Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria. (ROGD).
I've dealt with many strange disorders in my fifty-five years of medical practice, both physical and mental. In most instance the medical and allied health care professions were helpful in bringing some degree of relief and comfort even in those that they could not cure. Occasionally we made things worse, through lack of knowledge or understanding but most of those errors were well intentioned blunders and were quickly remedied as soon as they were recognized.
But that was before Politically Correct Disorientation Disease (PCDD) became endemic in our society and the PCU (Political Crimes Unit) established Common Sense as one of the most dangerous and heinous crimes.
The latest addition to the new encyclopedia of potentially fatal non-diseases is:
Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria. This disease was invented by a seriously disturbed group of so-called health care workers, including, I am ashamed to say physicians, who interpreted children's play at being the opposite sex (Am I even allowed to say that?) as a serious disease to be taken seriously. This normal phase in maturation was recognized by most normal parents for what it was and cured by nature by coursing testosterone through boys and estrogen through girls until they were ready to reproduce.
There is no doubt that in some families,the roost is ruled by the children and the guidance that normal parents give their children is subjugated to the will of the child. When a group of adults such as school teachers, social workers, including some health care workers undermine parents instead of supporting them, we truly have a recipe for disaster, both for the children and for society. I will leave it up to you to arrive at your own conclusions as to the political motivations that underlie this.
Lisa Littman, a researcher at Brown University recently published study entitled "Rapid-onset Gender Dysphoria in adolescents and young adults: A study of parental reports". The report explores "the psycho-social context of youth who have recently identified as trans-gender with a focus on vulnerabilities, co-morbidities, peer group interactions and social media use."
This study is of particular interest because it deals with adolescents and young adults, whereas most of the trans-gender literature deals with children. ROGD is identified by some as a new disorder because it starts after puberty with no previous indication of confusion or unhappiness. The study indicates a high incidence of internet and peer-group influence and it affects mostly teen-age girls within a group, who 'come-out' together. A high percentage of these girls report heightened popularity, while parents report worse relationships and worse mental health. There are groups that deliberately plot to undermine parental authority and to vilify those who try to protect their children from what many informed parents and physicians consider to be a particularly dangerous and malignant form of child abuse. The extreme damage perpetrated by such groups seems to be advocated predominantly by Left Wing Loonies, whose objective seems to be to destroy the role of the nuclear family in preventing society from destroying itself. This is in order to denigrate all social values that would impair their objective of 'instant gratification' as the goal of human existence.
I haven't yet completed my study of Ms Littman's erudite article, but you can be sure that when I do, you will hear from me.
I can remember 'dressing up' as a girl when I was a kid. It was great fun! I can't remember a single person recommending surgery or even hormone injections.
.
Mainly events that occur in and around the medical world. Some you need to know about and some you don't. All to either inform or amuse you.
Tuesday 28 August 2018
Monday 20 August 2018
Re-writing the Language2.....
Cripple: A person who is unable to walk or move properly through disability or because of injury to their back or legs. (Oxford English Dictionary).
The disabled persons parking pass has always been known in our rigorously politically incorrect home as a 'cripple pass'. It took me years to convince my wife that her Intermittent Claudication, that sometimes limited her from walking briskly without experiencing pain or discomfort merited one.It was excessively hazardous when walking across a vast skating rink-like parking lot, which is what many of our parking lots are in winter. I was particularly aggravated when, during my ' people watching' I found that many emerging from the parked vehicle displaying the so-called Accessible Parking Permit pass, were a good deal more spry than my eighty - something year old corpus allows me to be. Because we come a good deal closer to fitting the above definition than many of the persons I have observed abusing the demarcated spots, we have taken some pride in using this pass only for my wife who qualifies. I do not regard myself as sufficiently crippled to merit such a privilege.
To my horror, many Canadians have no such reluctance. Horrified, I watch teen-agers screech into a designated accessible parking spot, sporting Grandma's 'cripple pass', laughing their way into Loblaws and knowing full well that as long as they display that pass, no-one is going to bother to check it. I'm eighty three, a quintuple bypass patient, fibrillating and with degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine and osteoarthritis of the right hip. I don't have a 'cripple pass', because despite my disorders and the difficulties I have to cope with, I can manage. Unlike many of the folks I observe in the parking lots, abusing a 'cripple pass', I don't intend to apply for one until I fit into the Oxford English Dictionary definition that heads this article. I will continue to ask my wife, during the harsh arctic conditions that prevail in Canada's winter,
"Hey honey, got the cripple pass?' knowing full well that when we get there, most of the spots will be taken by folks who are far from cripples!!
The decline continues.
Thursday 16 August 2018
Re-writing the language.
Here's a piece of 'educational research' that I continue to get because I used to be a physician. It is so tainted with 'political correctness' as to being not only an opinion as to how a physician relates to patients, but to suggest a whole new dictionary as to how physicians should record their interpretation of their interview with their patients. George Orwell could hardly have dreamed up this piece.
Medical history taking is a highly skilled art, an art most physicians downplay today, because it is time-consuming and not rewarding. Both the scientific community and the masses grossly underestimate it, because in the long term, we all die. History taking is not glamorous and much of the time is routine grunt data collection, which is why in our present health care system is almost exclusively done by medical students and residents and even they realize that it is considered the 'scut work' and barely valued at all. Although it is the bottom of the totem pole, it holds the structure aloft. I know the high tech stuff is much more exciting and achieves incredible results (sometimes!) but when the bottom of the pyramid is unstable, the whole damn thing is likely to topple.
Remember, before Christ, the Romans were building bridges that lasted a thousand years. ( The Ponte Vecchio built in 1345 is still functioning today).
Stigmatizing language in chart notes creates negative impressions
Clinical question
Does negative language affect residents' and medical students' attitudes toward specific patients and influence their treatment decisions?
Bottom line
Think of how antagonistic common medical jargon is. Patients "complain." They "admit" or "deny." They "refuse" or are "noncompliant." The words we use can transmit, via a hidden curriculum, implicit bias to medical personnel in training. This study compared stigmatizing language with neutral language used to describe a patient with sickle cell disease that cast doubt on the patient's pain ("still a 10" vs "still a 10/10"), portrayed the patient negatively ("hung out at McDonald's" vs "spent the afternoon with friends"), or implied patient responsibility with references to uncooperativeness ("he refuses his oxygen mask" vs "he is not tolerating the oxygen mask"), Medical students and residents had more negative attitudes toward the hypothetical patient when described with stigmatizing language and suggested less aggressive management of the patient's pain. It's time to revise the medical scripts that convey negativity and bias about the patients in our care. (LOE = 1b)
Reference
Study design
Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)
Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)
Funding
Foundation
Foundation
Allocation
Uncertain
Uncertain
Setting
Other
Other
Synopsis
In this study, medical students (n = 233) and emergency or general internal medicine residents (n= 180) were randomly assigned, concealed allocation unknown, to read 1 of 2 chart notes with medically identical information about a hypothetical patient with sickle cell disease: one using neutral language (eg, "He has about 8 to 10 pain crises per year, for which he typically requires opioid pain medication in the ED") or stigmatizing language (eg, "He is narcotic dependent and in our ED frequently"). After reading the note, both the residents and medical students completed the Positive Attitudes toward Sickle Cell Patients Scale (range 7 - 35) and the residents selected a treatment for the patient from 4 options. Attitudes were significantly lower, on average, for participants presented stigmatizing language (25.1 vs 20.3; P < .001). Attitudes were progressively lower with years of training (correlation coefficient -.95). Residents were more likely to select less aggressive treatment (eg, a low-dose opioid or a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug instead of higher dose opioid, along with less likelihood of redosing) if exposed to stigmatizing language (P <.001). Participants reading the stigmatizing note also were more likely to identify the physician who wrote the note as having a more negative attitude toward the patient.
In this study, medical students (n = 233) and emergency or general internal medicine residents (n= 180) were randomly assigned, concealed allocation unknown, to read 1 of 2 chart notes with medically identical information about a hypothetical patient with sickle cell disease: one using neutral language (eg, "He has about 8 to 10 pain crises per year, for which he typically requires opioid pain medication in the ED") or stigmatizing language (eg, "He is narcotic dependent and in our ED frequently"). After reading the note, both the residents and medical students completed the Positive Attitudes toward Sickle Cell Patients Scale (range 7 - 35) and the residents selected a treatment for the patient from 4 options. Attitudes were significantly lower, on average, for participants presented stigmatizing language (25.1 vs 20.3; P < .001). Attitudes were progressively lower with years of training (correlation coefficient -.95). Residents were more likely to select less aggressive treatment (eg, a low-dose opioid or a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug instead of higher dose opioid, along with less likelihood of redosing) if exposed to stigmatizing language (P <.001). Participants reading the stigmatizing note also were more likely to identify the physician who wrote the note as having a more negative attitude toward the patient.
| ||||||
|
 |
POEMs stands for Patient-Oriented Evidence that Matters. POEMs is a publication of John Wiley and Sons, Inc. and distributed by Joule as a CMA Member service. All content is provided for information and education and not as a substitute for the advice of a physician. Joule assumes no responsibility or liability arising from any error or omission or from the use of any information contained herein.
This email was sent to sgsmith2@uwo.ca. POEMs is a daily email newsletter from Joule™, a Canadian Medical Association Company.
Unsubscribe from this list.
Joule.cma.ca
Tel (toll free): 1-888-855-2555
Tel (toll free): 1-888-855-2555
Copyright © 1995-2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. or related companies. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright © 2018 Joule Inc. or its licensors.
CMA and Joule are trademarks of the Canadian Medical Association used under licence.
Daily POEMs is a trademark of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. used under license.
Copyright © 2018 Joule Inc. or its licensors.
CMA and Joule are trademarks of the Canadian Medical Association used under licence.
Daily POEMs is a trademark of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. used under license.
Friday 10 August 2018
Canadian Medical Scavaging.
The recent decision of the Saudi-Arabian government to withdraw funding of students being educated in Canada, although not admirable, is certainly understandable. The present Canadian Government, lead by a multimillionaire capitalist pretending to be a socialist, trading on his father's name and who has never had a productive job, is a poor recommendation for the intellect of the less than half of the Canadian population, who voted for him and his wealthy elites. He hopes to continue to buy power, and it is all about power, by changing the electorate of Canada. His millionaire socialist father, and his millionaire socialist cronies, knew well that the way to fool the poor and needy and many others is to pretend to give them all they need, courtesy of the hardworking and creative segments of our society, that lifted us and them out of the poverty that was so ubiquitous in previous generations. Scientists and physicians were penalized for their efforts and as a result many have undergone a fundamental attitude change.
The withdrawal of many postgraduates in medically related fields won't go without consequences. Students and residents play a much greater part in keeping the health care system running than most people realize. In addition, foreign governments pay the Canadian government substantial sums of money above and beyond what it costs to train their residents. We are not doing it out of the goodness of our hearts!
Canada, as well as Britain and the U.S. have a shameful history of scavenging second and third world countries for their badly needed newly qualified physicians, not because we need them, but because it is cheaper than training our own. In addition, they are much more easily controlled by the University hierarchy, because they have control over the licensure of Foreign Medical Graduates. Incidentally, even the term 'Foreign Medical Graduate' is deemed politically incorrect today. I can comment on this because I am one! Now the term is 'respectabilised' into INTERNATIONAL Medical Graduate. They vary in quality from excellent to dangerous and often are not very carefully screened before being given positions in our health care system..
Anyway the FMGs are at the mercy of the University, who can pull their license if they don't do as they are told! They are certainly much more easily manipulated than Canadian graduates. I was a medical educator for much of my life. I know!
For once our tweeting Foreign Minister got the message right as to how foreign countries should correct their deplorable human rights record but has done serious damage to the resources of the health care System in Canada and to the economy. In our declining health care system which was only capable of giving mediocre care to citizens even before the intake of thousands of immigrants, the loss of funding and manpower resulting from the present fiasco can only do more damage.
Let's hope the Liberal government puts their money where their mouths are and that Canadian health care is not going to accelerate its already rapid decline. This government will not even allow Canadians to spend their own money in quest of better health care, without leaving the country.
The government's first job is to look after the people who are paying their salaries.
Don't be afraid to comment. I won't tell anyone
The withdrawal of many postgraduates in medically related fields won't go without consequences. Students and residents play a much greater part in keeping the health care system running than most people realize. In addition, foreign governments pay the Canadian government substantial sums of money above and beyond what it costs to train their residents. We are not doing it out of the goodness of our hearts!
Canada, as well as Britain and the U.S. have a shameful history of scavenging second and third world countries for their badly needed newly qualified physicians, not because we need them, but because it is cheaper than training our own. In addition, they are much more easily controlled by the University hierarchy, because they have control over the licensure of Foreign Medical Graduates. Incidentally, even the term 'Foreign Medical Graduate' is deemed politically incorrect today. I can comment on this because I am one! Now the term is 'respectabilised' into INTERNATIONAL Medical Graduate. They vary in quality from excellent to dangerous and often are not very carefully screened before being given positions in our health care system..
Anyway the FMGs are at the mercy of the University, who can pull their license if they don't do as they are told! They are certainly much more easily manipulated than Canadian graduates. I was a medical educator for much of my life. I know!
For once our tweeting Foreign Minister got the message right as to how foreign countries should correct their deplorable human rights record but has done serious damage to the resources of the health care System in Canada and to the economy. In our declining health care system which was only capable of giving mediocre care to citizens even before the intake of thousands of immigrants, the loss of funding and manpower resulting from the present fiasco can only do more damage.
Let's hope the Liberal government puts their money where their mouths are and that Canadian health care is not going to accelerate its already rapid decline. This government will not even allow Canadians to spend their own money in quest of better health care, without leaving the country.
The government's first job is to look after the people who are paying their salaries.
Don't be afraid to comment. I won't tell anyone
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)