corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 16268

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Haug C.
The risks and benefits of HPV vaccination.
JAMA 2009 Aug 19; 302:(7):795-6


Abstract:

WHEN DO PHYSICIANS KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THEnbeneficial effects of a new medical interventionnto start recommending or using it? Whennis the available information about harmful adverseneffects sufficient to conclude that the risks outweighnthe potential benefits? If in doubt, should physicians err onnthe side of caution or on the side of hope? These questionsnare at the core of all medical decision making. It is a complicatednprocess because medical knowledge is typically incompletenand ambiguous. It is especially complex to makendecisions about whether to use drugs that may prevent diseasenin the future, particularly when these drugs are givennto otherwise healthy individuals. Vaccines are examples ofnsuch drugs, and the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinenis a case in point.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963