Okay. Let's ignore the fact that historic numbers of physicians today are burning out and the suicide rate in the profession is the highest its over been. The profession now has one of the highest suicide rates. Much of this is attributed to EMRs.

The physicians just want to do their job and do it well. This is the biggest predictor or physician satisfaction.

But let's ignore all that and blame them for all the problems the MBAs and crapola that is health care IT.

Doesn't matter if a physician has no control over these issues which is usually the case. Most doctors offices today are run by health care admin MBAs and their IT departments. Also the vendors of these products are usually very slow to respond to these types of problems. The implementations are usually bare minimum. Physicians have very little say in any of this today.

You realize most doctors have very little to zero say in their information systems today? Today, most doctors offices are owned by large health care systems with IT departments that manage these things for them? I am a physician and work in health IT / informatics. The docs are usually at the mercy of the hospital MBAs. The vendors that create the systems are often really slow to respond to problems, too. Very rarely in my experience does the physician the cause of these problems.

I know. As I stated, I'm not *comfortable* modifying my main phone. It is not worth the risk to me. There are times I am on call and can't risk having problems with my phone. If I do have problems, it would limit my ability to have it fixed quickly. It works great as it is.

I've looked at that and I play around with those versions on my old phones. I use my old phones for things around the house like running my TV, sound systems or for visiting kids to play games.

I am a physician. I can't risk my main phone not working correctly. I'm not comfortably enough with them to alter my main phone like that. Not worth the risk to me.

Bloatware is a bit subjective.

From my point of view, it didn't have anything getting in my way. I'll put it that way. I didn't see any apps I was concerned about. I could be wrong or we may have different perspectives on want counts as bloatware. My experience with the phone has been far superior than Samsung in this regard.

I'm not sure Google has much motivation to fix this problem. I had been a Samsung Galaxy user for many years - I owned the Galaxy S3, S5 and S7. I bought a Pixel instead just over a year ago due to a recommendation from a friend.

I'll never go back to Samsung. Previously, I'd spend the first day or two of owning a new phone just turning off stupid notifications or uninstalling all sorts of annoying unnecessary applications. Sometimes longer as issues would pop up later.

I was blown away with the Pixel because I basically had to do none of that. Just tweaked a few setting in a few minutes and I was good to go. The overall longer term all experience is much smoother, too.

If the competing Android phones are making their phones suck on purpose, sounds like a potential win for Google. That is, if people are switching to Pixel phones as a result sounds like a win for Google. I guess it could hurt Android's reputation as a whole. Not sure how that balances out.
   

When the oral polio virus (OPV) vaccine is used this is true. The OPV vaccine isn't used in most countries. Its use it typically limited to poorer areas or areas with outbreaks. Its cheap to provide (can be given orally). Because the attenuated virus infects many people, one vaccine may vaccinate a large group of people.

In western countries its pretty much never used as far as I know. In the US , for example, we only use the IPV vaccine for polio. It is not live.

In the US and as far as I know all western countries in which polio has been eradicated, only the IPV vaccine is used to prevent polio. IPV is not a live vaccine. In the US its been this way since I was in med school - so at leave over 20 years but probably longer. IPV is quite effective on the individual level if provided as recommended.

The only places where the live polio vaccine is used is in poorer counties or countries with active disease. Its more effective from a population standpoint because one person can be vaccinate but the inoculated live virus will inevitably be passed to others which is typically a good thing. Many more people end up effectively vaccinated. Obliviously, its not a perfect strategy. The OPV vaccine is also much cheaper to provide.

This doesn't work well when

1. the low reviews are fake
2. accurate low reviews are suppressed from public view

I recently noticed several of my 1 star reviews on Google maps and Amazon are only view-able to me. If you login using any other account they aren't seen. I've read their policies and cannot identify any violation. I've attempted to contact google through their community feedback forum to understand what I said that prompted the suppression. So far no one has been able to provide any reason for the suppression nor any suggestions to have the suppression removed. Nearly two months later I'm only told 'they' are waiting for an official response from google.

Considering my reviews are based solely on my experience with the product or service and are fully accurate, I have lost a lot of faith in these reviews. I especially no longer believe the Google Reviews because that is where I'm seeing most of my low reviews are suppressed. Also, the Google reviews often are much higher than reviews on other sites - this is especially true for contractors.

Further, if you do some basic searches, you will find plenty of sites that instruct businesses how to have negative reviews suppressed. Seems like its too easy to game these - especially the google reviews.

This. China has very strict ad rules that are subject to change. Some are strict in regards to avoiding false advertising and some are more about censorship.

I know of a group who has created products directed at ad agencies there. The products are used to screen for banned types of wording so the ad agency can more easy create ads that will not violate local law. This is apparently hard to do. Taking all their ideas to a legal team first is expensive and time consuming. They use the tools to filter down to verbiage that is more likely to be acceptable. Something like that.

A herbicide is by many considered a type of pesticide. This includes the EPA. Calling glyphosate a pesticide isn't wrong; its just less specific.

https://www.beyondpesticides.o....

https://www.epa.gov/minimum-ri...

Otherwise, I wholeheartedly agree.

Physician here. Arguably, no intervention is health care is 100% effective.

It is maddening that anti-vaxxers say vaccines are not 100% effective so they are ineffective. It is flawed logic. Effective means it makes a difference when studied in a large group of people. Not effective means it has no effect on a large study group.

Many interventions in health care have numbers needed to treat (NNT) in the 10 or even 100 range to create one positive outcome. These are effective interventions. Vaccines are highly effective compared to most other interventions done in healthcare. Finding effective interventions in health care is hard.

On the other hand, antivaxxers and the like often push vitamins, herbs, adjustments, accupuncture and all sorts of other interventions that have no proven efficacy or even have been proven to have no efficacy (NNT is infinity!). There logic is literally backwards.

Sorry, I did not realize I was communicating with a wacko. Will avoid wasting my time in the future.

This 'recent' discovery is hardly proven to be true yet. At least two large studies are in progress to confirm, or reject, those early findings.

Sepsis historically has had many preliminary studies suggest a positive intervention only to be shown later it is ineffective or even harmful when studied fully. Further, even if we assume this intervention is effective, its not clear whether all three, two of the three or just one of the ingredients in necessary. We already know in some cases steroids can be helpful.

Inject-able vitamin C has plenty of history of overhyped effects followed by studies that show it has no significant effect. This is especially true as an intervention for cancer.

I wouldn't hold by breath.