1/ Sharing a piece I wrote @latimes
As doctors, an act that can potentially do harm dissuades us more than if we do nothing, even if *more harm* happens as a result of the latter
The active v passive cognitively biases us heavily
latimes.com/opinion/story/…
As doctors, an act that can potentially do harm dissuades us more than if we do nothing, even if *more harm* happens as a result of the latter
The active v passive cognitively biases us heavily
latimes.com/opinion/story/…
2/ In one study I reference, doctors would be less likely to give clinically-indicated blood thinners if they caused a bleed in the past on a different patient; but would not be any more likely to give them if they did not do so & their patient had a stroke as a result.
3/ Thankfully w/ the J&J clotting issue right now, we have alternatives like Moderna/Pfizer
We are moving away from the potential of doing harm (even though it is exceptionally rare) to patients
But the lack of vaccinating patients also does harm if they get #covid19
We are moving away from the potential of doing harm (even though it is exceptionally rare) to patients
But the lack of vaccinating patients also does harm if they get #covid19
4/ Applying the above, it may seem more acceptable to not actively do harm; and to accept passive harm- begs the question of whether we subconsciously have become accustomed to thousands of people being infected with this virus every day. #covid19
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
