September

In the June 2008 issue, an error was introduced into Drs Dehghani and Ludemann’s article “Aspirated foreign bodies in children: BC Children’s Hospital emergency room protocol” (BCMJ 2008;50:252-256). 

On pages 255–256, mention is made of three conditions (upper airway obstruction, bilateral foreign body aspiration, and clinically unstable children) under which bronchoscopy should not be considered. These conditions preclude the use of the BC Children’s Hospital Aspirated Foreign Body Protocol but are not contraindications to broncho­scopy in children. 

In his defence of homeopathy, Dr Malthouse lists a number of publications that have drawn favorable conclusions and asserts that the positive evidence “goes on and on.” In a sense, I agree. There truly is a huge amount of material that promotes homeopathy. But observers seeking objective proof will not be satisfied by poorly conducted research or even meta-analyses where low-quality trials rife with errors are lumped together to give a gloss of scientific credibility where none has been earned.

References

I thought my letter-writing days were over, but the headline “BC’s caesarean birth rate highest in country” (Vancouver Sun, 31 May 2007, p. A6) has driven me once more to the breach (no pun intended).

When I began practice at the old Grace Hospital almost 50 years ago (gasp!), the C-section rate threatened to exceed 5%. Accordingly, a portion of every monthly hospital meeting was dedicated to a critical review by the staff of all first sections. This seemed to keep the rate in check. 

I would like to comment on Dr Oppel’s article, “Reality check needed for CME credits” (BCMJ 2007;49[3]:109-110), which cites my conference lectures on homeopathy as inappropriate CME accreditation on two occasions. According to Microsoft’s Bill Gates, “a decline in science skills will cause North America to lose its innovative and economic edge.” Is homeopathy really that threatening?

References

In his commentary on a recent BCMJ editorial, Dr William Arkinstall describes Canada’s medical system as “dismal” (2007;49[6]:296). To learn about dismal, I suggest he read the recent CMAJ article discussing the hard decisions Canadian military surgeons must make in Afghanistan, where civilian patients transfered to local hospitals face likely death because of inadequate life-support technology. One of the physicians said such decisions “simply would not be made in Canada.”[1]