WOW. I just read an article that put together a bunch of things I’ve “sort of” known but didn’t have the references to support. CoAuthored by Vinay Prasad and one of my favorite docs, John P. A. Ioannidis it’s titled:
The reversal of cardiology practices: interventions that were tried in vain
They dig under the hood of a TON of cardiology practices that, despite some pretty effective debunking, continue to be used. One of the now debunked things we used to do (give potent anti arrhythmic agents to people after heart attacks) is now estimated to have killed 50,000 patients during the years it was in vogue!
I got onto this mission looking into the “benefits” of cardiac stents as my own father has now fallen into a medical rabbit hole in Las Vegas and may end up having a stent recommended. For those docs out there please read this and tell me what you think. I’ll be happy to communicate via private email if you’re not ready to come out of the closet with a public agreement quite yet.
Dr. Nick – 2 months till I’m a pediatrician again 🙂
Prasad V. The reversal of cardiology practices: interventions that were tried in vain. Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy. 2013-12;3:228-235.
P.S. For those mathematicians in the crowd, check out Dr. Ioannidis seminal paper “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”. PLoS Medicine 2 (8): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. PMC 1182327. PMID 16060722
free pdf here: