Take a photo of a barcode or cover
dmturner 's review for:
medium-paced
A rambunctious, sometimes choppy and one-sided analysis of the ways in which the medical profession and its governing bodies, in the search of consensus, engage in consensus and resist novel ideas. Makary takes on the ways in which medical group-think made things worse with peanut allergies, antibiotics, hormone replacement theory, cholesterol, childbirth, ovarian cancer, breast implants, and a host of other things including flu and COVID vaccines.
While I have witnessed the many ways in which medicine seizes on bad ideas and enforces them, often for decades, the arguments he made in this book did seem very black and white. I suspect Makary was often overstating his case and cherry-picking his evidence in the same way he criticizes in others. He presents himself as a gadfly and an opposition voice, which means that his opinions can lack nuance.
I also worry about the ways in which critique of medical consensus can fuel the vehemently anti-science movement, resulting in things such as lower vaccine rates and unfounded alternative medical health movements. During the height of the COVID emergency, for instance, Makaray was far too willing to go on the Fox Network, especially the Tucker Carlson show, which meant that his opposition to some aspects of COVID vaccination and to the CDC's flawed response made his viewpoint seem much less nuanced (he is neither a conservative nor an anti-vaccine advocate).
As the developer of the surgical checklist, he is rightly considered a major innovator in medicine, but I finished the book feeling skeptical of his super-skepticism.
While I have witnessed the many ways in which medicine seizes on bad ideas and enforces them, often for decades, the arguments he made in this book did seem very black and white. I suspect Makary was often overstating his case and cherry-picking his evidence in the same way he criticizes in others. He presents himself as a gadfly and an opposition voice, which means that his opinions can lack nuance.
I also worry about the ways in which critique of medical consensus can fuel the vehemently anti-science movement, resulting in things such as lower vaccine rates and unfounded alternative medical health movements. During the height of the COVID emergency, for instance, Makaray was far too willing to go on the Fox Network, especially the Tucker Carlson show, which meant that his opposition to some aspects of COVID vaccination and to the CDC's flawed response made his viewpoint seem much less nuanced (he is neither a conservative nor an anti-vaccine advocate).
As the developer of the surgical checklist, he is rightly considered a major innovator in medicine, but I finished the book feeling skeptical of his super-skepticism.