If you think about your relationship with doctors, I am sure, will be surprised to discover how greatly they differ from relations with other representatives of the service sector.
Typical relationship between a doctor and a patient expresses the word "regulation". Doctors give their clients prescriptions, attorneys, accountants and other professionals — tips.
When a child is brought to the pediatric office, a doctor conducts an examination (often superficial), writes out directions to x-rays and tests, makes a diagnosis, prescribes treatment (usually drug), sometimes hospitalitynet.
All this he does with little explanation and almost always, without the approval of the parents.
Warn the doctor about the risks and possible side effects of the treatment, and often forgets to inform about the cost of services.
He is confident that the bill will be paid, even if the diagnosis is incorrect, treatment will not work and the child will not recover. That is, for any actions the doctors are responsible to the customers the minimum liability.
Of course, in the power of physicians are all Americans, and parents — especially since fear for the lives of their largely not protected children makes them particularly vulnerable.
Children are constantly accompanied by the risk of becoming an easy victim of "treatment", often painful and debilitating.
After all, medical faculties taught to suppress a response to human suffering, not to emphasize the pain inflicted, and not to worry about the potential harm of prescribing.
Among physicians, pediatricians, I think, the most dangerous, because, at first glance, the most innocent.
In public consciousness the pediatrician appears to be a smiling good uncle, giving the kids a sweet medicine and a pill in the form of candy.
Moreover, children's doctors don't know why it is not accepted to criticize it, in contrast to, say, gynecologists and surgeons, which the public used to be considered greedy and unfeeling.
Why pediatricians threat?
The credibility of the pediatricians, in my experience, undeserved and difficult to discover in Pediatrics a real threat to the health and even the life of a child.
To name only a few reasons that give me the right to believe that children's doctors are far from harmless, and then the most significant of them will consider in more detail.
Pediatricians provide medicine patients. They form in people since their birth is a life — long dependence on her.
Unwanted healthy children frequent "preventive" check-UPS and vaccinations are replaced with age yearly "Wellness" examinations and endless treatment of minor ailments that, if left alone, resolve themselves.
From pediatricians less likely to expect information on the potential side effects of treatment.
Who ever told the parents about the proven connection of the use of infant formula, raising the level of lead in the blood and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)?
Or voluntarily, without pressure from the media, informed about the risk of epilepsy and mental retardation associated with vaccinations?
Or explained that antibiotics should be used for health reasons; they are permissible only in the case when there is no other way; that the frequent and indiscriminate use leads to adverse consequences in the future?
Pediatricians who constantly prescribing children potent means told that the pill is a panacea.
The child with the first years of life is belief that there is a cure for any disease, and that tablets and medicines that can be "treated" even simple human emotions — disappointment, excitement, despair, depression, uncertainty and many others.
Children's doctors are directly responsible for the development of dependence on drugs to millions of people and indirectly responsible for the handling of illegal drugs millions of unfortunate.
It is they who have convinced them that the chemicals save you from a lot, including psychological and emotional problems.
Pediatrics is one of the lowest-paid medical specialties, so the pediatrician for a living tend to spend more and more medical procedures.
They are more likely than other doctors will send patients for unnecessary tests and x-rays.
Their patients in this case are at risk twice: first, from the wrongly assigned tests and radiation, and, secondly, from unnecessary treatment. Because too often the research results are incorrect, and clinical data doctors neglect.
Pediatricians are so used to the fact that their patients are healthy, that are often not able to recognize among them patients.
This is the conclusion I made, participating as an expert witness in numerous court proceedings regarding the criminal negligence of children's doctors. When examining children's pediatricians were ignored obvious symptoms of life-threatening diseases.
One of the outstanding examples of this lack of pediatricians is meningitis, because nowadays it is uncommon in Pediatrics.
Once the meningitis was in 95 percent of cases fatal, he is now in 95 percent of cases can be cured, but only when the doctor recognizes the symptoms and diagnose on time.
This is a dangerous disease learn to diagnose in the learning process in residency, and is one of the few really useful things, just learning. But important knowledge is often forgotten after years of inspections of an endless string of healthy children.
Worse still, the pediatricians are so accustomed to treat healthy children that even if they correctly diagnose patients, they may not remember the right treatment.
To have an income, pediatricians tend to see more patients, which means that they reduce the time of their admission. As every doctor knows, the accuracy of diagnosis is 85 percent dependent on properly collected history, 10 percent from the quality of the inspection and only 5 percent from the results laboratory and clinical tests and studies.
To gather a complete medical history and thoroughly examine the patient, requires at least half an hour, and the successor medical usually lasts about ten minutes. That's where the template and reflex diagnoses, which replaces the habit of his mind.
Of all professionals-doctors, pediatricians most likely to multiply their incomes by lobbying laws, forcing to use their services.
It is they, not politicians, responsible for making decisions about the compulsory appointment of a newborn eye drops with antibiotics or silver nitrate; about medical examinations of pupils, providing a wide range of possibilities for the diagnosis of conditions, diseases are not; on the hospitalization of women in childbirth; on the right by a court decision to treat children with questionable and unproven methods against the will of their parents.
Offering pediatricians dangerous to apply because, if the parents refuse the recommended treatment, the child may be placed under the guardianship of the state. In recent years, I have to testify in defense of parents on many trials of this kind.
Pediatricians are the main enemies of breastfeeding, despite overwhelming evidence that it is one of the most effective ways to ensure child health in the future.
The efforts of the Dairy League to resist the influence of the manufacturers of mixtures of pediatricians tangible results have not given: many of the doctors still do not support breastfeeding or actively oppose it.
I will not go into the reasons for this, I will notice only that Pediatrics in the United States of America is developing to a great extent, thanks to financial support from manufacturers of infant formula. They have long been used by pediatricians as free sales agents.
With the tacit approval of pediatricians happen obstetric interventions in the birth process, the crippling of children physically and mentally.
Pediatricians notice received during childbirth disorders and disorders, but help to cover their perpetrators.
If parents of children with birth injuries ask the pediatrician a question about the fault of the midwives, then the answer prepared since my residency the phrase: "don't look back, focus on the future."
Threat obstetric procedures that cause children to mental retardation, learning problems, physical defects, could disappear for a few years, if pediatricians were more compassionate and they have the courage to say publicly about the responsibility of midwives.
All these facts testify to the dangerous consequences of the activities of U.S. pediatricians. But the myth that American children's health care the best in the world (pediatricians, then we have more!), continues to exist. Is it all good really?
Statistics of infant mortality in the U.S. shows that children are less healthy than children from countries where pediatricians less. And even children in some underdeveloped countries healthier than American.
It is likely that the cause of many of our problems in the health of children is what pediatricians have too many.
Access to health care determines the health of the nation. This statement is the doctrine of health of the United States, shared by the doctors and politicians whom they managed to persuade to his side without any arguments.
Meanwhile, there is evidence, convincing to the contrary.
I feel good just the availability of emergency medical care.
The availability of everyday medical intervention is often evil.
We had the opportunity to see this in the examples of strikes of doctors in California, the canadian province of Saskatchewan, in Israel: as soon as the doctors declare a major strike — the death rate falls!
The key to health: avoid doctors!
The best way to raise a child healthy is to keep him away from doctors except for accidents requiring emergency care and serious illnesses.
Noticed at the child symptoms of illness is not a reason for a visit to the doctor. Just reinforce the baby, and the help of a doctor need only when you realize that the disease is severe.
Most doctors rely only on medicine and ignore the fact that the human body is a unique system with remarkable ability to self-regulation.
At a reception at the pediatrician about the exceptional capabilities of the organism, the more likely you will never hear, but will witness the unnecessary and often dangerous interference with the natural protection of the child.
If I've convinced you not to rely on pediatricians and you will follow my advice to avoid them when it's reasonable, you have to learn to get around spaced Pediatrics traps.
The first of them — the so-called preventive examinations, doctors beloved ritual that increases their income and do not bring the child any good.
The danger of such inspections is formed in student's years the ability of doctors to find disease where there is none. Diagnoses, by itself, lead to treatment which can make a child sick.
As I said, should apply only when the child is really sick.
If the pediatrician will invite you on monthly or lesser regularity of checkups, ask, what, in his opinion, is their necessity. Ask if he knows about any objective research indicating the positive impact of such inspections on the health of the child.
I'm not familiar with those and I don't think your doctor will say something intelligible.
Trade unions pediatricians really want to the need of preventive examinations, which the doctors like to refer to, was confirmed by long-term controlled studies. And although the unions of physicians have insisted on performing such studies, they carried out a little bit.
Three of them, which I have read, did not support the needs of clinicians on regular visits to them healthy patients.
Were considered individually, the parameters such as General health, behavior, learning ability and development status. According to published in the journal "Pediatrics" report, none of the studies have not proved a positive effect of preventive examinations.
And if evidence that preventive examinations improve the health of the child, no, I suggest to avoid them because of the risk of unnecessary treatment and save time and money.
Over the years pediatric practices won't remember to this inspection found the condition that it would be impossible to identify with careful history taking during the first visit to doctor or symptoms subsequently. We'll talk later in more detail.
Preventive examinations of healthy children senseless because they are superficial, and they are because doctors at heart and do not see the sense in them.
According to a Pittsburgh study, the pediatrician spends on the examination of the child, on average a little more than ten minutes, and recommendations to parents it takes on average fifty-two seconds. Similar results were obtained by similar studies in new York, Baltimore, Seattle, Los Angeles and Rochester, new York).
No doctor is unable to diagnose the disease in the absence of symptoms for ten minutes and give practical advice for fifty-two seconds. If my child got an appointment with the pediatrician who says otherwise, I wouldn't have given the doctor a chance to even try to do so.
At each visit the child's doctor inevitably subjected to the measurement of height and weight.
Usually it holds a physician assistant or a nurse. This part of the ritual, invented modern medicine in order to once again emphasize that the money for routine patients pay not in vain.
Young parents are nervous, watching as the nurse is trying to put on the scales of their kicking baby. Sometimes when measuring the growth of the child parents are asked to hold his legs.
Mother and father sigh with relief, when it appeared finally, the pediatrician, comparing the results obtained with the table, announces that the baby is developing normally, or stress more upon hearing that the child is too large or too small.
The doctor has not mentioned that the ritual which the parents have just become devoid of any meaning. Parents do not know that growth charts–weight in the hands of a pediatrician is composed by one of the manufacturers of infant formulas and baby is delivered in physician offices free of charge.
The question arises: why the producers of compounds need to child is weighed?
It's very simple: as the weight of infants is often not the same as "normal" in the table from manufacturers of baby food, it is assumed that the pediatrician instead of to reassure frightened parents and explain to them that the reason for the alarm not advise you to stop breastfeeding and put the baby on formula.
And the reminder of them the doctor always at hand. Too often, the weighing of the child ends with these recommendations. As a result, the child is deprived of immune support and other benefits of breastfeeding.
Doctors use tables of height and weight for patients of all ages at least a century. The most popular table of the insurance company "Metropolitan", made for adults and older children.
Its last edition dates to 1959. Comparing after weighing the child indicators, the pediatrician declares them "abnormal" or "normal" by introducing parents astray.
After all, his conclusion in relation to a particular patient is not based on real and alleged statistics.
Why weight chart and growth misleading?
Conclusion on the basis of tables of weight and height are wrong, as they are compiled on the basis of averages of groups of children without taking into account living conditions, race, genetic data of the particular child.
The doctor concludes that the child is fat or thin, high or low, if the rates of weight and height deviate from the "norm". Moreover, it is taken from this treatment.
How here not to remember the principle of some lawyers to "sow doubts in the minds of customers who then had to allow a considerable benefit for themselves"!
Exactly what happens when a deviation from a "normal" table value becomes the reason for the treatment.
The definition of "norms" tables of mean values of height and weight unscientific in principle, especially if to take into account that they are incorrect.
So, some doctors have observed that specified in the table of the company "metro" perfect weight adult 10-20 percent less than they should. In the medical community even broke out on this occasion, a debate, and "underground", most likely, will be forced to revise the indicators.
But will they be to other doctors? Whatever the outcome of this story, there is no doubt that pediatricians, in their General mass, will not pay her any attention and will continue to apply approved the opinion of the majority of the standards with such thoroughness, if they are given a commandment from above.
As studies have shown, the standard table of height and weight for children (currently used a few) have even less sense than the tables for adults.
They, in particular, are not applicable to black children because it is based on measurements of children of the white race, with differences in characteristics. They do not take into account genetic factors of child development: for example, the growth of the parents does not matter.
But more my concern is that doctors use the table to determine the rate of weight gain of infants.
How can you determine the normal weight for children who consume mother's milk, if it does not exist?
The development of "infants" is different from the development of iskusstvennomu", and nothing abnormal in this. It's even good.
We have no evidence that God made a mistake, filling the mother's breast milk, and not a mix for artificial feeding.
Although many pediatricians, it seems, don't think so. If the weight of "babies" is not up to tabular figures, they insist on feeding mixtures. And it is harmful to all children without exception. On this I would like to talk too much.
Meanwhile, let me emphasize that I think breastfeeding is a necessary condition for the health of children not only in infancy.
Standard table growth, operated by children's doctors, constitute a sample — and American medicine is rich in examples of the predominance of quantitative over qualitative nonsense common sense.
Do not fall for the arguments of the doctor, when he will convince you that your child's growth allegedly does not correspond to any kind of "standards" and "norms".
Remember that these "rules" were derived arbitrarily, many years ago, and people who don't see the difference between "babies" and "iskusstvennye", but often compare apples to oranges.
Normal growth of child breastfeeding, the pediatrician absolutely nothing knows.
Saying that the baby is growing slowly, it introduces parents astray. If the growth slowdown is only a symptom of "illness", do not put the baby on formula milk. Note that the doctor drew his conclusion from a meaningless table!
I know it's hard to accept the fact of the absurdity of the use of tables of height and weight in medical diagnostics, because without them none of the doctor's appointment.
I assure you I am not alone in the opinion that these tables more harm than good. This view is shared by many colleagues, liberated from blind faith in everything they had previously taught, and objectively evaluating the results of their practices.
I gave to a question about "standards" for weight and height so much attention because I want to have it as a warning about the danger of actions of pediatricians. And convincing examples I cite when I talk about specific diseases.
If a pediatrician willing to treat the child based on the wrong tables, it is easy to imagine what intervention it can be resolved by discovering the symptoms of this disease. After all, he has to keep up his reputation as a good doctor!
The damage from the proverbial table, usually limited to the contents of the wallet and peace of mind of parents, but recently they began to use to the detriment of much more. I can not say about new dangers, albeit briefly.
I mean the frequent cases of use of estrogen and other hormones to change the children's growth, which on the basis of tabular data, physicians were considered to be too high or too low.
About the potential harm of stimulating or retarding growth hormones, very little is known and nothing is known about the long-term effects of treatment them.
In medical journals in recent years about the use of estrogen to prevent excessive growth of the girls wrote a lot.
In one of the articles about the safety of such treatment covertly noted the risk of the following side effects: morning sickness, night pain, thrombophlebitis, urticaria, obesity, high blood pressure, menstrual irregularities, suppression of the pituitary, migraine, diabetes, gall stones, atherosclerosis, breast cancer and genital tract, infertility.
It was indicated that a relatively small number of girls was the therapy long enough to have time to pass the latent period neoplasia (the formation of malignant tumors).
How many doctors recommending this treatment children told their parents about their side effects?
How many parents would allow doctors to monitor the growth of the child these drugs if in advance to know about their risk?
The risk of being exposed to serious danger during routine medical procedures is neither remote nor insignificant.
That is why you should take the child's health into your own hands.
from the book ©Robert S. Mendelsohn, "How to raise a healthy child in spite of doctors."