Jacky's debate group is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
- Find a debate you care about.
- Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
- Earn points and become a thought leader!
To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.
Be Yourself
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
HlifT
| Reward Points: | 2 |
| Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
| Arguments: | 2 |
| Debates: | 0 |
Joined:
I find it difficult to support US without any evidence to back it up in human subjects. Animal studies are too far removed to be applicable. By just saying it seems to have beneficial effects in practice without actually knowing what it does is not justification in my view. Isn't willingly applying a modality based mostly on possible placebo effect or unknown effects unethical regardless of best intent for the patient? I will use this as an extreme example so bear with me: at one point thalidomide was deemed a reasonable treatment until the evidence clearly showed that it wasn't. This may be a bit of a stretch but what's to say that as technology improves we don't find that US may be somewhat deleterious to someone's health? My ultimate question is how it got approved for application to human patients without evidence to validate it?
I find it difficult to support US without any evidence to back it up in human subjects. Animal studies are too far removed to be applicable. By just saying it seems to have beneficial effects in practice without actually knowing what it does is not justification in my view. Isn't willingly applying a modality based mostly on possible placebo effect or unknown effects unethical regardless of best intent for the patient? I will use this as an extreme example so bear with me: at one point thalidomide was deemed a reasonable treatment until the evidence clearly showed that it wasn't. This may be a bit of a stretch but what's to say that as technology improves we don't find that US may be somewhat deleterious to someone's health? My ultimate question is how it got approved for application to human patients without evidence to validate it?
About Me
|
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |
Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here
