Iain Kewley wrote:
>
> Graham,
>
> I wasn't trying to prove the case for under diagnosis or disprove it - I
> merely showed the references which might be relevant.
>
> Whilst it is always attractive to dismiss evidence from other countries, I
> think most people would argue that it is erroneous to do so. Are you really
> suggesting that we dismiss all research from elsewhere - as has been
> already suggested that would mean we would have to ignore the majority of
> work done. On what evidence do you make the exclusion?
>
>
Iain
I am simply saying that in the UK many patients are wrongly given a
positive diagnosis, hardly a contentious point (save in this group
perhaps when given by a lawyer!). It has been pointed out to me, and I
am quite prepared to accept it, that in the UK many are wrongly given a
negative diagnosis, and that this phenomenon is to such an extent that
it is an issue of public health concern itself. Quite what is the
success rate of diagnosis in other countries is surely not relevant. No
matter how succesful or unsuccesful they are doesn't change a jot the
position in the UK. In any event one would expect differences between
countries since the impact of primary care will differ, with the
differences of coverage, funding , access, as also will cultural
factors such as the levels of individual self-reliance, etc.
Graham
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|