Excellent advice for all - Page 2 - Mothering Forums
1  2
Vaccinations > Excellent advice for all
applejuice's Avatar applejuice 03:08 PM 04-30-2014

samaxtics,

 

Thalidomide is still on the market in other nations as Brazil in use for leprosy and chemotherapy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

 

Bendectin, another drug that was used against hyperemesis gravidarum (morning sickness), was pulled from the market in the late 1980s.  There was a law suit, but the drug company won.  - Merrill-Dow. 

 

Bendectin is back on the market also. Bendectin is a combination of the antihistimine doxylamine and vitamin B6, pyrodoxine hydrochloride. I do recall that men and women were told in the early 1990s to avoid doxylamine, an ingredient in OTC medications, be avoided if they were trying to conceive. Vitamin B6 helps the body absorb proteins.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bendectin

 

editted to add - http://www.wonderdrugthemovie.com/Cover_Page_Boston_Globe__2_.jpg
See how this is labeled "safe", "effective", despite the fact that the Dieckmann study showed that DES did nothing of the sort.

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/show_picture.pl?l=english&cat=pics&c=pf&q=DES+the+wonder+drug&h=820&w=568&th=231&tw=160&fn=DES_Ad__3_op_568x820.jpg&fs=174.1%20k&el=boss_pics_1&tu=http:%2F%2Fts2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DHN.607990141716595065%26pid%3D15.1%26H%3D231%26W%3D160&rl=NONE&u=http:%2F%2Fwww.wonderdrugthemovie.com%2FOverview.html&udata=489e327cd3fc3f353448ef747af860e8&rid=OALNTSSTQTPL&oiu=http:%2F%2Fwww.wonderdrugthemovie.com%2FDES_Ad__3_op_568x820.jpg

http://desinfo411.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/globe-feature-story.jpg
 

Quote:
 These statistics are the best that have been reported.  In fact, they couldn't be any better. - Editor of The Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey Volume 4 Number 2 April 1949 page 190. 

... this quote and report were published BEFORE the Dieckmann study was finished and published. On what was that information based?  This is quackery!



sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 06:44 PM 04-30-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModerateMom View Post
 

I'm actually kind of the definition of moderate.  And my moderate opinion is that doctors should be held accountable for mistakes, but not for following appropriate protocol.  The OP doesn't differentiate between the two, and is in general too vague and can be applied too widely.   I think it would be foolish to go through life not taking the advice of people who are trained to know more than the rest of us in particular areas because we can't possibly accumulate the knowledge and insight on our own to do so.  Therefore, I don't think the OP is excellent advice.

Because lay people are incapable of self education.....

 

I have a degree in Animal Behavior.  That degree really didn't teach me much - it was the reading I did on my own time and working with other trainers and working with dogs in general that taught me what I know now.  While getting that degree I was a pre-vet major and let me tell you, that parallels pre-med and if you think these docs come out of school as "experts" in their field.....then you are choosing to not read between the lines.  They receive an incredibly basic and raw education on many subjects, the rest are to be filled in if they so choose in their spare time.

 

If I was to follow your logic, I'd be out there popping dogs on choke chains and pinch collars, shocking the hell out of them with remote collars, grabbing them by the scruff in a dominance roll to be the alpha....all things that have been proven detrimental yet are still perpetuated by many trainers who are more than willing to continue to spread this information because they know more than the rest of us.......


Imakcerka 08:15 AM 05-01-2014

I never understand the logic of NEVER believing a DR and to just intuit your cure.  All the google pages and checked out library books along with good intentions, will not rid the world of disease.


fisherfamily's Avatar fisherfamily 08:28 AM 05-01-2014
But neither will all the doctors.

Yesterday I mostly.believed a doctor who said my kids' breathing issues weren't life threatening, and she could keep running. But, in the back of my mind, you can bet I'll still be watching her like a hawk.
waywornwanderer's Avatar waywornwanderer 08:45 AM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post

...

While getting that degree I was a pre-vet major and let me tell you, that parallels pre-med and if you think these docs come out of school as "experts" in their field.....then you are choosing to not read between the lines.  They receive an incredibly basic and raw education on many subjects, the rest are to be filled in if they so choose in their spare time.

....


Just popping in here. I haven't read the entire thread and have zero desire to really argue many points. I just had to address this particular comment.

So, you have (presumably) an undergraduate degree in Animal Behavior.... but you feel qualified to remark on not only graduate Veterinary training, but also Medical training. Without having actually gone through either process yourself? That's incredibly presumptuous, and a dangerous leap.

You say that doctors receive an incredibly basic and raw education on a variety of subjects. This is true for medical school. Medical students are expected to have broad clinical and technical knowledge of basic specialties in order to pass boards and become licensed physicians. But you neglected one crucial fact: doctors must then go forward and complete residency training before practicing medicine. In fact, stateside, a medical degree is moot without receiving postgraduate residency training. That is, physicians (DOs and MDs) who completed four years of undergraduate education and four years of graduate medical education can't practice- compared to PAs who complete four years of undergraduate and just two years of graduate (or NPs who do four years of undergraduate and a year or two of graduate) and CAN practice.

Residency for Family Medicine and Internal Medicine training consists of a year of internship and two years of additional professional training. Pursuing a sub specialty adds further training and fellowship years.

Hardly what I would call "general", "raw", or "basic". These docs in training work 80+ hour weeks in their chosen fields!

It's simply not comparable to *your* general degree in Animal Behavior, or even your supplementing your education with self-guided study.

Now, I'm not delving into the question of vaccinations. And I'm certainly not saying there aren't terrible care providers out there (whether PA, NP, DO, MD, ND, CPM, CNM, et al).... But what I am calling into question is your judgment that doctors aren't educated, or are educated in a basic way. Which as you can see now, just isn't true.

IMO, What good doctors do is take their excellent clinical education (for all doctors do receive lengthy, specialized, extensive education of some sort) and find a way to merge it with evidence based and holistic care models. And, of course, take into consideration the varied stated and unstated needs of the patient right in front of them.

Unfortunately, that isn't the way most physicians practice medicine.
samaxtics's Avatar samaxtics 09:22 AM 05-01-2014

Who says the world needs to be rid of disease?

 

Please note that western (allopathic) medicine in terms of age, is the new kid on the block.  

 

And over the years the paradigm for allopathic medicine has shifted greatly to simply treating symptoms with pharmaceuticals.  

 

The doctors who practice are prisoners of their associations.  I know of a doctor who won't order some titre tests because it sends up red flags. 

 

I know of three breast cancer patients who were told by their oncologists to stop using commercial antiperspirants.  Has anyone ever had their family doctor tell them not to use them? Why do you have to become a cancer patient to hear that info? Whose interests are really being looked after in that situation?

Doctors will kick non-vaccinating parents out of their practice but have you ever heard of a patient that smokes being kicked out of a practice for not following their doctor's recommendation to stop smoking?

 

There are some amazingly caring and talented individuals that practice allopathic medicine.  I am in absolute awe and feel deep gratitude for those in acute care.

 

But when it comes to other health issues, I will use the GP for diagnostic tests but am more inclined to seek out a more holistic approach to remedying the issue.


applejuice's Avatar applejuice 09:27 AM 05-01-2014
Quote:
I am in absolute awe and feel deep gratitude for those in acute care. 


Me too.

The best of allopathic/American/modern medicine is found in the treatment of trauma care, shock, and emergency medicine.

When these trained medical technicians turn their skills on otherwise healthy people, there are always problems.

 

Quote:
 Why do you have to become a cancer patient to hear that info?

 

As a cancer patient, my husband was told to avoid all recently vaccinated children.


ss834's Avatar ss834 09:32 AM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

Because lay people are incapable of self education.....

 

I have a degree in Animal Behavior.  That degree really didn't teach me much - it was the reading I did on my own time and working with other trainers and working with dogs in general that taught me what I know now.  While getting that degree I was a pre-vet major and let me tell you, that parallels pre-med and if you think these docs come out of school as "experts" in their field.....then you are choosing to not read between the lines.  They receive an incredibly basic and raw education on many subjects, the rest are to be filled in if they so choose in their spare time.

 

If I was to follow your logic, I'd be out there popping dogs on choke chains and pinch collars, shocking the hell out of them with remote collars, grabbing them by the scruff in a dominance roll to be the alpha....all things that have been proven detrimental yet are still perpetuated by many trainers who are more than willing to continue to spread this information because they know more than the rest of us.......

 

 

And if you saw a dog owner with none of your experience "popping dogs on choke chains and pinch collars, shocking the hell out of them with remote collars, grabbing them by the scruff in a dominance roll to be the alpha" and offered them advice that you have come to see as more effective through your education and experience, how would you feel if that person responded to you that your advice was worthless in informing their decision because they knew intuitively what was right for the dog, and you wouldn't be there to see/deal with the outcome anyway?


kathymuggle's Avatar kathymuggle 09:59 AM 05-01-2014

I have used a choke collar on a dog.  I am not a fan of choke collars, but it worked and prevented the huge, somewhat unruly dog from dragging me through the street, lunging at smaller dogs, or chasing bike wheels.  He was (cancer - RIP) a great dog in many ways, but horrible to walk and I felt I needed a choke collar until such time as I found a better way to handle him. Choke collar trumped being dragged, a dead dog because he got away from me and was hit by a car, or me feeling horribly guilty/in trouble with animal control because I failed to control my dog. 

 

I did have a vet cluck her tongue and sigh  at the choke collar. I don't disagree with her POV, but I did as I saw best as I was the pet owner. I had the big picture - not the professional.   I was the one who would have to live with the significant  consequences of going choke-collar free before we had an alternate plan in place.

 

Professionals give information; they do not make the call. 

 

(my current doggie is choke collar free)


3lilchunklins's Avatar 3lilchunklins 10:24 AM 05-01-2014
I've gotta agree there. My 90 pound pit is normally *not* on a choke collar, but there are times when its absolutely necessary, as KathyMuggle stated.
Just like for the most part I choose to use natural/holistic treatments for my family, but sometimes it becomes absolutely necessary to seek additional professional medical treatment.
ss834's Avatar ss834 10:47 AM 05-01-2014

On that note, I agree with KathyMuggle and 3LilChunkins. I don't think any professional's advice should necessarily be taken as is, just because of their credentials. Yet, in exploring other options, we're going to encounter the advice and opinions of others, people who also do not have a stake in the outcome, and we may base our decision on their advice as an alternative.

 

Ultimately, the decision being our own responsibility doesn't mean that there isn't a trail of professional and unprofessional (but perhaps experienced) opinions that we take into account. I didn't decide not to vaccinate simply because the thought of it horrified me (though it did). I decided not to vaccinate because I researched and considered other people's advice or experiences. I changed my mind, again, not because I suddenly felt gleeful about vaccinating, but because I continued to get information (research, other people's advice and experiences). None of my decisions were solely intuitive. All were informed, or "based," on what was available to me from other people's experiences since I did not have much experience of my own at the time.

 

So that's why I agree with ModerateMom's objections. We all have to get our information from somewhere, and whether it's simple advice like a physician saying "I suggest this" or it's scientific advice that we deduce from a research paper, it's still coming from someone else and still helps form the basis of our decisions. Perhaps excluding those who do intuit their way through life free from the suggestions of others, if that's at all possible.


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 11:06 AM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by waywornwanderer View Post


Just popping in here. I haven't read the entire thread and have zero desire to really argue many points. I just had to address this particular comment.

So, you have (presumably) an undergraduate degree in Animal Behavior.... but you feel qualified to remark on not only graduate Veterinary training, but also Medical training. Without having actually gone through either process yourself? That's incredibly presumptuous, and a dangerous leap.

You say that doctors receive an incredibly basic and raw education on a variety of subjects. This is true for medical school. Medical students are expected to have broad clinical and technical knowledge of basic specialties in order to pass boards and become licensed physicians. But you neglected one crucial fact: doctors must then go forward and complete residency training before practicing medicine. In fact, stateside, a medical degree is moot without receiving postgraduate residency training. That is, physicians (DOs and MDs) who completed four years of undergraduate education and four years of graduate medical education can't practice- compared to PAs who complete four years of undergraduate and just two years of graduate (or NPs who do four years of undergraduate and a year or two of graduate) and CAN practice.

Residency for Family Medicine and Internal Medicine training consists of a year of internship and two years of additional professional training. Pursuing a sub specialty adds further training and fellowship years.

Hardly what I would call "general", "raw", or "basic". These docs in training work 80+ hour weeks in their chosen fields!

It's simply not comparable to *your* general degree in Animal Behavior, or even your supplementing your education with self-guided study.

Now, I'm not delving into the question of vaccinations. And I'm certainly not saying there aren't terrible care providers out there (whether PA, NP, DO, MD, ND, CPM, CNM, et al).... But what I am calling into question is your judgment that doctors aren't educated, or are educated in a basic way. Which as you can see now, just isn't true.

IMO, What good doctors do is take their excellent clinical education (for all doctors do receive lengthy, specialized, extensive education of some sort) and find a way to merge it with evidence based and holistic care models. And, of course, take into consideration the varied stated and unstated needs of the patient right in front of them.

Unfortunately, that isn't the way most physicians practice medicine.

You have added quite a bit more presumption in your response than I ever did in my post.  I'm well aware of what is taught at a graduate level - I looked into it as well as having many friends enter into and complete various graduate and doctorate degrees, both human and animal.  So before you assume I know nothing it would be better to ask a question to clarify rather than to make false accusations.  In no way was I stating that doctors are clueless with zero education.  They have an expansive education and therein lies the problem - most PCPs and Pediatricians are a jack of all trades mater of none.  Many still deny any sort of connection between nutrition or vitamin deficiencies and overall health - because they simply have not had adequate training in those areas.  Same goes for vaccination.  All docs are taught how vaccines save lives and are a necessary tool for health, but very little information is actually given about side effects, how they REALLY work in the body - that's an entirely different subset of scientists who study vaccines vs docs who study the human body.  And when all of your information comes from teh very companies who manufacture the product, that's a bit one-sided.

 

I was subjected to many lectures via Pfizer reps about how important drugs are and how infrequent side effects tend to be; Cargill and ConAgra reps who openly promote the use of GMO's.  It's an incredibly one-sided education unless you actually take the time to elaborate on your own.  Yes post-doctorate training is intensive, but by and large they are in a practice alongside other docs who are sharing anecdotal information from their own personal experience and they are being molded by the attitudes, beliefs, and practices who whomever they shadow in that time frame.  My own DD's pediatrician had a post doc intern with her and she spent more time talking with him about how to talk to the parent about vaccination and how to get information out the parent than actually talking to me, the parent.  She made sure to be extra graphic about the potential dangers of each VAD with ZERO explanation about vaccine risks.  Now do you think he's likely to go out and discuss vaccine reactions with his own patients after he saw first hand that it didn't happen with his "mentors"?

 

The only thing I will agree is that good doctors do look at the individual and merge all aspects of care together to fit that person.  But not many doctors fit this bill in comparison to those who treat everyone the same regardless of their differences.  It's why I see an ND because I'm not going to be just another number on their daily schedule.


kathymuggle's Avatar kathymuggle 03:23 PM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss834 View Post
 

 

So that's why I agree with ModerateMom's objections. We all have to get our information from somewhere, and whether it's simple advice like a physician saying "I suggest this" or it's scientific advice that we deduce from a research paper, it's still coming from someone else and still helps form the basis of our decisions. 

I basically agree with this.

 

I suspect that some of this comes down to word definition.  We had a long thread a while back on this very topic.  People take the word "advice" differently.  

 

To some it comes down to a directive.  Consider:

 

I took Johns advice and bought the house

I did not take Johns advice and did not buy the house.

 

The act of "taking someones advice" implies doing as they suggest.

 

Strictly speaking, I do not ask people for advice.  Advice means recommendations (from definition up thread).  I ask for opinions, sometimes i ask what they would do…but i do not ask them to tell me what to do.  

 

It is very reasonable to solicit opinions from people, and to weigh some peoples opinions more than others.  I stay away from the word advice.  

 

I absolutely have seen arguments where people say you should do as your doctor says, as they have the most knowledge and experience (and why would you even go to a doctor if you do not plan to do as they say?).  It is a paternalistic  type of doctor patient relationship that I do not seek, and moreover, do not think is good in terms of patient health.

 

If the argument is just "you should seek the opinion of educated and knowledgeable people" then sure.  


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 06:56 PM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss834 View Post
 

 

 

And if you saw a dog owner with none of your experience "popping dogs on choke chains and pinch collars, shocking the hell out of them with remote collars, grabbing them by the scruff in a dominance roll to be the alpha" and offered them advice that you have come to see as more effective through your education and experience, how would you feel if that person responded to you that your advice was worthless in informing their decision because they knew intuitively what was right for the dog, and you wouldn't be there to see/deal with the outcome anyway?

What you seem to be implying here is that those who don't vax are doing so out of motherly intuition and not because they made an educated decision.  That education and experience is a one way street.....


waywornwanderer's Avatar waywornwanderer 07:36 PM 05-01-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
 

You have added quite a bit more presumption in your response than I ever did in my post.  I'm well aware of what is taught at a graduate level - I looked into it as well as having many friends enter into and complete various graduate and doctorate degrees, both human and animal.  So before you assume I know nothing it would be better to ask a question to clarify rather than to make false accusations.  In no way was I stating that doctors are clueless with zero education.  They have an expansive education and therein lies the problem - most PCPs and Pediatricians are a jack of all trades mater of none.  Many still deny any sort of connection between nutrition or vitamin deficiencies and overall health - because they simply have not had adequate training in those areas.  Same goes for vaccination.  All docs are taught how vaccines save lives and are a necessary tool for health, but very little information is actually given about side effects, how they REALLY work in the body - that's an entirely different subset of scientists who study vaccines vs docs who study the human body.  And when all of your information comes from teh very companies who manufacture the product, that's a bit one-sided.

 

I was subjected to many lectures via Pfizer reps about how important drugs are and how infrequent side effects tend to be; Cargill and ConAgra reps who openly promote the use of GMO's.  It's an incredibly one-sided education unless you actually take the time to elaborate on your own.  Yes post-doctorate training is intensive, but by and large they are in a practice alongside other docs who are sharing anecdotal information from their own personal experience and they are being molded by the attitudes, beliefs, and practices who whomever they shadow in that time frame.  My own DD's pediatrician had a post doc intern with her and she spent more time talking with him about how to talk to the parent about vaccination and how to get information out the parent than actually talking to me, the parent.  She made sure to be extra graphic about the potential dangers of each VAD with ZERO explanation about vaccine risks.  Now do you think he's likely to go out and discuss vaccine reactions with his own patients after he saw first hand that it didn't happen with his "mentors"?

 

The only thing I will agree is that good doctors do look at the individual and merge all aspects of care together to fit that person.  But not many doctors fit this bill in comparison to those who treat everyone the same regardless of their differences.  It's why I see an ND because I'm not going to be just another number on their daily schedule.

 

I'm sorry that you think I was being presumptuous, but you openly stated "While getting that degree I was a pre-vet major and let me tell you, that parallels pre-med and if you think these docs come out of school as "experts" in their field.....then you are choosing to not read between the lines.  They receive an incredibly basic and raw education on many subjects, the rest are to be filled in if they so choose in their spare time".  (emphasis mine)

 

You said that your pre-vet track paralleled a pre-med track. Hmm, that's debatable. But even assuming that's true, an undergraduate pre-vet (or even a pre-med) degree does not and cannot in any way remotely resemble medical school. Or residency. Or fellowship. I'm sorry, that's just the truth. I'm not really interested in extensively debating anything else, as I stated previously. I was just calling your credentials (for lack of a better word) into question.

 

Note: I do not think families necessarily need credentials in order to make their own informed decisions. Again- my issue is that you stated, as a pre-vet major (your "credential", if you will), that your experience rivals that of doctors and based on that "experience" you're telling others that doctors aren't very well educated. Which.... is not true. Now, you may have a problem with the status quo, and the way most doctors tend to think or tend to practice. I have a problem with that, too. And I think there is room for refinement and improvement throughout medical education and residency programs. 


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 09:28 PM 05-01-2014

http://vetmed.illinois.edu/asa/documents/MythsaboutAdmissions.pdf

“It is harder to get into vet school than it is to get into human medical school.”

Surprise! This is NOT a myth. There are only 29 schools of veterinary medicine in North America and there are 160+ schools for the study of human medicine. The lack of availability of seats for students who wish to study non-human medicine makes it very challenging to be admitted. Each year around 15,000 students apply for about 2500 – 2600 seats for entering DVM students. 

 

As someone who is friends with several doctors (one who got into medical school but not veterinary school) and a couple of veterinarians, I have to say that sassyfirechick is right on target.


applejuice's Avatar applejuice 11:12 PM 05-01-2014

There was a doctor strike in the mid-1970s.  Many persons actually went to a vet for some human consultation.

 

A person has to be smarter to be a vet because the animal cannot tell you where it hurts; the veterinarian really has to make sure s/he knows what they are dealing with.

And since we are on the vaccine forum, many veterinarians will not vaccinate a female dog in estrus or while pregnant. 

Many veterinarians will not give more than one vaccine at a time, and for many veterinarians, vaccinosis is a recognized iatrogenic ailment that they try to avoid.

 

Yes, animal doctors are smart!


TCMoulton's Avatar TCMoulton 01:38 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post


A person has to be smarter to be a vet because the animal cannot tell you where it hurts; the veterinarian really has to make sure s/he knows what they are dealing with.

By this logic that must mean that pediatricians also must be smarter than average since their youngest patients also cannot communicate what is wrong. Yet there are other members on this very thread who claim that peds are simply "Jack of all trades". Which is it - really can't be both.

Honestly I personally believe both doctors for humans and animals alike are generally highly intelligent individuals - the amount of knowledge they must learn and then apply is huge.
katelove's Avatar katelove 04:24 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by waywornwanderer View Post

(or NPs who do four years of undergraduate and a year or two of graduate)

Maybe it's different in the US but, in Australia, a nurse practitioner needs an undergrad nursing degree, five years clinical experience in the relevant speciality *then* a Master of NP which must be undertaken while working as an NP candidate.
katelove's Avatar katelove 04:35 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post


A person has to be smarter to be a vet because the animal cannot tell you where it hurts; the veterinarian really has to make sure s/he knows what they are dealing with.

By this logic that must mean that pediatricians also must be smarter than average since their youngest patients also cannot communicate what is wrong. Yet there are other members on this very thread who claim that peds are simply "Jack of all trades". Which is it - really can't be both.

Honestly I personally believe both doctors for humans and animals alike are generally highly intelligent individuals - the amount of knowledge they must learn and then apply is huge.

I think vets need to have a lot more knowledge (which I know is not the same as being smarter). Human HCPs only need to understand human anatomy, pharmacology as it pertains to humans, diseases which affect humans etc you get the idea.

Vets need to know the anatomy of many different species, diseases affect some but not others, medications can be used for some animals but not others. There is *way* more content for veterinary medicine.

And, after two OT posts, I shall now give this thread a break for a while ;-)
kathymuggle's Avatar kathymuggle 07:03 AM 05-02-2014

I think Sassy' point that many general practioners have a broad information base, but not necessarily a deep one, is probably true.  I would expect  pediatricians would have a slightly deeper understanding of all thing pediatrics, but still, it is a huge field.

 

I have a general practitioner, and part of the reason I have a GP is for the breadth of knowledge.  I expect her to refer when she is over her head - which she does, easily.  I do not expect her to have highly in depth knowledge on any one topic, including vaccines. 

 

(fwiw, if the topic of vaccines come up, I always ask HCP their opinion and listen respectfully.  I just have not had any great responses. )


tadamsmar 08:56 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post
 

No.

 

One can pay one or a thousand educated, licensed, practiced persons for advice and counsel, but the final, ultimate decision will lie with the person who will deal with the result of his/her decision.

The final ultimate decision lies with the person who has the authority to make it, assuming everything is on the up and up.

 

But if your neighbor can make a decision that he has the authority to make and you or your family can be impacted by that decision.


tadamsmar 09:02 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Don't base your decisions on the advice of those who don't have to deal with the results.

The title is "Excellent advice for all"

 

But, according to you, no one can base any decisions on this advice unless you (Taximon5) have to deal with the results.


sassyfirechick's Avatar sassyfirechick 09:12 AM 05-02-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMoulton View Post


By this logic that must mean that pediatricians also must be smarter than average since their youngest patients also cannot communicate what is wrong. Yet there are other members on this very thread who claim that peds are simply "Jack of all trades". Which is it - really can't be both.

Honestly I personally believe both doctors for humans and animals alike are generally highly intelligent individuals - the amount of knowledge they must learn and then apply is huge.

Intelligent, absolutely,  But my DD's pediatrician, after acknowledging her vaccine reaction as just that - a vaccine reaction - conveniently downplayed it at the following visit and insisted we not only do the recommended vaccines for that visit, but catch up on missed ones as well!  She also denied any sort of food sensitivities or allergies which later she was proven to have - so an area she was not familiar with and she not only neglected to pass us along to someone more experienced in the nutrition/allergy field, but flat out denied there was an possibility of a food issue and that she would not order any test for allergies.  It was not within her scope of capabilities and yet rather then pass us on to someone who could help, she chose to ignore the issue altogether.  I have more respect for someone who can admit they don't know something and passes me on than someone who denies there's an issue to avoid having to admit they don't know everything.


1  2

Up