Here it comes – the studies stating how all the testes and ideas that we were engrained with are now false. No scientific basis just a push for the political agenda – health care rationing!. READ ANIMAL FARM!!!!!!!!
This is how we save money on healthcare – we stop going to the doctor! And when we get really ill, we are told we can only have such and such tests and procedures and we can only see a nurse or proxy provider. Meaning – we will not be able to detect diseases early and manage them – we will detect them to late and simple die. Death = cost savings. Treatment and prevention = more money!
Horrible – but can it be explained any way?
Once again – where are the doctors shouting about this? Where are the societies screaming at the top of their lungs – WRONG!!!!!!!
The sound of silence is deafening and we the people believe what we here – hence we don’t here you doctors so it must be TRUE!!!!!
Look at the trend:
Mamograms are not effective
PSA tests are not effective
Annual exams are not effective
The trend is to retrain the population in believing we do not need these hence we artificially reduce healthcare costs. It took years to train us to eat an apple a day, go to the doctor for our yearly exam, the 4 food groups (now morphed into a complex ridiculous food pyramid that no one understands),Reading – Riting – Rithymic and now the institution of marriage between man and women – all gone!
Look at the problems we are having and look at what is going on in the country – all the result of this “Hope and Change”
Well – I HOPE IT CHANGES!!!!
Again – DOCTORS WHERE ARE YOU ? Perhaps you need a free meal to discuss the possibility of discussing this?
Excerpt from report
General health checks are common elements of health care in some countries. These aim to detect disease and risk factors for disease with the purpose of reducing morbidity and mortality. Most of the commonly used screening tests offered in general health checks have been incompletely studied. Also, screening leads to increased use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which can be harmful as well as beneficial. It is, therefore, important to assess whether general health checks do more good than harm.
We aimed to quantify the benefits and harms of general health checks with an emphasis on patient-relevant outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rather than on surrogate outcomes such as blood pressure and serum cholesterol levels.
We included 16 trials, 14 of which had available outcome data (182,880 participants). Nine trials provided data on total mortality (155,899 participants, 11,940 deaths), median follow-up time nine years, giving a risk ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.03). Eight trials provided data on cardiovascular mortality (152,435 participants, 4567 deaths), risk ratio 1.03 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.17) and eight trials on cancer mortality (139,290 participants, 3663 deaths), risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.12). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter these findings.
We did not find an effect on clinical events or other measures of morbidity but one trial found an increased occurrence of hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia with screening and one trial found an increased occurence of self-reported chronic disease. One trial found a 20% increase in the total number of new diagnoses per participant over six years compared to the control group. No trials compared the total number of prescriptions, but two out of four trials found an increased number of people using antihypertensive drugs. Two out of four trials found small beneficial effects on self-reported health, but this could be due to reporting bias as the trials were not blinded. We did not find an effect on admission to hospital, disability, worry, additional visits to the physician, or absence from work, but most of these outcomes were poorly studied. We did not find useful results on the number of referrals to specialists, the number of follow-up tests after positive screening results, or the amount of surgery.
General health checks did not reduce morbidity or mortality, neither overall nor for cardiovascular or cancer causes, although the number of new diagnoses was increased. Important harmful outcomes, such as the number of follow-up diagnostic procedures or short term psychological effects, were often not studied or reported and many trials had methodological problems. With the large number of participants and deaths included, the long follow-up periods used, and considering that cardiovascular and cancer mortality were not reduced, general health checks are unlikely to be beneficial.