Cleveland Clinic Doctors Note Form: Fill & Download for Free

Impossible to say.Morality isn’t objective. Whatever your values are, I promise you, I can find ones that you create through no shortage special pleading and no true Scotsman fallacies.There is no objective test that can give you the answers you like. It’s probably theoretically possible to find variances between the systems that result in things you might subjectively call “moral” and “immoral”. (Note: I hate the American system and I want universal healthcare.)It’s unlikely that on a per-doctor basis, you’ll find any significant variance between the clinicians (MDs, physicians, surgeons, nurse practitioners, etc.) who have the ability to prescribe and treat patients in the US and UK or Australia. We can make all kinds of arguments about the “morality” but that will bet between systems, of course, because the systems come with a lot of numbers that can be compared. Comparing things like “deaths during treatment” with doctors is a fool’s bet because some doctors operate on high risk patients while others do not.Each of us is stuck inside a vast array of machines that restrict us. We may have choice (i.e., just like I can choose to climb a bell tower and start shooting), but the fact is, none of us has as much choice as some claim and none of us can change the machine very much from inside it. American doctors are busy trying to save lives the way doctors are busy trying to save lives in the UK or Australia or Japan. It’s just that our system is largely a failing of politics, not medicine.If you are broke, don’t come here for treatment. If you are rich? You can probably get the same “mainstream care” anywhere on Earth.An appendectomy in Santa Casa de São Paulo Hospital or the Johns Hopkins Hospital is going to be about the same (two of each nations’ best hospitals).A heart transplant in Sakakibara Heart Institute or the Cleveland Clinic (each country’s best heart hospital) is going to get you largely the same results.If you are rich and you have an extremely rare or highly aggressive disease, then this is when you come to the US (acknowledging that rankings amongst the top dozen or so are dubious):Cancer & Endocrinology to the Mayo ClinicHeart to the Cleveland ClinicNeuro to Johns HopkinsBut that doesn’t necessarily mean that the doctors are individually better or more mature or more ethical. Our system has a lot of problems but it’s better than its detractors give it credit for (because, when have idealists EVER tempered their histrionics). Within that system, are physicians who are as trapped as the patients are, by the complex nature and byzantine regulations that make our system such a cluster fuck. That problem is political and not some perfidy on the part of the medical community.

The USA has some world beater facilities and anyone would be a fool to deny it. However, so do many other countries.But the hospital my family gets its care in is ranked 7th in the world and close to #1 for transplants. It is also, probably easier for a Canadian to get treated there than an American getting intp the Mayo or Cleveland clinics.Our family doctor did his residency in Chicago and noted frequently that we were very very lucky about the quality of our hospitals in Toronto compared to where he trained.

Oh, and how could this possibly go wrong?So, by “more accurate “ you mean like the relatively small “crowd sourced” answers to medical questions on Quora? Like the answers from some non-medical Quorans agreeing that “head transplants” are possible? In your question you did not specify that your crowd-sourced medical advice would be from licensed medical physicians only.And since you’re not going to have the background to sort out the reasonable answers from the ludicrous ones, how will you choose which advice to follow?And even if you limit input to medical physicians only (a good idea IMO) what if all the opinions don’t agree? Do you go with the diagnosis and treatment plan with the most votes? What if it’s a tie? Do you think physicians always agree on diagnoses and treatment plans?Plus the fact that the medical professionals on Quora who do know what they are talking about, always (IME) add a disclaimer saying that their answer is not to be taken as medical advice. Why do you think they all add that disclaimer? It is because, as many answers noted, trying to make a diagnosis or a differential without an exam and necessary testing is like trying to hit a deer with an arrow while blindfolded.And if you do limit your crowd sourcing to medical physicians, or even narrow it down more to physicians who are specialists in what you think is the area of the problem (let’s say you think it’s an autoimmune disease) how do you know that the rheumatologists you ask will even agree with you that that is the nature of the problem?And if you solicit opinions from 15 or 20 physicians, how will you pay them all? Do you think a lot of physicians will be going onto your site for free during their free time to offer medical opinions?And if a situation turns out badly, are you going to indemnify them, or hold them harmless from malpractice lawsuits?I could go on and on. The problems with this idea are too numerous to list them all.Where this mostly works, is in group practices like Mayo and the Cleveland Clinic and large academic practices. Even then, the consultation is usually with a few other physicians in the department, or with one physician from another specialty. Not the whole department, and not every physician in the clinic. They sure don’t go on the internet and ask for input.And yes, there are online teaching sites that present a case study, and ask physicians to choose diagnoses and testing strategies. You know how often there is unanimity in the answers? I’ve never seen it happen even once.I think this concept requires more thought.