Share
|Hippocrates said that sacred knowledge should not be given to the uninitiated. He also said we should share information freely among ourselves. Copyright locks up the best of medical thought behind monetary walls. When I first went into practice, I could not afford journals. I was too busy paying off debt. In family practice, I needed many journals to stay current, but the family doctor who needs them most can afford them the least. The specialist who can afford all of them wants only one or none at all.
Now we have the Internet and Google. People can access anything, but not physicians. The hospital, medical school or medical society library is the only access without a high priced subscription. Now that I am semi retired, I have none of those things available, but it is the older physician who needs current information the most. Restricted access to medical knowledge is a good thing on the one hand; there is too much mischief to be made in sharing critical knowledge with those who would misuse it. Price, however, is not the way to channel medical knowledge. Better that we make all knowledge free and take our chances.
The medical schools do us a disservice by not providing total online access to all publications through their medical library. Without access to free medical information, we are left with best evidence determined by someone else, of an unknown source, unknown date and unknown validity. The guideline stifles progress. The guideline provided by someone else ends clinical medicine as a science and clinical doctors who rely entirely on those guidelines as scientists.
Standardized medicine has some merit, however, in shoring up clinical weaknesses, excesses and greed. Such standardization may be the only way forward from our broken profession, but by the same argument, published research and clinical information needs to be freely distributed within the profession. Neither copyright nor patent should interfere.We need free access to all medical information. No wonder an office visit costs so much.
Now we have the Internet and Google. People can access anything, but not physicians. The hospital, medical school or medical society library is the only access without a high priced subscription. Now that I am semi retired, I have none of those things available, but it is the older physician who needs current information the most. Restricted access to medical knowledge is a good thing on the one hand; there is too much mischief to be made in sharing critical knowledge with those who would misuse it. Price, however, is not the way to channel medical knowledge. Better that we make all knowledge free and take our chances.
The medical schools do us a disservice by not providing total online access to all publications through their medical library. Without access to free medical information, we are left with best evidence determined by someone else, of an unknown source, unknown date and unknown validity. The guideline stifles progress. The guideline provided by someone else ends clinical medicine as a science and clinical doctors who rely entirely on those guidelines as scientists.
Standardized medicine has some merit, however, in shoring up clinical weaknesses, excesses and greed. Such standardization may be the only way forward from our broken profession, but by the same argument, published research and clinical information needs to be freely distributed within the profession. Neither copyright nor patent should interfere.We need free access to all medical information. No wonder an office visit costs so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment