First Arriving Network
Powered by the First Arriving Network,Reaching 1M+ First Responders Worldwide

Filed Under “Water Is Wet”

On the Kevin, MD blog, Dr. Wes notes the shift of medical research journals from clinical medicine to politics.

“Medical journals aren’t what they used to be. Just ten short years ago, medical journals were places to report scientific study, interesting cases or clinical updates and reviews. They were, for the most part, about science and discovery.

Now, there is a dramatic shift of scientific content in our journals to politics and policy.

No where is this more evident than the much-heralded and widely read New England Journal of Medicine. (The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is not too far behind either.)”

If you’re a gun owner or libertarian in a medical profession, you’ve probably noticed it, too.

If some of the “research” bandied about in the guns as public health epidemic meme were subjected to any serious scrutiny, some of these researchers would be spoken in the same breath as Andrew Weil.

Comments - Add Yours

  • Old_NFO

    VERY true… dammit…

  • Too Old To Work

    What they are doing, whether they understand it or not, is weakening the underpinnings of science. The public health people are the worst, as they desperately expand the meaning of “public health crisis” into the political realm. It started with smoking. Now it’s seat belts, helmets, guns, salt, and anything else the nanny state nannies don’t like. All the while they are ignoring diseases which do pose a threat to public health like TB, AIDS, Hepatitis C, etc…

    Of course studying those diseases might unveil some uncomfortable truths about disease and life style choices. We can’t have that, can we?

  • #1 Dinosaur

    Whatever you do, don’t ever do any actual research on guns. God forbid you may discover that some of your treasured “truths” ain’t so. Let’s keep the CDC, and everyone else for that matter, from studying gun violence, because you already know everything you need to know. Just like how you know how useful backboards are for all neck trauma, and how CPR is most effective conbined with rescue breaths, and…oh, wait.

    • Ambulance_Driver

      I dare say I’ve done more research on the subject than you have. And I make my points without hysterical, spittle-flecked invective and insults.
      Unlike you.

    • Edd Flammer

      Actual research would be a refreshing change compared to what is passing for it now

    • Too Old To Work

      Alas, if only it were so. What passes for “gun research” by the medical profession, including the CDC, consists of pre drawn conclusions with data tailored to support those conclusions. If it were real research they’d submit to peer review and release the raw data set to public scrutiny. They don’t because they can’t.

      Look at the work of Gary Kleck and John Lott. Kleck set out to prove that guns increased crime, but when the data proved the opposite he released that data. Lott is an economist by trade and applied his rigid methodology to crime and gun ownership; He has released his raw data and no one has been able to refute his conclusions.

      As to back boards and C Spine immobilization, look to your fellow tradesmen for that. Most EMS personnel know it’s an uncomfortable waste of time, but their medical directors are so afraid of litigation that they insist that their medics and EMTS persist in doing. Despite the fact that Maine adopted a field C-Spine assessment protocol in 1995 most states have not followed their lead. In my trips to Portland I have not been regaled with the vision of hoards of quadriplegics rolling in their wheel chairs down the street. New Hampshire just this year adopted similar protocols, but most other states have done nothing.

      All of the available data says it’s a bad procedure which is also unnecessary most of the time. Yet, it persists. My guess is that someone will have to sue and win a law suit for injuries resulting from backboard before your cohort will change their protocols

      • mpatk

        Aren’t NEJM and JAMA peer-reviewed journals that require the raw data (aka “supplemental information”) to be available upon request?

        Regardless, gun injuries/deaths are just the latest abuse of epidemiology by public health “scientists”.

        • Too Old To Work

          In theory.

    • Anon

      If they did real research on guns and violence, they’d find some strong demographic correlations that would disturb the left.

  • Scott Kenny

    Well, I suppose that criminal behaviors would be a medical issue in Criminal Psych types, but when did criminal behavior become a public health issue?

  • Christine Dumaine Springfield

    What’s really neat is that they are now renaming disease processes with the name of the manufacturer who manufactures the treatment drug. Every once in a while, when using the MedScape app on a call, I will come across a disease/syndrome that is “sponsored” and “renamed”. WTF? Really?