fair enough. But based on my experience (perhaps skewed by it) they start with a protocol and then if they see a lot of patients with a given condition, may satrt to consider how to improve it. But the protocol and the consensus are important.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:11 AM, G Money<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Dana <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> usually. A lot of the stuff in medical journals is about how the >> protocols could/should be refined. >> >> But haven't you ever been told something like "we don't treat x until >> test results look like y"? The "we" in that sentence is usually some >> sort of medical society that has arrived at a sort of "best practices" >> consensus. As in "we don't treat the common cold with antibiotics" for >> example. >> > > No, I haven't, actually...but then, I don't have any conditions that require > "ongoing" care. > > Even so, it makes sense to me to follow what has already been established as > a best practice, until such time as the doctor's experiences start to > suggest to him/her that there may in fact be a better way to do something. > That's when docs will usually turn into innovators. > > -- > Waiting for World War III while Jesus slaves > To the mating calls of lawyers in love > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:298702 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
