Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;333:396 (19 August), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7564.396
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORThe systematic review by Arroll and Kenealy shows the state of medicine today.1 Journals contain volumes on the mysticism of ethics, conditions affecting communities with underlying problems far greater than the scope of the article, and a knowledge base of big severe illnesses but little on the most basic medical conditions.
| |||||||||||
None of the articles quoted in the review gives any indication that the nose was ever examined. Was there any history of obvious causes of acute purulent rhinitis? Who is taught to examine a nose today? The article does not mention the conditions far more common than bacterial infection that cause acute discoloured secretions. There is no mention of the fact that discoloured secretion does not indicate infection: even eosinophils cause discoloration. The mention of the Cochrane analysis of chronic purulent rhinitis almost implies that there is a similarity to acute purulent rhinitis. And
Raymond Friedman, ear, nose, and throat surgeon
Johannesburg 2052, South Africa friedmanr@surgeon.co.za