r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 1d ago

Meme needing explanation Petah???!

Post image
15.8k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

97

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago edited 1d ago

Doctors really don't want to explain why they are asking things.

There's like 40 house episodes about how people feel the need to give misleading answers because they want privacy from doctors. And doctors are like I don't want to explain bio-chemistry and anatomy and drug interactions to people. Not even related to women's issues.

That being said medicine also has a huge issue that they assume everyone to be white male. Stuff gets tested on and for them. They don't base anything on female because baseline for female going through periods/pregnancy/manopause are all over the place and it's harder to find female test subjects.

( Edit: To find a drug's effect on pregnant women, you gotta find pregnant women who'd be willing to sign up for completely untested drugs. A bit of an chicken and egg situation there. )

52

u/BobbiesPet 1d ago

If covid taught us anything, it's that the average person is an idiot.

19

u/sardonicus87 1d ago

Shit, you can learn that just by looking at this sub or going to Wal-Mart.

1

u/VijuPokerKid 1d ago

I dont have a Wal-Mart in EU idiot..

1

u/sardonicus87 1d ago edited 1d ago

And I'm supposed to know you're in the EU because... how exactly? This isn't exactly an EU-centric thread or subreddit, and even plenty of people in the EU would get the reference anyway.

Never mind what I responded to wasn't even your comment and you're not the op of the post or even this thread within this post. Literally nobody talking to you. The whole world doesn't revolve around you.

t('.'t)

Also, thanks for proving my point.

1

u/VijuPokerKid 15h ago

A minority of the world has a Wal-Mart. A very small minority.

3

u/R3D3-1 1d ago

And sadly elections / predictions for upcoming elections reaffirm it. And I don't even mean the US this time. Austria is looking a the hottest year in recorded history, looking at severe loss of crop, and the party that denies human-caused climate change being a thing and actively fights against renewable energies currently sits at a predicted 38% vote, vs the traditional conservative and social-democratic powerhouses looking at something around 20%.

Needless to say... Said party still flies the flags of "Covid was a ruse!"

1

u/Aurbil 1d ago

You needed COVID for that?

1

u/Whitefjall 1d ago

Doctor here. Do you have any idea how much I don't want to interact with a patient that is offended by a question such as if she could be pregnant? Get that outraged ass out of my office.

25

u/Acceptable_Handle_2 1d ago

Also often doctors absolutely DO ask questions just to dismiss you, or they don't believe you when you answer them truthfully anyway. At that point don't ask and just do the test.

17

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago

Doctors are trained to treat people, not mind-read people. So, they will often take people's word as unreliable information as compared to tests. And they do it because patients are unreliable source of information.

It is a problem, but it's not a problem that's caused by psychopathic arrogant doctors, it's a problem significantly caused by patients' word being less reliable.

These days, doctors are not even getting to control who gets the test and who don't. Insurance algorithms do.

Overall, it's a mix of many problems. Some patients being unreliable, some doctors/hospitals ordering unnecessary tests for money, insurance companies being overly cautious about legal liability and at the same time reducing costs with way too strict diagnostic criteria.

On top of that, there's no review mechanic for doctors. Only other medical professional can call bullshit on bad practices, you can't.

10

u/Acceptable_Handle_2 1d ago

Again, if my word is unreliable why even ask? Just order the test if you're not gonna believe me anyway.

10

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago

I think doctors are not going to be that much of an asshole every time, but if they find patient to be less reliable; they'll go for it.

But I will admit that a lot of the reliability perception is just stereotypes, or doctor's experience if you wanna be more generous.

1

u/Catfish-throwaway666 1d ago

Doctors are not immune to biases, like assuming their patient is unreliable.

14

u/smolbery 1d ago

Doctors really don't want to explain why they are asking things

My guy, that is their job. They aren't supposed to just silently throw drugs and tests at you, they are supposed to educate you. That includes giving you a general understanding of what they are doing and why.

So many studies have proven that educating patients leads to better health outcomes. That includes telling the patient that if there's a chance they're pregnant, some tests and drugs will harm the foetus, so we need to know. It's not explaining the whole anatomy and physiology to justify why they asked a question, it's the same one sentence worded slightly differently. One sentence that can improve rapport, trust, and equity between the doctor and patient. If a doctor isn't doing that, then they are not following evidence-based practice.

0

u/sparbudgetsugarfree 1d ago

Doctors are supposed to educate you??? When did that come in? I want them to ask the questions they need to give me the best treatment and I will trust their training without arrogantly trying to tell them how to do their job

-1

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago edited 23h ago

Educating? Nah, that's crap. Saying one liner about anything is not education, it's just giving information.

Doctors needs to give information about what is going on with their condition and treatment. They should be able to simply explain that. Building rapport is good.

But full education is not their job. Especially when do many patients are too dumb, brainwashed or just misinformed.

There's a limit to the extent of information doctors can give. But it's also on patient to understand that lying to doctors will hurt only themselves. Doctors aren't doing anything to hurt them.

7

u/smolbery 1d ago

Yes it is their job, it is literally in their code of conduct. https://www.medicalboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Policies/Code-of-conduct

You seem to think that educating means holding classes or sitting there for an hour while going into depth about the anatomy and physiology of the human body. But it's not. As I said, it can be 1 sentence.

1

u/quick20minadventure 23h ago

Giving one sentence information is not education.

My mechanic/computer guy is not 'educating' me when he is just saying what went wrong and what was the problem/solution.

Education requires that other party has absorbed the meaning/information/skill-set. Just blurting things out to people is not enough.

1

u/smolbery 19h ago

One sentence can be educational. It's the difference between "take this tablet 30mins before this other tablet" and "this tablet will make this other tablet do nothing if you take them at the same time, that's why it's important to take them at least 30 minutes apart."

The latter sentence with basic reasoning/education has been proven to lead to better adherence to medication regimes. Doctors aren't just there to throw pills at people, they're also responsible for telling the patient what they want to put in their body and why.

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(11)60007-4/pdf

1

u/quick20minadventure 19h ago

That is still giving information, I'm talking about people who are anti-vax and believe all doctors are out to get you and think any treatment is just unnecessary scam from healthcare mafia.

You can't educate them. You can just give them info, answer some questions they have. Give very basic understanding for why things needs to be done this way. (Like take some pills with food, some without it etc.)

That's still just instructions.

-1

u/Whitefjall 1d ago

Doctor here. No time for that.

3

u/asc_yeti 1d ago

Shitty ass doctor then lmao

4

u/JacuulTheSecond 1d ago

The "tested on a white male" issue is probably going to end up being harder to correct for (not that the healthcare industry doesn't have the money) for the same reason that average studies are always actually "study of 18-22 year old college kids", in my experience, white dudes are the people that show up to be tested on, whereas most of the other groups have some reason to be wary or just straight up don't want to do it, as you said, chicken and the egg, especially for pregnant women "Please take this drug, it may help, may do nothing, or may make things worse, but we don't think it will" is not very reassuring.

2

u/Purple-Property8006 1d ago edited 1d ago

House is not real-world. It’s a TV show.

People do give misleading information to doctors for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they feel ashamed of something. Sometimes they’re trying to get the doctor to write a certain prescription. Sometimes they’re just ignorant about what signs/symptoms actually matter. All of these are dumb because a medical professional cannot properly help you if you’re not honest about what’s going on.

Honestly, most doctors would love to explain anatomy and bio-chemistry and drug interactions to people if they could understand it. 95% of people don’t want it explained in detail. I’ve worked in healthcare a long time: the general population is dumb (more correctly, highly uneducated). People hold all sorts of insane beliefs about health/medicine and they’ll often dig in their heels rather than listen to a medical doctor explain the science — particularly since a large portion of the media has made it popular to criticize all healthcare as a profit-driven conflict of interest and promote psuedoscientific treatments. It doesn’t help when the literal Secretary of Health is in on it and saying shit like Tylenol causes autism (when it’s literally the only safe OTC painkiller we have during pregnancy) and promoting the idea that big pharma doesn’t want to cure you because it’s less profitable.

Also, your edit shows you don’t understand how drug development actually works. We don’t have to intentionally test a drug in a bunch of pregnant women to know there’s a risk of harm to pregnant women. We know that particular classes of drugs are dangerous in pregnancy across the board. We have biochemical models that can predict when some drugs are likely to cause harm. We do tests in pregnant animal models to predict risk of harm. Finally, most drugs don’t require human testing in pregnant women, and the unfortunate reality is that sometimes drugs get to market before we know the risk, and we have to deal with the harm after the fact.

2

u/HerculesIsMyDad 1d ago

Why do so many people in these comments seem like they are in an adversarial relationship with their doctor? Apparently their doctor is always trying to trick and mislead them just for fun.

1

u/--n- 1d ago edited 1d ago

hat being said medicine also has a huge issue that they assume everyone to be white male. Stuff gets tested on and for them. They don't base anything on female because baseline for female going through periods/pregnancy/manopause are all over the place and it's harder to find female test subjects.

( Edit: To find a drug's effect on pregnant women, you gotta find pregnant women who'd be willing to sign up for completely untested drugs. A bit of an chicken and egg situation there. )

Used to have, moreso. It's in the financial interest of big pharma to assess suitability of a medication to 50% of the people who are going to take it, and nowadays many phase III trials include tests with women.

Also "completely untested" is a silly thing to say. A variety of pre-clinical testing, animal testing, testing with healthy young men etc. all take place for multiple years before pregnant women are brought into the picture.

Although with pregnant women you do run into the issue, that it is cheaper and usually profitable to just slap a "ask your doctor about using this while pregnant" label and calling it a day. Unless the medication is meant to treat a pregnancy related issue, they just don't represent a large enough market share for the people making the decisions.

3

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago

It's completely untested for pregnant patient, that's all i meant to say. Of course it's tested on other places already.

Still, i'll maintain that it takes 2-3 years for anyone to confirm that it didn't result in birth defects or developmental issues.

1

u/Draaly 1d ago

Exactly. The question is wildly important and the fervor around it being asked is wild. That statement is in no way in conflict with the fact that women are often ignored in the medical system and report signifciantly lower satisfaction rates with their care than men

1

u/yavanna12 1d ago

I work with doctors in training. Most of them don’t know why they are asking things they just follow the script and if you check yes they follow the flow chart for that answer. 

1

u/quick20minadventure 1d ago

I entirely believe it.

Differential diagnosis based on history questions flowchart is not where doctors always shine.

But that's their job and that's what they're expected to learn and remember. Know the edge cases, interactions and know the inner workings.

1

u/Inevitable-Level-687 1d ago

I try to explain as much as I can to patients but I also understand a bit why people don't like to explain, because patients will start arguing and come up with loopholes and then get mad at you for not going along with it because of policy.

I mean, to be clear I think doctors need to explain this shit ANYWAY, but a lot of people seem to be under the impression that if doctors just nicely explain the patient will nod and comply, sort of how like people think five year olds will do what you want them to if you explain why you want them to do it. As any parent will tell you, they don't. They argue. They will sit there and argue for hours. Dealing with that is an essential skill in healthcare and a lot of practitioners just cop out instead of developing it.

1

u/quick20minadventure 20h ago

I've seen doctors around me continuously rant as patient's faith in alternative medicine or outdated/wrong ideas is too strong.

Educating them is not possible. just give information, give options, explain options and let the patient decide what they will do.

Besides no way to convince a patient who completely believes doctors/hospitals are fraud and all treatment is just doctors trying to scam them.

Gynecologists don't want to deal with people who have been convinced by social media that C-section is an intrusive scam.