Sadly your stance shows a lack of understanding of how medicine works. Trends often follow dogma and fashions, rather than evidence, particularly in surgery, and it can sometimes take a decade or two for the truth to become obvious.
Also it's scientifically nonsensical - if something has not been proven then it hasn't been proven, you don…
Sadly your stance shows a lack of understanding of how medicine works. Trends often follow dogma and fashions, rather than evidence, particularly in surgery, and it can sometimes take a decade or two for the truth to become obvious.
Also it's scientifically nonsensical - if something has not been proven then it hasn't been proven, you don't have to prove a negative to be able to justifiably state the case for something is unproven!!
Perhaps you should stand down until you've actually understood the argument - I am not saying they are definitely wrong, I am saying the case for the rising rate of hamstring surgery has not been proven and this is clearly the case, as the evidence cited by experts supporting this stance is low quality and flimsy. They may be right, however they may be wrong, what is clear, is that we don't know and their case is unproven.
If you don't have high quality evidence with a comparator then you simply don't know if your intervention is effective, and if history has taught us anything in surgery in particular, it is that trends in practice are not necessarily correct. Many new interventions don't work.
You don’t need to be an expert in sports medicine to understand that if Arsenal were actively damaging their star athletes with unnecessary surgery… we’d find out quicker than a decade.
Sadly your stance shows a lack of understanding of how medicine works. Trends often follow dogma and fashions, rather than evidence, particularly in surgery, and it can sometimes take a decade or two for the truth to become obvious.
Also it's scientifically nonsensical - if something has not been proven then it hasn't been proven, you don't have to prove a negative to be able to justifiably state the case for something is unproven!!
Perhaps you should stand down until you've actually understood the argument - I am not saying they are definitely wrong, I am saying the case for the rising rate of hamstring surgery has not been proven and this is clearly the case, as the evidence cited by experts supporting this stance is low quality and flimsy. They may be right, however they may be wrong, what is clear, is that we don't know and their case is unproven.
If you don't have high quality evidence with a comparator then you simply don't know if your intervention is effective, and if history has taught us anything in surgery in particular, it is that trends in practice are not necessarily correct. Many new interventions don't work.
You don’t need to be an expert in sports medicine to understand that if Arsenal were actively damaging their star athletes with unnecessary surgery… we’d find out quicker than a decade.