Re: Physicians’ political preferences and the delivery of end of life care in the United States: retrospective observational study
This is an unusual paper if not a bit contrived. The lead author hails from Harvard possibly a "top medical school" and probably therefore Democrat. The other 7 co-authors are from "top schools" also and probably Democrats. The paper is published in UK ...why not USA? The Republicans are characterised as old school (not top medical schools) greying and among top earners. The Democrats are young bright (from top schools) and female (mostly). This is according to the data they harvested from their previous physician political affiliation paper. Whether this is true fair and real is debatable. Depends really on who is writing or spinning it. The biggest bias in this present publication is the political affiliation of the authors. Why don't they state it clearly because it does matter. Have they declared their political contributions or are they non affiliated?The second question is why did they write this paper - what did they want to show or expect to find?
End of life care is more related to patient and family desires and availability of local resources - be it hospice or intensive care or Liverpool Care Pathway type scenarios (at last finally deleted from the UK end of life menu). It is also more closely related to world views such as belief in God, affiliation and practice of a religion, and also financial affordability. The fact that most people in the West spend the bulk of their medical expenses in the last year of their lives means that they are buying everything available to prolong or palliate or sustain their lives at its last stages. This is a societal trend at present, and political affiliation not being a fundamental world view or religion (yet at least) is unlikely to influence it significantly.
Why would someone want to attribute a type of medical behaviour to a particular political affiliation? Most countries have a medical code of ethics which forms their core medical code and practice, and far outweighs any influence politics has. Politicising medicine has happened in the last century with dire consequences for the profession. We unfortunately now see it in Eastern Gupta where political regimes target medical clinics and personnel and hospitals in a special way. Medicine should not be dragged into party political conflicts and the divisive separation of physicians into their political silos.
Rapid Response:
Re: Physicians’ political preferences and the delivery of end of life care in the United States: retrospective observational study
This is an unusual paper if not a bit contrived. The lead author hails from Harvard possibly a "top medical school" and probably therefore Democrat. The other 7 co-authors are from "top schools" also and probably Democrats. The paper is published in UK ...why not USA? The Republicans are characterised as old school (not top medical schools) greying and among top earners. The Democrats are young bright (from top schools) and female (mostly). This is according to the data they harvested from their previous physician political affiliation paper. Whether this is true fair and real is debatable. Depends really on who is writing or spinning it. The biggest bias in this present publication is the political affiliation of the authors. Why don't they state it clearly because it does matter. Have they declared their political contributions or are they non affiliated?The second question is why did they write this paper - what did they want to show or expect to find?
End of life care is more related to patient and family desires and availability of local resources - be it hospice or intensive care or Liverpool Care Pathway type scenarios (at last finally deleted from the UK end of life menu). It is also more closely related to world views such as belief in God, affiliation and practice of a religion, and also financial affordability. The fact that most people in the West spend the bulk of their medical expenses in the last year of their lives means that they are buying everything available to prolong or palliate or sustain their lives at its last stages. This is a societal trend at present, and political affiliation not being a fundamental world view or religion (yet at least) is unlikely to influence it significantly.
Why would someone want to attribute a type of medical behaviour to a particular political affiliation? Most countries have a medical code of ethics which forms their core medical code and practice, and far outweighs any influence politics has. Politicising medicine has happened in the last century with dire consequences for the profession. We unfortunately now see it in Eastern Gupta where political regimes target medical clinics and personnel and hospitals in a special way. Medicine should not be dragged into party political conflicts and the divisive separation of physicians into their political silos.
Competing interests: No competing interests