Thanks Ashish for offering to take the anti-POISE position.
POISE used Metoprolol CR/XL.
How should we compare the doses to see if the POISE dose was too large?
Remember these were DIFFERENT chemical compounds. Both beta blockers, but different ones.
POISE's Perioperative beta blockade, lowering heart rate by 7 bpm and BP by 2mmHg, was too rapid, because it was started within 24 hour pre operatively.
So this was now a panel of 115 people who were definitely not D Poldermans.
They start with a lie. This was a falsehood first introduced by Poldermans in a debate, and contradicted by the actual trialist who was present.
However, Poldermans friends on the panel, knowing it was false, still reintroduced this statements.
Until the 2014 guideline when the Poldermans Insurgency slipped it back in.
Lies are a powerful tool. Even Ashish was taken in (and he is no Poldermans apologist).
In how many HIGH RISK surgery studies, EXCLUDING the 1 DECREASE study, was perioperative beta blockade beenficial?
Thank god for this trial.
Where shall we send the prize to, to the author of the trial, because he has saved us?
4 of which are neutral.
And DECREASE I, the made-up trial, which is stunningly positive for beta blockade, and causes beta blockers to "win".
Should the 115 experts put so much effort into concealing things that you would probably want to know, i.e. the advice is actually coming from D Poldermans, despite the guideline being de-Poldered.
There were 2 deaths out of about 700 in the beta blocker arms
And 14 out of about 700 in the control arms.
So where were the deaths from?
i.e. do you always trace references in a guideline, and then trace the references of those references, and then count the number of events and work out where everything comes from?
Luckily, otherwise the world would grind to a halt.
But sometimes people use our trusting natures to muddle things up, fluff the issue and cover up embarrassment.
Hence the self-congratulatory editorial, with photos etc.
That way, ordinary people like you and me can spot when we are being tricked, before the guideline comes into force.
I find young fellows are the sharpest, and hardest to trick.
Better than getting 115 fuddy-duddies that will basically sign anything as long as they get a nice blanket and a cup of cocoa in the evening.
I was planning not to mention it but since you force me, let's see how the other cheeky chappies got on?
I guess he could order people around within the guideline committee.
Only one person had the authority to reprimand him in that role.
The boss of All the Guideline Chairpeople.
The capo di tutti capi, the caped crusader?
115 experts or whatever , but almost none of them actually had a duty to do anything to fix the situation.
Everyone can defer to some later date or some committee or some other flim flam.
Everyone can blame someone else.
As president of ESC you have the authority and power to simply say, these trials are insecure and should be retracted.
He feels no responsibility for this.
In which case it is our fault.
For NOT making him retract it.
For NOT asking him as the first question after each of his hundreds of Presidential lectures:
If we all do it he will eventually agree he is better off in the camp of truth than the camp of crookedness.
We bend over backwards to be generous to fraudsters.
These trials never existed.
They were fictional.
Well, judge for yourself.
The only person who could do perioperative beta blockade trials properly!
Other people did it, it killed people.
When he did it, it was amazing.
Let's look at the reality.
It's brilliant because it is aimed at ordinary doctors/nurses, not specialist anaesthetists.
Enjoy! Nice video too.