Ainda em continuação dos dois postais anteriores, ler
Com destaque para estes comentários:
I am very skeptical of hospitals myself. What bugs me is that people then assume I’m some kind of anti-western air-head hippie. But most people don’t understand that there is a distinction between the scientific method and its use (or lack thereof) in the medical establishment. The reason I’m skeptical of hospitals is not that they are scientific, it’s that they aren’t scientific enough.
Some examples: * Studies have shown that performing episiotomies during routine child-birth has no positive effects. But it is still common….
The reason I’d like to see them have more scientific training is so that they will be more skeptical of things that seem like they should work (like isolating children from parents to prevent infections) without using empirical research to find out if what seems good to them actually is good in reality.
Related: “Prologue. Hard as it is to believe, during the early twentieth century, a whole school of mental health professionals decided that unconditional love was a terrible thing to give a child. The government printed pamphlets warning mothers against the dangers of holding their kids. The head of the American Psychological Association and even a mothers’ organization endorsed the position that mothers were dangerous – until psychologist Harry Harlow set out to prove them wrong, with a series of experiments with monkeys.”
posted by Seth Finkelstein on 2006-09-26T21:30:59
Há muitas questões filosóficas e sociais a aprofundar relacionadas com os três últimos artigos. Mas uma das coisas a realçar, é esta: que a maioria das questões do cuidado de saúde, nada têm a ver com uma má assistência em Portugal. São uma questão que os políticos, os cientistas, o progresso tecnológico ou a maior riqueza, não resolveram, nem resolverão.