No 82: Its Not My Cup of Tea… But...
Tldr
Some recent articles, books and authors that I find interesting, but who I have also found to be controversial when discussing with colleagues.
Recent MediCurious articles:
No 77 - The Art and Science of UK GP: A Historical Timeline
No 78 - A Timeline of General Practice and EBM: In Much More Detail
No- 79: Teaching Students How to Maximise the Impact of Their Academic Careers
Trump, Brexit, COVID, Climate Change, BLM, The Middle East…
The last few years have been heated. Friends have fallen out. Discussion between colleagues has become fraught. Some people have “followed” “the science” and some people have been “sceptical”.
Some people like to claim to be “evidence-based” but then completely adopt a “party-line”, on a range of what could be completed unconnected issues. If they told you one belief, then following the cliches on social media you would be able to predict all of their other strong opinions on recent matters.
This also seems to have happened in medicine. I am probably as guilty of some of the above as much as the next person, but … I would like to use this week’s post to argue for reading widely.
I am hoping the phrase “its not my cup of tea, but it was different/interesting/helpful,” might become more common.
I am going to recommend some of the following authors and their work because I genuinely think that some of their content is well written, educational and interesting. Even if you think you may disagree with some of their opinions, it may still be useful to read some of their work.
Malignant: How Bad Policy and Bad Evidence Harm People with Cancer by Dr Vinay Prasad
Controversy: Some people won’t like his approach to COVID policies.
Why this recommendation?
It is similar to Ben Goldacre’s Bad Pharma. It is a biting critique of the current oncology, regulation and pharma system. Dr Prasad talks you through how current oncology practice works. How they set up trials and how they measure real and proxy outcomes. How the FDA operates and how big Pharma bends the rules to the max to get their very expensive drugs to market with little additional patient benefit.
There is also an excellent chapter on how global research works, with its pros and cons. Some very good comparisons. The UK’s NICE gets a very positive mention, as it should.
Controversy: Some people will say he is too right wing and rights harshly about modern British culture
Why this recommendation?
As a doctor he has travelled and worked all over the globe. In the UK, he spent most of his career in slums and prisons. He really does have a wealth of experience and he writes about it in a beautifully hard-hitting way.
If you have ever wondered about working in these environments, with challenging patients, then you should read some of his books first. I am sure that I have learnt plenty about the “human condition” and maybe even a little medicine from his collection of short essays. Almost every essay will at least provoke an emotion or a curious thought.
I don’t know if quoting these on a medical school personal statement essay would guarantee and interview, but it would at least make you stand out.
(For context, I quote Aldous Huxley and James Le Fanu in my statement, and it was discussed at 3 out of 4 interviews).
Controversy: Some people won’t like their approach to COVID policies.
Why this recommendation?
I think blogs like this could be the future of medical education and publishing. They are effectively acting as new journals.
I have learnt from more EBM from reading these articles and paper critiques on a weekly basis then I ever learnt at medical school. If I am honest, I think the way these doctors write about medicine is far more engaging and easier to follow than most lectures I have ever had on EBM.
They also work quite hard to publish articles with a range of views and quite often have follow up articles that dispute the previous posts. I think this is a really good model for how to calm down debates and try to make them collegiate and useful again.
Controversy: Some people won’t like their approach to COVID policies.
Why this recommendation?
Similar to Sensible Medicine, these are two Professors of GP and EBM at Uni of Oxford in the UK, who regularly post short articles about data in medicine.
It is eclectic! It is far ranging, it is often technical and complicated. It is usually interesting, well written and thought provoking.
They are also trying to use EBM principles to hold people to a high standard. It is almost the medical equivalent of investigative journalism. They are currently digging into the proceedings of the COVID enquiry, into pharma documents and into the workings of the MHRA.
Even if you disagree with some of their conclusions, I believe that it is valuable to read their reasoning and see how they are analysing the data.
Conclusion
I try to write pieces for MediCurious that will be useful and/or thought provoking. I love reading widely and I love sharing what I find interesting. I hope you also find these authors interesting.
If anyone would like to suggest authors with differing views to the above then please do post them in the comments or contact me directly. Happy reading.