Best medical administration & economics books according to redditors
We found 180 Reddit comments discussing the best medical administration & economics books. We ranked the 97 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
The book's title is "Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America's Heartland". It's available on Amazon.
It was profiled pretty heavily back in March by several outlets, journalists, and pundits. Here's the PBS segment on it.
The book Dying of Whiteness by Jonathan Metzl, the author they interrupted, is excellent. If you don't want to bother reading the whole thing, he did a good podcast with Chris Hayes where he breaks down the main points.
How dare you question me, the world's leading Temperaturology expert! I got the information from my copy of this textbook. I just found this on google, though.
The main problem, as I understand it, is that you are not always able to ensure that the IR beam actually hits the tympanic membrane and thus gives you an inaccurate reading.
Yup, I am doing anthropological research in Haiti for my PhD and I've become so incredibly cynical about the vast majority of non-profit work done in Haiti and other places. For those who are unaware, I highly recommend two books: Killing with Kindness and Travesty in Haiti both of which document how destructive these kinds of things are.
Also relevant: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/?single_page=true
Edit: I should add that I don't think all non-profits, NGOs, and charities are a shit show. There are some great ones that I would even recommend to people. But in places like Haiti (AKA The Land of NGOs) there are thousands and thousands of them most of which are highly ineffective and some which are downright harmful. I'm a charity snob now in the sense that I never just hand out my money without investigating the organization first. I've seen too many examples of how well meaning people go into a community and do more harm than good with those donations. And I never donate used clothing to foreign countries (a few exceptions being natural disasters) because it is always damaging to local economies. Fuck the NFL and other groups who do that and try to spin it as a positive PR move. When presented with the opportunity to help either with donations or manpower think a minute about how it will impact that local community, look up how they've spent their donations, and do some research on the issue & organization.
TL;DR: Don't give up on non-profits, aid, and charities altogether. Just donate smart.
The life expectancy for white males in America has gone down for several years in a row. Upon closer examination, it turns out the causes of death that have brought about this are "deaths of despair." Alcohol related deaths, suicide, opiate-addiction related deaths. Here's one book that has examined the problem:
​
https://www.amazon.com/Dying-Whiteness-Politics-Resentment-Heartland/dp/1541644980
​
This is unprecedented in a thriving society, and it is a very big deal, sociologically speaking. What I mean is, sociologists really want to understand why it's happening, so they study it. Is that wrong, to study a phenomenon that is remarkable and probably indicative of something deeply interesting and serious about our culture?
​
Okay, so they have been studying it, and they have found, guess what! that white males in America are in despair and they are angry. Relative to previous years and relative to other demographics. So is it wrong to study this more and try to understand *why* it's happening? And if it's not wrong to do that, why is it inaccurate or wrong to call the study "angry white men" since that's exactly what is being studied?
"Would brown people get that health care as well?" - Susan
There's a great book that I recommend left and right to people - Atul Gawande's Being Mortal. It covers a huge breadth of topics regarding aging, end of life, terminal illness, cancer, hospice/palliative care, nursing homes, death, and modern medicine.
One of the recurring issues that comes up is the struggle for many doctors to effectively communicate expectations and outcomes with patients and their families. They find it challenging to have those very necessary, but difficult, conversations that basically boil down to "you have a disease that is 99% going to kill you and there's nothing more we can realistically do to extend your life without causing more suffering."We have encouraged doctors to change healthcare from a service to a conversation -- to involve patients in their care -- and it is overall a very good thing, but this has has an unintended consequence; doctors are afraid to dispense bad news. So they beat around the bush; they say, "you have stage IV renal cell carcinoma, with mets here, here, and here. What questions do you have for me?" The patient asks, "how do we treat it?" -- the doctor says, "well, we can do chemo, radiation... there are some medications, and a few clinical trials we could see if you qualify for..." (note how, at no point, the doctor says "there is no cure; this is terminal.") Time prognoses are scary (not to mention a potential liability!), so we tell them to try to avoid them - so we don't tell the patient they are likely going to be dead less than 3 months from now. The family member interjects that they want "everything possible" done to save their loved one, accompanied by printouts of google searches and random crap they found online. The doctor entertains this, even though they know it won't do anything - again, they're afraid to tell the patient no, this random experimental treatment or drug you're requesting isn't going to save your life, and you're still going to die.
So when the patient with stage IV cancer declines and winds up in the hospital, and all signs begin to point towards impending imminent death, the family is shocked, horrified, but most of all surprised. "I didn't expect her to die so fast", posted one of my facebook acquaintances after her mother rapidly declined; they had been on the "pray the terminal cancer away" and "we're waiting to get her into an experimental treatment, if her numbers improve juuuust a little bit!" denial train.
There was a study not too long ago that found that most patients with end-stage cancer didn't evaluate themselves as terminal. We see facebook walls filled with people posting about their loved ones or even themselves - I have stage 3, stage 4 cancer, prayers, more prayers, send hope; she's a warrior, she can beat this, he's so strong and will fight! Either we are promoting a culture of delusion or doctors aren't being blunt enough with their patients and their families about the realities of these kind of illnesses.
Because you're right - ask any doctor or nurse and they'll tell you, stage 4 means say your good-byes, tie up your loose ends, go on that vacation you always wanted to but never got around to, and find a means to end your life while you still have the autonomy to do so with the least suffering.
>Is there some kind of phone service to call for medical advice?
Not only is the answer yes, but Canada basically took that idea from America.
Source: this book, the chapter on Canada's system.
I think things have to change with malpractice insurance. It has to. We are losing MDs doing births at all because of this. Our cesarean rate is also rising - we are losing any resemblance to natural birth in the hospital. In fact, I hear the word "natural birth" to mean "vaginal birth".
Doctors are given lower malpractice premiums when they have higher cesarean rates. This is not acceptable!
We used to be shocked at Brazil's 95% cesarean rate. I think we're well on our way. In my community, 40% of first time moms have cesareans.
I hope that we can find inroads that are free from malpractice protocols that allow docs to collaborate with midwives for teaching, safety, and general empowerment of women. I see other countries doing it, but unfortunately, our healthcare and malpractice system does little to help this goal of mine. :(
Our maternal and infant mortality rates are dismal. And it's not because we're using less technology or interventions. It's because we're using more. I really recommend a book called Expecting Trouble: The Myth of Prenatal Care in America by Thomas Strong, MD. He's a third generation MD, second gen OB and he has some amazing insights. Mainly, leave high risk and surgical birth to OBs, turn all other care over to midwives for better outcomes...and look at technology more judiciously.
Other books I recommend are:
Born in the USA: How a Broken Maternity System Must Be Fixed to Put Women and Children First by Marsden Wagner, MD
Pushed: The Painful Truth About Childbirth and Modern Maternity Care by Jennifer Block
Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born by Tina Cassidy
Lying In: A History of Childbirth in America
Above all, I wish that more providers would see that the motherbaby is one unit. They are not antagonists towards each other. Less intervention is better and if we could move towards more evidence-based practices we might see better outcomes.
Again, it all boils down to allowing doctors to practice freely. We have to see malpractice reform.
/r/cringe
Couldn’t find any more info about the book though, are you sure that’s the right title?
edit: Here’s the book, never heard of it before but now it’s on my radar. Wonder if white nationalists have heard of the Streisand effect
I'm really interested in history and urban design. The following are within reach
The E. Kimbark MacColl series is really good:
Others.
Abbott has a couple other Portland/Oregon books, I should really dig into them.
When Breath Becomes Air - Paul Kalanithi
Being Mortal - Atul Gawande
Better - Atul Gawande
Honestly anything by Atul Gawande
Start With Why- Simon Sinek (Just finished this one today. Phenomenal read. Not medicine related, but a great perspective on what leadership means and how you can inspire those around you)
The White Coat Investor - James Dahle (Financial literacy is always a good thing)
​
I have quite a bit more book suggestions if you're ever curious, but those should keep you busy for a while. Feel free to DM me if you want more!
Canada and Britain arguably have better healthcare than us. But France, Germany, and Japan have better healthcare than anyone, at a much lower price than we pay, and they aren't single-payer. Here's how they all work:
Everybody is covered, period. Doctors don't need administrative staff, insurance companies don't need medical underwriters. Japan is the cheapest with healthcare at 6% GDP, despite the fact that they have almost no waits and they go to the doctor an average of 14 times a year. Germany is the most expensive, but they cover things like week-long visits to the spa for stress relief, and they still spend a lot less than the U.S.
Source: The Healing of America by T.R. Reid.
MD here. Many of my elderly patients ask me, "Why do the politicians want to mess with the greatest health care system in the world?" I try to explain to them that we (USA) have one of the very worst systems in the world. Propoganda has worked on these patients. I tell them to read the book, "The Healing of America". (link below)
IMO, Americans are uninformed or misinformed about healthcare and our political system will prevent meaningful reform until a crisis arises which breaks the current system, or until there is a huge, national public outcry demanding change. We're just not there yet.
http://www.amazon.com/Healing-America-Global-Better-Cheaper/dp/1594202346/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268663520&sr=8-1
A fantastic read for anyone trying to get a high level view of how modern healthcare systems work: [The Healing of America] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Healing-America-Global-Cheaper/dp/B004KAB348)
Also a short film on PBS a few years ago: Sick Around the World
I'd start by reading "Being Mortal" by Atul Gawande.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0805095152/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1480885429&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=being+mortal+book&dpPl=1&dpID=51C9yK9VzzL&ref=plSrch
Basically you need to prioritize what matters for you when you go into your treatment. With a child at home I would think that a high probability treatment method would take precedence over finances. But if you have an aggressive form of cancer with a lower probability of curing, it sounds like you will have substantially different priorities than most Americans (and that's a good thing IMO.)
You'll want to maximize quality of life for as long as possible while allowing you to continue to support your family and spend time with your child. Your treatment plan should be based around this, rather than throwing everything you can at the cancer hoping for a miracle.
Some that I've really enjoyed:
The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and the Future of the World by Michelle Goldberg
How the Pro-Choice Movement Saved America: Freedom, Politics and the War on Sex by Cristina Page
Life's Work: A Moral Argument for Choice by Dr. Willie Parker
Lovejoy: A Year in the Life of an Abortion Clinic by Peter Korn
This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor by Susan Wicklund
Willing and Unable: Doctors' Constraints in Abortion Care by Lori R. Freedman
Who Decides: The Abortion Rights of Teens by J. Shoshanna Ehrlich
The Story of Jane: The Legendary Underground Feminist Abortion Service by Laura Kaplan
The Abortionist by Rickie Solinger
I'm sure there's a lot more I'm forgetting, as well as ones I have yet to read but are on my list, but all of these were ones I found important/fascinating, and easy-to-read (no dense academic texts).
This book is super helpful if you aren't already familiar with it.
Yes, If Disney Ran Your Hospital is an actual book that we were required to read in my last hospital. It's definitely become an interesting paradigm, the shift to customer service and patient sat above all else. I think you need to find (and defend) your sweet spot. It sounds like you are actually already doing a lot of the customer-centric things. Where do you think the disconnect is?
https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Health-Policy-Clinical-Approach/dp/1259584755/ is an excellent introduction to the healthcare system in the USA.
With regards to "how we got where we are" and "where are we now," as someone else noted, Starr's The Social Transformation of American Medicine is an excellent history of the medical institution, at least until the 80's. Freidson's Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge is also superb. After that, you'll want to look at articles such as "The Shifting Engines of Medicalization" by Conrad (http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/46/1/3.abstract) and The Continued Social Transformation of The Medical Profession (http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/51/1_suppl/S94.abstract) by Timmerman and Ohs for a look at where the field is now.
Yes, that is the dominating factor. It was measured after the 2016 election the biggest indicator if you were going to vote for Trump was racial resentment. No 'economic anxiety' or other nonsense. Sure you might have 'anxiety' your job left town, but you blame non white people for that as the underlying cause.
--
Also I'm reading this very good book right now that goes into this very subject and analyses the data: https://www.amazon.com/Dying-Whiteness-Politics-Resentment-Heartland/dp/1541644980
> In the era of Donald Trump, many lower- and middle-class white Americans are drawn to politicians who pledge to make their lives great again. But as Dying of Whiteness shows, the policies that result actually place white Americans at ever-greater risk of sickness and death.
> Physician Jonathan M. Metzl's quest to understand the health implications of "backlash governance" leads him across America's heartland. Interviewing a range of everyday Americans, he examines how racial resentment has fueled progun laws in Missouri, resistance to the Affordable Care Act in Tennessee, and cuts to schools and social services in Kansas. And he shows these policies' costs: increasing deaths by gun suicide, falling life expectancies, and rising dropout rates. White Americans, Metzl argues, must reject the racial hierarchies that promise to aid them but in fact lead our nation to demise.
--
https://portside.org/2019-03-13/dying-whiteness
> Early in his book, “Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America’s Heartland,” physician and social scientist Jonathan M. Metzl introduces a Tennessee man named Trevor. Trevor is 41 and dying of liver disease. He lives in a low-income housing facility and he doesn’t have health insurance.
> “Had Trevor lived a simple thirty-nine minute drive away in neighboring Kentucky, he might have topped the list of candidates for expensive medications called polymerase inhibitors, a life-saving liver transplant, or other forms of treatment and support,” Metzl writes. But Tennessee officials repeatedly blocked efforts to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.
> But Trevor is not mad at the state’s elected officials. “Ain’t no way I would ever support Obamacare or sign up for it,” he tells Metzl. “I would rather die.” When Metzl prods him about why he’d choose death over affordable health care, Trevor’s answer is telling. “We don’t need any more government in our lives. And in any case, no way I want
Forgive me if I'm not optimistic about the data you have provided. The CDC study you cite even admits that the estimated 500,000 to 3,000,000 is in wide dispute and should not be taken as fact. You can't just assume that those numbers are accurate when the source you got them from says they shouldn't be taken as definitive. For instance, the Violence Policy Center estimates an average of 235,700 self-defensive gun uses over a 5 year period, using FBI data. Meanwhile, the Kleck study that the CDC cites in the article you linked has been widely criticized and almost universally rejected as inaccurate. Lastly, surveys that place self-defensive gun use in high numbers often rely on self-reported claims of self-defense. When examined closely, and shown to actual criminal court judges, we find that many of these accounts of 'self-defense' are actually illegal uses of firearms, and have no relation to self-defense. In fact, the 3,000,000 number is technically impossible. According to the Kleck study, the extrapolated number of respondents who reported shooting their assailant was 200,000, which is twice the number of people killed or treated for gunshots in the entire country.
Furthermore, you can't assume that each of those defensive gun uses would have otherwise resulted in injury or death without providing evidence to that effect. In fact, there is good evidence to suggest that many of those defensive gun uses actually result directly in injury or death. Had there not been a gun involved, the victim would likely not have been harmed in any way. According to David Hemenway, using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action. In this article, he goes further, pointing out that even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. In this Harvard study of 160,000 people, people defended themselves with a gun in roughly 0.9 percent of crimes committed over this period. Their likelihood of being injured was 10.9%, only 0.01% lower than the likelihood of injury had they not defended themselves at all. They also found that simply running away was safer than defending yourself with a gun.
To conclude, the 3,000,000 estimate is impossible, and the 500,000 is extremely unlikely. Moreover, in many cases what people report as self-defense is actually illegal gun use without any connection to self-defense. In addition, there is no evidence that using a gun in self-defense would have prevented an injury or death from occurring. In fact, the evidence seems to indicate that using a gun in self-defense increases your likelihood of being harmed during an incident. I didn't explore the other problematic factors relating to gun ownership, but it is additionally true that being in possession of a gun makes it more likely to kill oneself, for a family member to kill themselves by accident, for a criminal to kill you with your own gun, for that gun to be stolen and used in a crime, and for you to be shot by police. The overwhelming evidence is that gun ownership correlated with gun deaths, and there are no discernible self-defense benefits to counterbalance that fact.
Not a book recommendation, but I really, really recommend watching the documentary Alive Inside. I believe it's still on Netflix? What I learned about music therapy from it has helped me connect very deeply with multiple dementia and Parkinson's patients over the years.
The late, great Oliver Sacks also stars as an expert on it, and he wrote Musicophilia, of which there are a couple of chapters that deal with music & memory. I really enjoyed reading that.
Edit: Found my booklist. Here's a really simple handbook that helps guide you in having difficult conversations with seriously ill patients and their families about the patient's condition. It's aimed primarily at doctors (it was made for oncologists originally), but many of its tenets and suggestions can be applied to any level of caregiver.
Because you're working on a dementia unit, I'd also start familiarizing yourself with death & dying - not just the physiological process, but the ethical and philosophical levels as well (both societal and personal). If you're not familiar with it, working with dying people can be very scary and uncomfortable, and you'll find yourself feeling moral distress because you're mentally still trying to apply curing principles of care to someone who cannot be cured. Once you become more familiar with this stage of life, you're probably going to recognize a lot of aggressive, futile care happening, and THAT's going to become emotionally very difficult for you.
Recs on that:
We tend to use MacLeod's Clinical Examination here in Scotland and it is pretty great! Good detail, nice simple steps and explains what findings might mean, and it has an online resource too. There's a new edition coming out in June 2013 though so if you want the latest edition I'd hang fire or pre-order it.
This is one of the best introductory books:
Understanding Health Policy: A Clinical Approach by Thomas Bodenheimer & Kevin Grumbach
Note that Bodenheimer coined the "Quadruple Aim." It has great examples.
I recommend this book
http://www.amazon.com/Being-Mortal-Medicine-What-Matters/dp/0805095152
It is a good read and addresses this issue.
I highly recommend the book Being Mortal by Atul Gawande, it's the best thing I've ever read on this subject.
Interestingly, I've yet to talk to anyone who left Lindwall alive. Everyone I discussed the game with thought that would be cruel, and I agree, but I'd be interested to see other perspectives.
I really like the Healthcare Handbook https://www.amazon.com/Health-Care-Handbook-Concise-United-ebook/dp/B0088CMAUU
It's very concise and covers a lot of crucial topics that you should be aware of going into medicine. For social/economic/political issues ... This is a tough one. A lot of your answers will depend on where you are on the political spectrum. So wherever you lie on that, stick to your conviction and back it with evidence. I am on the left with issues so that's what my answers reflect. So bottom line, be well read in those areas. I'd recommend "Sociology: The Essentials"
In a nutshell, I think it's trying to fix a broken system with an equally broken system.
There are two students from the Washington University School of Medicine that came and delivered a lecture to my class (I'm also in med school) about the breakdown of the US healthcare system and how it's really more of an amalgamation of 8 different systems. One of the standout points they mentioned was that while we are currently in a crisis in terms of trying to pay for everyone to have some form of healthcare, just about every other country out there that uses a more socialized system is eventually going to hit where we are, we just happened to get there first.
The sad truth of the matter is that there are limited medical resources (both in terms of equipment and staff), and some people are going to fall through the cracks. I distinctly remember during my interview process a discussion I had with one of my interviewers, who was a doctor and a long time administrator himself. He asked me if I thought healthcare was a right or a privilege. I said I thought it was a right, but it doesn't seem to be implemented that way. He responded that while the ideal is that it's a right, it currently is a privilege and will stay that way until we develop a much better system of managing healthcare. For the time being, there are too many people being forced into a system with too little resources and not enough money behind it to alter how care is given. Other problems are also related to the fact that the existence of insurance has greatly driven up the price of many procedures, there are often an overabundance of procedures (CT, MRI) performed emergently that don't need to be (out of fear of litigation, billing for insurance, or even just trying to give in to a overly-concerned parent), people are very ill-informed about their own health, and even the idea of what base-level care actually means (which is something that Obamacare is supposed to offer to everyone).
All that being said, I won't pretend to have a solution because the situation is so complicated and goes so far beyond just healthcare that I wouldn't know where to begin. Also, my own experience in dealing with healthcare is pretty one-sided, so there are probably some major points I'm missing here.
On a final note, the students I mentioned earlier actually wrote a book, so if you'd like to read up on the whole situation, here's the link-
http://www.amazon.com/The-Health-Care-Handbook-ebook/dp/B0088CMAUU/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1367512148&sr=1-1&keywords=the+health+care+handbook
Also, sorry this ended up being super long. The TL;DR version is just this basically: In a nutshell, I think it's trying to fix a broken system with an equally broken system.
Like do you genuinely believe that without guns the rate of violent crime would be literally 4000% higher than it currently is? Is this genuinely a statistic you believe? That without the second amendment the lowest end of your "stopped crimes" would see a higher annual death toll across America than the Vietnam war?
Do you know where those numbers come from? Because I'll tell you where they're from.
Presumably you mean this study by Kleck. Because it's always bloody Kleck.
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6853&context=jclc
Which I've seen whored out every couple weeks. Several points. Firstly its an extrapolation a couple thousand respondents multiplied by 50,000 to represent the nation. Ignoring things like unverified self report, selection bias (people with an agenda are far more likely to agree to performing a survey than someone who has no agenda) then this still means that every single person in that study represents 50,000 people. So if anyone of those respondents do anything it is recorded as if the entire population of Brunswick Georgia did it. Secondly the causality is along the lines of "I carry a gun and I haven't been robbed. Therefore my gun prevented me from being robbed". In which case I have an anti tiger penny that has saved me from literally countless tiger attacks.
Here's Kleck himself being quietly self pwned by a respondent to one of his articles.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082
>Update: A response from Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes, authors of The Myth Behind Defensive Gun OwnershipWhen Gary Kleck can't defend, he attacks. Instead of offering new insight, Kleck instead baselessly speculates on our motives, suggesting we “hope that total gun prohibition will one day be politically achievable.” To be clear: prohibition is not something we have ever suggested in any of our writing, all of which can found at armedwithreason.com. Not that it should matter, but neither of us are merely “investment counselors” either, as Kleck suggests. In fact, DeFilippis spent most of last year helping design and analyze surveys much larger than Kleck’s.The Florida State professor even goes so far as to describe Dr. David Hemenway, director of Harvard’s Injury Control Research Center and author of more than 130 articles and five books in Economics and Public Health (a total that includes two decisive rebuttals to Kleck and several surveys), as “a man named David Hemenway… who is also untrained in survey methods.”Rather than confront the significant, multidisciplinary research showing that the false-positive problem is ubiquitous when measuring rare events, Kleck pretends the problem is negligible, and links us to a 1998 “rebuttal” where he references surveys that have nothing to do with rare events. As Dr. Hemenway has extensively detailed, suggesting that false negatives could somehow outweigh false positives is indulging in fantasy.Kleck also ignores the fact that his results repeatedly fail tests of external validity. In our original article, we mention that Kleck’s data would require, impossibly, that gun owners use their gun in self-defense in more than 100 percent of burglaries. Kleck’s data also suggests that every year hundreds of thousands of criminals are shot by law-abiding citizens. But where are the hospital records to validate this claim? Kleck insists, with no medical knowledge and without citing a single study, that the vast majority of these criminals never seek hospital treatment, a claim scoffed at by medical professionals.Kleck concludes his article by saying we “have not offered any new criticisms” and, like Dr. Hemenway before us, do “not once cite the one thing that could legitimately cast doubt on our estimates—better empirical evidence.” However, had he read the second page of our column, he would have seen that the entire point of our article was to highlight new empirical evidence debunking Kleck’s claims.Here are the facts Kleck missed: According to his own survey more than 50 percent of respondents claim to have reported their defensive gun use to the police. This means we should find at least half of his 2.5 million annual Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs) in police reports alone. Instead, the most comprehensive nonpartisan effort to catalog police and media reports on DGUs by The Gun Violence Archive was barely able to find 1,600 in 2014. Where are the remaining 99.94 percent of Kleck’s supposed DGUs hiding?It would be disappointing to see any professor relegated to using falsehoods and ad hominem attacks in a desperate attempt to preserve the tattered remains of his thoroughly repudiated research. Yet, such tactics are particularly deplorable when they are used in service of a gun-worshipping culture that generates tragedy on a massive scale.
If there were (at minimum) 500,000 cases of good guy with gun saving the damsel. Then where are they all. We both know the NRA wouldn't shut up about these brave heroes if this was the case. So why is it the same handful brought out year after year.
I'm just going to spam some stuff in here and let you guys sort it out, sorry. It's from another post on another thread, so it's easier to cut and paste. Some of this may already be in there, but I'm sure there's a bunch that isn't:
I'm a big fan of John Paul Stevens' Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change The Constitution.
I also recommend Carl Bogus: The Hidden History of the Second Amendment.
This op-ed written by David Hemenway back in 2015: There's scientific consensus on guns -- and the NRA won't like it. Much like climate change, the vast majority of researchers studying gun violence agree that gun control works, but news media insists on presenting the progun side as if it has equal scientific weight. It does not. In fact, Hemenway's book Private Guns, Public Health is another you should pick up.
Next is a blogger calling himself the Propaganda Professor. Their blog has many great posts backed up by links to hard science:
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2013/09/30/the-poorly-armed-assault-on-gun-control-how-the-gun-culture-manipulates-statistics-part-1/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2013/12/09/the-poorly-armed-assault-on-gun-control-how-the-gun-culture-manipulates-statistics-part-2/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2014/11/23/the-poorly-armed-assault-on-gun-control-how-the-gun-culture-manipulates-statistics-part-3/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2015/04/25/the-poorly-armed-assault-on-gun-control-how-the-gun-culture-manipulates-statistics-part-4/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2014/01/20/home-invasion-defensive-gun-use-or-creative-headline/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2018/01/19/second-amendment-follies-part-1-an-inconvenient-clause/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2018/02/19/second-amendment-follies-part-2-a-well-regulated-militia/
And my personal favorites:
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2012/02/18/estimating-defensive-gun-uses-reasonably/
https://propagandaprofessor.net/2013/01/06/more-on-defensive-gun-use/
(The guntrolls really hate those, it cuts the legs out from under their #1 argument.)
Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Assault - Peer reviewed study showing that people with a gun are 4.5x more likely to be shot than those not
The Myth Behind Defensive Gun Ownership
Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use - from the Harvard School of Public Health
Strong Regulations on Gun Sales Prevent High-Risk Individuals from Accessing Firearms and Can Reduce Violent Crime - 2015 study from Johns Hopkins University showing that gun control works.
Firearm Violence, 1993-2011 - US Dept. of Justice report showing that firearm homicides are down since 1993 (coincidentally the year the Brady Bill was passed); 60% of criminals get their firearms from legal sources like friends, family members, and gun stores; most victims of firearms violence knew their assailant
Victimization During Household Burglary - another DoJ report, this time showing that only 1 in 4 household burglaries result in violent crime, and most of those are performed by a person known to the victim. It also shows that locking doors and windows, putting lights on timers, and other methods are far more effective at deterring and preventing crimes than firearms.
Weapon Involvement in Home Invasion Crimes - Now, I'm not going to lie to you, Kellerman is controversial. I wouldn't go throwing him around as a trump card, pardon the expression. But his research is interesting and provides some insight, even if it isn't exactly the strongest.
Tracing the Guns: The Impact of Illegal Guns on Violence in Chicago - report from Office of the Mayor of Chicago showing that over 60% of guns used in crimes in Chicago come from out of state, proving that Chicago's gun laws would work, if they were not subverted by weak laws in Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, etc. as well as gun stores located outside city limits in Illinois.
Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense
A breakdown of the $229 billion gun violence tab that American taxpayers are paying every year - Yeah, you read that right. $229 BILLION. Think of the tax cuts they could give their cronies if they just outlawed guns...
Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows and here
One of my personal favorites, from the National Bureau of Economic Research:
More Gus, More Crime - they hate this one, because they can't find anything against it that isn't "John Lott."
Speaking of, Armed With Reason is another great resource.
Finally, I'm going to leave you with this piece from the "failing" NY Times: How to Reduce Shootings. That ought to keep you out of trouble for some time, and maybe even give you some hard ammo to fight back with.
EDIT: also, why isn't the academic resource page in the sidebar? That should be stickied or something.
Buy the healthcare handbook 2nd edition. That's what med students use for a general overview.
I enjoyed Being Mortal, by Atul Gawande. My local library had it.
This is a helpful book
http://www.amazon.com/Documentation-Manual-Occupational-Therapy-Writing/dp/1556429711
Long time reader and teacher here -
I agree with skipping any phonics instruction at this stage, and that trying audio books is a good idea. Written language is different than spoken, and listening to written will help with reading it. (Besides that, audio books are great!)
There is a lot of great nonfiction out there that he might enjoy -
these are collections of short articles, which may make them less intimidating:
Gene Weingarten: [The Fiddler in the Subway] (https://www.amazon.com/Fiddler-Subway-World-Class-Violinist-Performances/dp/1439181594/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1505310496&sr=1-1&keywords=gene+weingarten) (I do my best to read everything he writes)
[Sarah Vowell's books] (https://www.amazon.com/Sarah-Vowell/e/B001ILFO7E/ref=sr_tc_2_0?qid=1505310914&sr=1-2-ent)
some of [Joel Achenbach's books] (https://www.amazon.com/Joel-Achenbach/e/B001HMTVXC/ref=sr_tc_2_0?qid=1505310626&sr=1-2-ent), including 'Why Things Are'
not collections, but so good
[The Boys in the Boat] (https://www.amazon.com/Boys-Boat-Americans-Berlin-Olympics/dp/0143125478)
[Seabiscuit] (https://www.amazon.com/Seabiscuit-American-Legend-Ballantine-Readers/dp/0449005615/ref=pd_sim_14_14?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0449005615&pd_rd_r=4P2YTBS454KVBDDS78NP&pd_rd_w=YohLc&pd_rd_wg=g6ySs&psc=1&refRID=4P2YTBS454KVBDDS78NP)
[Tracy Kidder's books] (https://www.amazon.com/Tracy-Kidder/e/B000AQ8T3E)
[Being Mortal] (https://www.amazon.com/Being-Mortal-Medicine-What-Matters/dp/1250076226/ref=la_B00458K698_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1505310411&sr=1-1)
And so many more - I just listened to Erik Larson's [The Devil in the White City] (https://www.amazon.com/Devil-White-City-Madness-Changed/dp/0375725601)...
Bate's might be useful, as long as someone knows what to do with those findings. Maybe paired with a wikireader to enhance understanding. Clinical examination is something of a lost art.
> as always, i would like to see another book that points to an opposite conclusion; I have yet to see one.
Have you looked? Here is one. In fact the wikipedia article for the book contains a rather long list of opposing studies and books. I feel this is part of the problem with the gun debate in this country, each side simply looks at something that agrees with what they want to be true, ignores everything else that doesn't fit in with what they want, and claims the issue is settled and anyone who disagrees is just uninformed.
In reality the research and stats are a hot mess, and anyone who claims there is some definitive conclusion on the matter I look at with great skepticism.
If she's pretty healthy, it's ultimately up to momma. VBAC is generally a lot safer and better for mom and baby than repeat cesareans. If she wants to attempt trial of labor, she needs to find an OB or midwife that will support her decision. Sometimes the Dr might say they don't recommend a vbac, but the Dr has a high cesarean rate. Most times when Dr's recommend cesareans, it's out of convenience (for the Dr) and fear of litigation, not what's best for mom and baby. Look up hospitals' cesarean rates in your area. Meet with different doctors/midwives until you find the one the supports your decisions and won't "bait and switch." Do your research and ask questions. Lots and lots of questions. Houston, TX has the largest medical center in the world and there's only one hospital that will allow vbacs after 2+ cesareans, and even though vbac is proven to be safer, Houston still has a high cesarean rate (33%), but also the highest maternal mortality rate in the country🤦🏽. So depending on your area, it may be hard (or easy) to find a hospital that will allow mom to attempt a vbac. A cesarean should never be an elective option and should only be reserved for emergencies. It's a major abdominal surgery that takes 6wks to heal from. The "postpartum period" is generally 6wks as well (as far as maternity leave goes, but postpartum can be as long as 2yrs). Do your research and make your own informed decisions, and find a Dr/midwife that supports your decisions. You have a choice in EVERYTHING when it comes to the birth of your child. Here are some links for more info and a few good books on the U.S. maternity system and the industrialization of birth. Also, finding a doula would be beneficial as well. Look up evidence based birth, and maternity care.
Source: I'm a doula, and have doula'd for multiple successful vbacs
https://vbacfacts.com
https://m.acog.org/Patients/FAQs/Vaginal-Birth-After-Cesarean-Delivery
https://www.amazon.com/Pushed-Painful-Childbirth-Modern-Maternity/dp/0738211664
https://www.amazon.com/Born-USA-Broken-Maternity-Children/dp/0520256336
https://www.amazon.com/Farmer-Obstetrician-Michel-Odent/dp/1853432040
Regarding his eyes, get them checked out now. The sooner eye stuff is caught and corrected, the better.
My mom has had every eye thing imaginable. Cateracts removed, then a secondary film reappeared - happens in a small percentage of cateract cases - really helped to get that removed. She also has macular degeneration. She has wet and dry. When her wet was developing, she got shots in the eye to keep it from spreading. They caught it soon enough she could stop the shots after a while.
Don't let his vision fail any further. If his surgery is scheduled, make sure it happens. Vision is priceless.
As for the rest of it, you can make suggestions, but chances are it won't work.
For example: moving to a 55+ apartment where there are others his age and activities. Or, moving to assisted living, again, others his age and activities.
There is most likely a senior center nearby with activities and programs. Getting him involved could help. Some have daily lunches and shuttle services for such.
You might find a book called Being Mortal by Atul Gawande particularly helpful. Your library probably has it.
TR Reid, The Healing of America is a great read about this topic.
I passed the registry with a 96/100. Let's put some things into perspective for you:
We took a Correctec practice exam and the beginning of our final semester, and we were told that a 50% or above meant that the student was on track to passing. That's assumed because, with an entire semester of review, your score is going to improve dramatically. You only need a 75 to pass. If you're two semesters out and almost at a 75 on the quizzes, I think you'll be fine.
Relax! You're fine.
The Healthcare Handbook
Blurb:
> The American health care system is vast, complex and confusing. Books about it shouldn't be. The Health Care Handbook is your one-stop guide to the people, organizations and industries that make up the U.S. health care system, and the major issues the system faces today. The Handbook's five chapters (250 pages) cover:
> * Inpatient and outpatient health care and delivery systems
In my opinion, this book has a great balance of completeness/readability - I had a pretty fragmented knowledge of the healthcare system, and this book tied everything together and filled in the gaps.
Full disclosure: The Healthcare Handbook was written by two students at the med school that I attend, and our class was given free copies of the book - but I totally think it's worth the $8.
Found it: The Health Care Handbook
As I said - not a deep, immersive book, but it gives a very good, detailed pespective of the health care system as it exists today, written by people inside it.
So, this book isn't written for 5 year olds and it's not specific to your plan, but it is a really good overall explanation of the healthcare system in the US. You don't have to read it all at once, there are sections on different aspects. I highly recommend it. It looks like the paperback is only through 3rd party sellers but you could get the kindle version and just read it in a web browser on your computer if you don't have a kindle
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00PWQ93M8/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i_QLIlDb3NTV643
I would start with textbooks then move to reviews then to original research (but you probably won't get that far until actually in the job.)
Perhaps go by system if you want and look at the relevant basic sciences (anatomy/physiology/biochem/pharm etc), clinical medicine/surgery and then clinical skills (history taking/examination/procedural skills etc) for the major systems eg CVS, resp, endo, GI, gen surgery, neuro. I've linked an example textbook I used.
It's pretty tough to teach yourself the material to be honest so focus on the patient not the underlying science, go through cases (such as those featured in NEJM) to get a picture of the ambiguity involved in medicine. Visit websites such as almostadoctor, handwrittentutorials, trickcyclists, geekymedics123, DoctorNajeeb, teachmeanatomy, become familiar with the language and the feel of medicine as well as establishing some knowledge foundations. It's knowledge, skills and attitude that make a professional not just knowledge.
I've heard that The Healing of America by T.R. Reid is good, though I haven't read it myself.
I can't recommend enough The Social Transformation of American Medicine, although I doubt it would "be assigned in an intro course." It's not exactly a light read, though.
If you'd like a good lecture on Single Payer I always suggest Tim Faust. He also just put out a good new book that I have been digging into, Health Justice Now: Single Payer and What Comes Next Here;s one of his big lectures
"We can;t do anything become of Mitch McConnell" is an excise I have seen around this sub multiple times in the last week. And if you honestly believe that, please get the fuck out of the way and left the left have it's moment. You lost.
This piece is quite good. Credit where credit is due (though it's framed as a book review of Tim Faust's book Health Justice Now: Single Payer and What Comes Next, which I guess gives WP employees deniability if anyone accuses them of actually liking something about Bernie) .
Obviously the timing is suspicious, coming in the midst of Sanders' criticism of the paper's coverage. The book has been on Amazon for a couple of weeks and I assume was available to reviewers long before that. I guess it's the same as Amazon and Disney spontaneously, by pure coincidence, deciding to pay their workers $15/hr at the exact instant Bernie was beating them up.
Was this actually on the Op-ed page in the print version of the paper?
Racism is running some of the show, where people chose their own demise. This is where the propaganda machine, pushed the idea welfare is for "those people".
https://www.amazon.com/Dying-Whiteness-Politics-Resentment-Heartland/dp/1541644980
I think the poster was pretty spot on.
Here's a book that discusses, at length, white identity
Check out this book. Amazing writer. Think you’ll find it interesting.
If you don’t die a fairly painless death from ALZ, you’ll die a painful death from cancer. That’s just what the data says. I’ll take the ALZ path myself.
Eventually the decision will have to made, shut down a children’s vaccination program and divert the $$$s to ALZ research, that’s the issue coming up. What would you do?
The Atlantic Article :
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/01/dying-better/384626/
The book:
Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0805095152?psc=1&ref=yo_pop_mb_pd_title
“Beautifully written . . . In his newest and best book, Gawande . . . has provided us with a moving and clear-eyed look at aging and death in our society, and at the harms we do in turning it into a medical problem, rather than a human one.” ―The New York Review of Books
PS. I don’t usually say “Nazi”, you can say the German people. They were just everyday people. Could have been anyone. Just like anyone you or I know.
Thanks for the reply, always enjoy thinking about it all.
This has been asked recently, so I'd recommend browsing the archives, but...
There are a ton of UX-focused books out there that focus on different areas. If you have an area you're trying to grow your skills in, let us know. There maybe better or worse books for that.
I tend to shy away from books with UX in the title. It's just to trendy right now. UX isn't new by any stretch, though, so finding books that expand your horizons a bit is a good thing.
If you want an excellent read on both the cost and the morality of excessive, interventionist end-of-life care, I can't recommend Atul Gawande's Being Mortal enough. IMO, it's one of the most important books written in the last 5 years.
Mmmm. I smell trollbait.
If you're really interested in educating yourself on healthcare, I sincerely suggest taking an hour and watching this lecture lecture. T.R. Reid provides one of the clearest, most politically objective overviews of world healthcare I've ever heard. The lecture is essentially a free run-through of his book. If you're capable of stepping beyond the American political echo chamber and really looking at what works and what doesn't work, then save yourself $13 and check out the lecture. I think you'll find it edifying.
hey buddy.
Health Care Handbook by Elizabeth Askin & Nathan Moore. I read it when applying in 2013 and at the time it was a free pdf. Now it's a book but I remember reading like 20 pages every morning in bed and it was like a kid's book. So easily digestible. I was accepted to USC (Los Angeles), Tulane and Miami and all interviewers said I was very well versed in Obamacare. Also, google "Redditor explains obamacare" by /u/CaspianX ...I read that everyday for a month and it melted into my memory, didn't even have to actively memorize. And it was...dare I say...even enjoyable to read haha.
I haven't read the other one's posted here but they may be just what you're looking for too!
Amazon link (can get digital and have it in 2 seconds!): http://www.amazon.com/Health-Care-Handbook-Elisabeth-Askin-ebook/dp/B0088CMAUU
Review of the book: http://healthcarehandbook.wustl.edu/
good luck and please PM for any help with the admissions process. I answer loads of PMs every week and have been since this time last year. I received help from a friend a year above me and feel the need to pay it forward!
:)
Read The Health Care Handbook
I am currently reading surgeon Atul Gawande's book Being Mortal. The books deals with end of life care. I would recommend it to anyone who would like to see the research on this topic. Amazon
Heard an interview with this author recently, you aren’t alone in your realizations: https://www.amazon.com/Dying-Whiteness-Politics-Resentment-Heartland/dp/1541644980
Interview:
Understanding Health Policy: A Clinical Approach
I have not read it, but this book seem to be recommended if you want to try understand the mind of white far right. Might be close enough?
https://www.amazon.com/Dying-Whiteness-Politics-Resentment-Heartland/dp/1541644980
$5 Paypal
Essentials of Health Care Finance 8th Edition
ISBN-13: 978-1284094633
ISBN-10: 1284094634
Amazon Link
Essentials of Health Care Finance 8th Edition
Does your new job give you any journal access?
Beyond these Walls may be a good place to start. I'm personally working through a couple of books byAtul Gawande, including Being Mortal - not directly related to your field, but he's a great storyteller.
If your clinic has a research focus, it also couldn't hurt to take a look through any publications by your physicians. Amazon has bestseller lists in about any category, so you can get recommendations there too.
Not really.
Chemotherapy is horrible for some patients making them feel even worse than death.
If you can, you should read up Being Mortal. I cannot recommend it enough. It will change your perspective about death, and also about life. Review 1, 2.
More.
> our most cruel failure in how we treat the sick and the aged is the failure to recognize that they have priorities beyond merely being safe and living longer; that the chance to shape one’s story is essential to sustaining meaning in life; and that we have the opportunity to refashion our institutions, culture, and conversations to transform the possibilities for the last chapters of all of our lives.
https://www.amazon.com/Health-Care-Handbook-Concise-United-ebook/dp/B0088CMAUU
I liked this book.
Read this - https://www.amazon.com/dp/0805095152/ref=sxts_sxwds-tsp_2?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=3155180962&pd_rd_wg=5Vw5w&pf_rd_r=0Z9TFP0KJXXKPKJPVSZH&pf_rd_s=desktop-sx-top-slot&pf_rd_t=301&pd_rd_i=0805095152&pd_rd_w=vktq2&pf_rd_i=atul+gawande&pd_rd_r=NGRP8CJGMYTJS78EY751&ie=UTF8&qid=1502065845&sr=2
In the interest of balance, virtually all of the high numbers you're citing come from the work of Gary Kleck, whose methodology has been criticized. You might want to read up on some of that criticism.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1264/2013/09/Response-to-Kleck-SDGU.docx
http://www.amazon.com/Private-Public-Health-David-Hemenway/dp/0472031627
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262?o=1
The estimates provided by directly surveying people (as Kleck does) about their gun use do not match up as we would predict with hospital records, police reports, or NCVS results. From the third source:
>For example, the claim that millions every year shoot their guns in self-defense has led some to posit that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal uses. This assertion is inexplicable—not backed by any substantive evidence. We have yet to find a single study examining the question that does not show that criminal uses far outweigh defensive uses.
>You might hear gun advocates substantiate this claim by comparing inflated survey numbers like Kleck’s with NCVS crime numbers. But defensive gun use surveys and the NCVS use different methodologies. To compare those two data sets is to break one of the most important laws of statistical analysis: You must always compare likes to likes.
>And indeed, comparing NCVS results to NCVS results yields a very different picture—that more than 9 times as many people are victimized by guns than protected by them.
Thanks for making me look deeper into this and I admit you've seeded some doubt in my mind, but please do the same courtesy, since these conclusions are highly contentious.
Anymore, the focus is on industrializing the hospice business, making it an adjunct of existing nursing homes, and moving as many bodie$ through the system as possible.
Which is a damned shame. Atul Gawande has a wonderful new book out that discusses end-of-life care in great and compassionate depth. Highly recommended for anyone facing these painful decisions.
If anybody is interested in reading on the subject I highly recommend Atul Gawande's "Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End"
https://www.amazon.com/Being-Mortal-Medicine-What-Matters/dp/0805095152
But if the conversation around the ACA proves anything, if that logic goes out the door when you get an easy signed by like "death panels" and can convince a large number of Americans that the government is actually going to set up a board to decide what kind of Americans live and die.
> I want to live again. I want to go out and enjoy every single minute God gives me here on Earth. I don't want to schedule my day around taking pills, or my week around when I am going to have to go in for an infusion. I am at peace with my choice and I just wish someone understood.
You should share this article with your parents: http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/07/06/413691959/knowing-how-doctors-die-can-change-end-of-life-discussions
Here's an excerpt:
> In 2011, Murray, a retired family practice physician, shared his observations in an online article that quickly went viral. The essay, "How Doctors Die," told the world that doctors are more likely to die at home with less aggressive care than most people get at the end of their lives. That's Murray's plan, too.
And, if they still aren't convinced, have them read this: http://www.amazon.com/Being-Mortal-Medicine-What-Matters/dp/0805095152
In short, I think you made the right choice. Also, read both of those things yourself.
And if anyone tries to guilt you into resuming treatment, tell them they're grasping at false hopes, emotionally manipulating you, and that treatment is miserable, and you don't want to spend what little time you have left being miserable.
If there isn't a cure, there isn't a cure. Everyone's life ends anyways at some point. You have the blessing of knowing that you only have so long left. Make every second count, and tell anyone who thinks otherwise to kindly fuck off.
<3 best of luck OP.
It is funny how you condemn and ridicule the US for its food aid in the form of corn, indicting it for driving down the price of domestic African produced corn... which I agree with... but then is your next post down you say that empathy is the key to our future. Well, much aid (empathy) that is given to Africa has many unintended consequences, many times doing much more harm than good, as you indicated. Empathy can be a slippery slope, because in an attempt to feel righteous and holy in our causes by 'doing good', we can interfere in horrible ways. You should read the book 'Killing with Kindness' about the disasterous situation NGOs have caused in Haiti with all their 'empathy'. Sometimes, we need to set aside our inclinations to 'assist' and instead let countries work their problems out for themselves. Yes, some may die, but they will become stronger because of it. No country in history has ever thrived or flourished off of a unyielding injection of 'empathy' and assistance.
So there's a lot of discussion in this thread and I might get downvoted, but it is unfortunately not so simple for the US to just switch to universal healthcare (or universal Medicaid). Our system is dysfunctional, but it's a giant disgusting tumor that essentially lives on the largest and most vital parts of our economy, and you can't just cut it out. Love it or hate it our healthcare system, the way it is, employs millions of people in administration and health insurance who do jobs specific to this system. Obamacare was sabotaged by Republicans, but even Obamacare was just a band-aid and not a true fix.
If you want to get an excellent and academic overview of the issues facing US healthcare policy, check out this book: https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Health-Policy-Clinical-Approach/dp/1259584755/