-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Medical ethics?
Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
And you think this is evidence that we're in the wrong?
Tell me...how much do you know about statistics? I ride a motorcycle. I know that this is risky behavior, and know the statistics. If I ever have kids, I'll probably stop riding until they grow up. Is this just paranoia? Or good judgment?
Another example: if practically all my relatives were alcoholic, is it "paranoia" for me to abstain from alcohol, fearing a weakness for the stuff?
The entire point of this thread is that you do not...the woman we're discussing drastically REDUCED her chances of getting breast cancer, jumping straight from a very high percentile to a very low percentile in one fell swoop. There were costs to this jump, but she was aware of them. And yet somehow this is unethical.
I wonder sometimes if what we're debating is the difference between "I certainly wouldn't choose that path if I were in that situation" and "I wouldn't choose that path, and therefore anyone who does is morally wrong."
ManyBeers
Platinum Member
I didn't say anything was evidence of being wrong
I have owned four motorcycles in my day 2 dirt 2 street.
Maybe overly cautious. Maybe be more selective about when and where you choose to ride
Yes you are. Your families past drinking habits have no affect on yours. You're welcome to believe it does though.
Drastically reduced huh.
1. Not all breast cancer is detectable with screening mammograms.
2. Mammograms carry a small, but appreciable, risk of causing breast cancer. In the normal population, who only start getting 2 or 3 yearly mammograms aged 50 and over, this risk is pretty small. But someone who starts getting annual mammograms aged 40, this risk is substantially increased.
3. Women with these high risk genes have a significant risk of developing cancer before they are 40. Regular mammograms are not recommended in women aged under 40.
While regular surveillance with mammograms is a perfectly acceptable option - it is a considerably higher risk option than early prophylactic mastectomies. Careful discussion of these issues is necessary in such circumstances.
As much as I do believe in personal responsibility for one's actions, the facts of the matter is that all else being equal, including willpower, people with a genetic weakness for alcohol will have a much harder time drinking in moderation, and a much harder time quitting. As such, if you have a family history of alcoholism, it's a good idea to just never start in the first place. You really don't think that genetics have anything to do with behavior? People with higher testosterone levels aren't more aggressive? People with nothing but fat relatives aren't more likely to be fat? The scrawny short kid with glasses could be an Olympic boxer if he wasn't so lazy?
Family history isn't deterministic, but to say it has "no effect" is laughably absurd.
You're welcome to believe in the curative power of mercury and arsenic, but if there are crushing mountains of evidence against it, that DOES render your beliefs weaker than those who at least have something to back up what they are saying.
zinfamous
No Lifer
a hysterectomy for birth control? that is preposterous. ....are you suggesting that someone having their uterus removed is a viable, and ethical approach to birth control?
this is one of, if not the, riskiest surgeries that is performed. Blood loss is astounding.
this is even more preposterous than having breasts removed on a healthy woman to prevent a possible occurence of cancer.
ManyBeers
Platinum Member
If you want to blame your relatives for your behavioral problems that is fine, however it really isn't analogous to a discussion about the ethics of radical mastectomies in preventing breast cancer. Breast cancer is not a behavioral disorder. You can't take the cancer and not put it in your mouth like a cigarete or a glass of beer or a donut.
MotionMan
Lifer
Dr. Dean Edell is one.
BTW, I am not against circumcision (mostly for religious\cultural reasons. My son was circumcised). I was just pointing out that the anti-circumcision crowd has got bigger and/or louder in the last few years.
MotionMan
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
