most lucid voice against the excesses of modern psychiatry? If I wanted to know the answer, I had no choice but to read his latest book "Saving Normal. An insider's revolt against out-of-control psychiatric diagnosis, DSM-5, big pharma and the medicalization of ordinary life"