Print

Print
Dear Juan,
I have learnt a lot from this list about how to practice and teach EBH including aspects of the EBH movement (such as is Cochrane still fit for purpose?) and ethics. I have read with great interest many of the links you have provided. But there is a difference between discussing the practice and teaching of EBH, which inevitably will include the evidence for topics from real world examples, and FOCUSING on specific topics. I believe it is the latter that Douglas Badenoch refers to.
Looking at Anoop’s example below, his linked article raises questions about EBH practice: how are guidelines developed, who should develop them, how do they fit in with public health policies? At the end, he does raise doubts about a specific topic but that is only PART of the message,
In contrast, your recent post differentiating between seat belts and vaccines FOCUSED ON a specific topic.
I write this to clarify the boundary not to get into an argument. I am sure that at times others have strayed over the boundary and previous list owners may not have picked them up. But that was then and this is now. 
Kev

On 20 Nov 2019, at 22:39, Juan Gérvas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

-just one example (there are many), without any comment by Douglas (Badenoch), 2 Oct 2019
-in this case, is it no appropiate to writte? "I just want to gauge the views of the list here.  EBH is intended to
provide a forum for discussion of the teaching, practice and implementation of Evidence-Based Health, and not for debate of the evidence in specific clinical topics. Juan is an active contributor to this list, but I wonder if this type of post is getting us off-topic".
-it is not a specific clinical topic?


This list is for discussion of teaching, practice and implementation EBH. Evidence based health (EBH) is the integration of individual knowledge with the best available external evidence from systematic research in making decisions about health care. This list is for teachers and practitioners in EBHC to communicate with colleagues, announce meetings and courses, stimulate discussion, air controversies and aid the implementation of EBH. If you have a query about evidence concerning a specific clinical topic , please be aware that this is not the focus of this list, and you should look elsewhere first. If you do post a request to EBH, please include with your post a statement showing where you have already looked and what you have found. It is considered good manners to offer to repost a summary of what you find afterwards as well. Other general principles of netiquette apply to the list, particularly: i) Please be polite and respectful in your use of language ii) Please don't post attachments to the list.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
De: Anoop Balachandran <[log in to unmask]>
Date: mié., 2 oct. 2019 a las 2:54
Subject: Red Meat & Health Outcomes
To: <[log in to unmask]>


I hope most people now read about this: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-low-quality-evidence-controversy-wellness/index.html

Any comments or concerns?

What I am really happy for is that it again shows why is it is important to asses the quality of evidence AND integrate into your conclusions and recommendations. Something which many articles rarely do - even now. In fact, what EBM has been advocating for years!

The natural question is is the evidence for vegetables, fruits and fiber and trans fat also overblown?

Anoop

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1

To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1



To unsubscribe from the EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH&A=1