The eyebrow incision for orbital roof lesions has been around for many years. This is not a new procedure. It is disappointing that the tumor was not completely removed. If it is truly growing as fast as implied in the article, she will need another surgery, probably through a different incision to definitively take care of the problem. There is nothing new in the article, and I would have to say, the 3D model in all likelihood had no impact on the surgical planning or results. It is easy to have good results when the difficult part of the tumor is left behind. I have intermittently used 3D models for various cases, for many years. I don't know that they have ever really helped me when it came to actually doing the procedure.

Of course your n=1 study of your child is much better evidence than the long term prospective studies which do show a correlation. Of course, I didn't state that video games ruin kids, only that exposure to television prior to the age of two significantly increases that child's risk of developing ADD/ADHD.

I hate to be a negative nelly, however, the best input device for an 18 month old is none at all. Many studies have demonstrated increased rates of ADD and ADHD in infants exposed to television prior to the age of two. Speaking as a physician, my recommendation would be to turn off the television and computer, and either read to your child or involve your child in other play activities which do not involve electronics.

You make some good points. However, to some extent I agree with Andy Grove's original statement. If you read the medical literature, most of the journals are full of poorly controlled articles, case reports and sometimes wild guesses. There is very little in medicine which is proven, especially in my field. I am a pediatric neurosurgeon and when I am reading the neurosurgical literature it is absolutely amazing what gets published. It almost seems as if articles are accepted into peer reviewed journals just so the the journal can fill its pages for the month. As also mentioned, the placebo effect greatly obfuscates the process. The ability to get a good case controlled trial which can prove or disprove that a medicine or procedure works requires a huge number of patients. In order to get a good study which may even include a sham surgery requires a huge amount of funding which no one is willing to provide, including the NIH, which is continually having its budget cut. Even if the money is acquired, getting the study past the institutional review board discourages almost all research. After all of this, the Health Insurance and Portability Act passed by the congress has imposed onerous standards for using even anonymous patient data. Overall, the legislative and legal environment in the United States is firmly in place against groundbreaking medical research which can prove or disprove whether treatments actually work.