Facebook Pixel
Searching...
简体中文
EnglishEnglish
EspañolSpanish
简体中文Chinese
FrançaisFrench
DeutschGerman
日本語Japanese
PortuguêsPortuguese
ItalianoItalian
한국어Korean
РусскийRussian
NederlandsDutch
العربيةArabic
PolskiPolish
हिन्दीHindi
Tiếng ViệtVietnamese
SvenskaSwedish
ΕλληνικάGreek
TürkçeTurkish
ไทยThai
ČeštinaCzech
RomânăRomanian
MagyarHungarian
УкраїнськаUkrainian
Bahasa IndonesiaIndonesian
DanskDanish
SuomiFinnish
БългарскиBulgarian
עבריתHebrew
NorskNorwegian
HrvatskiCroatian
CatalàCatalan
SlovenčinaSlovak
LietuviųLithuanian
SlovenščinaSlovenian
СрпскиSerbian
EestiEstonian
LatviešuLatvian
فارسیPersian
മലയാളംMalayalam
தமிழ்Tamil
اردوUrdu
Blind Spots

Blind Spots

When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health
作者 Marty Makary 2024 288 页数
4.48
1k+ 评分
Listen to Summary

重点摘要

1. 医学教条可能危害患者:花生过敏流行病

“在美国儿科学会(AAP)提出花生避免建议后的近十年里,国家卫生研究院(NIH)的过敏与传染病国家研究所(NIAID)及其他机构都未能资助一项全面研究来评估该建议是否对儿童有帮助或有害。”

误导性建议。 2000年,美国儿科学会建议儿童避免食用花生以预防过敏。这一基于有限证据的建议导致花生过敏病例显著增加。

毁灭性后果。 花生过敏的发生率飙升,急诊部门因花生过敏就诊的次数在短短十年内(2005-2014年)增加了三倍。到2019年,估计每18名美国儿童中就有1名患有花生过敏。

范式转变。 2015年,吉迪恩·拉克博士的开创性研究证明,早期接触花生实际上可以将过敏风险降低86%。这导致AAP的建议被推翻,但在此之前,整个一代人都受到误导性建议的影响。

2. 激素替代疗法的益处超过风险

“HRT降低了一系列医疗问题的风险。”

数据误解。 2002年,女性健康倡议研究错误地声称激素替代疗法(HRT)增加乳腺癌风险,导致该治疗被广泛放弃。

被忽视的益处。 HRT提供了显著的优势:

  • 阿尔茨海默病发生率降低35%
  • 骨折风险降低50-60%
  • 心脏病风险降低约50%
  • 结肠癌风险降低25-45%

需要重新评估。 医学界对HRT的开处方犹豫不决,基于错误的数据解读,可能使数百万女性失去了延长生命和改善生活质量的机会。

3. 抗生素过度使用威胁肠道健康并助长超级细菌

“你不仅仅是继承基因,你还继承了你的微生物组。”

微生物组干扰。 抗生素的过度使用,尤其是在儿童早期,可能严重改变肠道微生物组,导致以下风险增加:

  • 肥胖
  • 学习障碍
  • 注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)
  • 哮喘
  • 乳糜泻

全球危机。 抗生素耐药性日益严重,一些细菌对所有已知抗生素产生了耐药性。这可能会推翻一个世纪的医学进步,使常见手术再次变得危险。

谨慎使用。 抗生素应当精确开处方,以挽救生命或预防残疾,而不是常规用于无效的情况,如病毒感染。

4. 饱和脂肪神话:挑战胆固醇假说

“在过去的60年里,美国心脏协会未能质疑减少膳食胆固醇和饱和脂肪降低心脏病的教条。”

有缺陷的假说。 安塞尔·基斯博士的影响力“七国研究”导致了数十年的低脂饮食建议,尽管研究存在重大缺陷。

矛盾证据。 多项大型研究,包括:

  • 明尼苏达冠状动脉实验
  • 弗雷明汉心脏研究
  • 女性健康倡议

均未能显示饱和脂肪摄入与心脏病之间的联系。

范式转变。 当前研究表明,炎症,通常由精制碳水化合物引起,可能是心脏病的更重要因素,而非饱和脂肪摄入。

5. 认知失调阻碍医学科学进步

“积极努力保持开放和客观的人令人印象深刻。他们也很容易被识别。他们在不同问题上的立场常常让人感到惊讶。”

对变革的抵制。 莱昂·费斯廷格博士的认知失调理论解释了为什么即使是受过高等教育的人也可能对与其现有信念相悖的新思想持敌对态度。

努力辩护。 投入大量精力于特定信念或实践的人更可能为其辩护,即使面对矛盾证据。

开放心态至关重要。 医学进步需要积极管理我们自然倾向于忽视或改变挑战现有信念的新信息的倾向。

6. 机构傲慢危害血液供应安全

“在艾滋病流行的头十年里,拉克医生和其他前线医生目睹了医学界对数据的傲慢无视和对异议的无情碾压。”

早期警告被忽视。 在1980年代初,像唐·拉克这样的医生意识到通过输血传播HIV的风险,但他们的担忧被医学当局驳回。

毁灭性后果。 延迟实施适当的筛查程序导致数千人因受污染的输血而感染HIV,特别是影响了血友病患者。

教训。 这一事件突显了机构傲慢的危险,以及倾听前线医疗专业人士的重要性,即使他们的观察挑战了既定实践。

7. 重新思考分娩实践:减少干预,改善结果

“对于绝大多数婴儿来说,最佳的过渡地点是在母亲的胸膛上,皮肤接触。”

过度医疗化。 几十年来,诸如立即夹断脐带和将婴儿与母亲分开等新生儿护理常规做法,基于医学教条而非证据。

基于证据的改进:

  • 延迟夹脐带:提供重要的干细胞和营养
  • 皮肤接触:提高母乳喂养率并减少产后抑郁
  • 避免对早产儿常规使用抗生素:保护发育中的微生物组

平衡之道。 尽管现代医学大幅降低了婴儿死亡率,但在医疗干预与自然过程之间找到正确的平衡对获得最佳结果至关重要。

8. 卵巢癌的意外起源挑战外科规范

“卵巢癌并非源自卵巢。”

范式转变。 最近的研究揭示,最常见的卵巢癌类型实际上起源于输卵管,而非卵巢本身。

预防的意义:

  • 切除输卵管(输卵管切除术)可将卵巢癌风险降低多达80%
  • 健康的卵巢通常可以保留,维持激素益处

实践变革。 这一发现正在重塑外科手术方法,可能拯救生命,同时减少不必要的卵巢切除,这可能对女性健康产生负面影响。

9. 胶囊植入物争议暴露监管失误

“硅胶乳房植入物的战争代价高昂,造成了许多附带损害。”

监管过度。 1992年,FDA基于有限证据禁止硅胶乳房植入物,引发全国范围的狂热和大规模诉讼。

科学反击。 随后的多项研究未能发现硅胶植入物与自身免疫疾病或癌症之间的联系,揭示了禁令的过度反应。

持久影响。 这一争议突显了基于证据的监管的必要性,以及在缺乏充分科学依据的情况下做出的监管决策可能带来的后果。

10. 医学创新者面临阻力但推动进步

“纵观历史,尤其是今天,新思想和新事实威胁着坚持既有信念的心理安宁。”

历史模式。 从威廉·哈维描述血液循环到巴里·马歇尔发现H. pylori是溃疡的原因,医学创新者常常面临嘲笑和抵制。

坚持终有回报。 尽管最初遭到拒绝,但许多创新最终革命性地改变了医学实践,拯救了无数生命。

当今的教训。 医学界必须保持开放的心态,愿意在面对有力证据时挑战既定信念。

11. 现代医学中的公民话语权之争

“言论自由并不是为了轻松的言论——那些因确认多数人信念而受到欢迎的言论。它旨在保护那些不舒服的言论——那些挑战群体思维的言论。”

压制异议。 最近医学界的趋势显示出对不同意见的日益不容忍,一些医学协会支持政府对健康信息的审查。

扼杀创新。 遵循传统思维的压力可能阻碍科学进步和新思想在医学中的探索。

需要开放辩论。 维持一个允许公民话语和挑战既定思想的环境对推动医学知识进步和改善患者护理至关重要。

12. 质疑当前实践:我们还有哪些错误?

“如果现代医学界在过去几十年中犯了如此多的重大健康建议错误,那么一个令人不安的问题随之而来:我们今天又在做什么错误?”

当前争议。 作者强调了几个当前医学实践可能基于不足证据或错误假设的领域,包括:

  • 饮用水氟化
  • 大麻使用的安全性
  • 普遍发热治疗用药
  • 早期癌症检测血液测试
  • 每年流感疫苗与普遍流感疫苗
  • 未成年人性别确认护理

持续重新评估。 医学界必须保持警惕,质疑既定实践,并愿意根据新证据进行演变。

公众信任。 认识到不确定性并对医学建议的依据保持透明对维护公众对医学职业的信任至关重要。

最后更新日期:

FAQ

What's Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health about?

  • Exploring medical misconceptions: The book delves into common misconceptions and dogmas in modern medicine that can lead to harmful health recommendations.
  • Challenging established norms: It discusses how groupthink and resistance to new ideas can hinder progress in healthcare, emphasizing the importance of questioning established practices.
  • Real-life implications: Through case studies, such as the peanut allergy epidemic, the book illustrates the real-world consequences of medical blind spots on patients' health.

Why should I read Blind Spots by Marty Makary?

  • Awareness of medical dogma: It helps readers understand the pitfalls of modern medicine and the importance of questioning medical advice.
  • Empowerment through knowledge: The book encourages readers to ask for evidence behind health recommendations, fostering a more informed approach to personal health.
  • Engaging storytelling: Makary's narrative style makes complex medical topics accessible and relatable, using personal anecdotes and case studies.

What are the key takeaways of Blind Spots?

  • Questioning medical authority: The book emphasizes the importance of questioning medical recommendations and seeking evidence-based answers.
  • Understanding the microbiome: It highlights how antibiotics can disrupt the microbiome, leading to health issues, and stresses careful antibiotic use.
  • Impact of dietary cholesterol: The book debunks myths about dietary cholesterol's impact on heart disease, encouraging a reevaluation of dietary guidelines.

What are the best quotes from Blind Spots and what do they mean?

  • “Just memorize it for the exam.” This reflects the rote learning culture in medical education, discouraging critical thinking.
  • “The ability to determine which infants are high risk is imperfect.” It underscores flaws in medical guidelines, calling for a nuanced understanding of risk.
  • “We can enact health care reform... but if we continue to recklessly issue health recommendations... we’ll continue to struggle.” This emphasizes the need for evidence-based medicine over consensus-driven recommendations.

How does Blind Spots address the issue of over-medicalization?

  • Critique of current practices: Makary argues that many interventions are performed without sufficient evidence, leading to potential harm.
  • Historical context: The book provides examples of how medical practices have evolved, often swinging between extremes.
  • Advocacy for patient-centered care: It calls for a more patient-centered approach, promoting informed decision-making over a one-size-fits-all model.

What is the significance of the peanut allergy epidemic discussed in Blind Spots?

  • Flawed recommendations: The book details how recommendations for peanut avoidance led to an increase in allergies, illustrating the dangers of guidelines without solid evidence.
  • Role of early exposure: It highlights research showing early introduction of peanuts can reduce allergy risk, challenging previous dogma.
  • Consequences of groupthink: The case serves as a cautionary tale about groupthink leading to widespread harm in public health.

How does Blind Spots challenge traditional views on cholesterol and dietary fat?

  • Debunking cholesterol myths: The book argues dietary cholesterol doesn't significantly impact heart disease risk, challenging long-held guidelines.
  • Role of inflammation: Makary suggests inflammation, driven by refined carbohydrates, is a more significant factor in heart disease.
  • Encouraging a balanced diet: The author advocates for including healthy fats in a balanced diet, promoting a holistic approach to nutrition.

What psychological concepts does Blind Spots explore in relation to medical beliefs?

  • Cognitive dissonance: The book discusses how it can lead individuals to reject new information contradicting their beliefs.
  • Effort justification: Makary explains how people justify past efforts, even with new evidence, hindering progress.
  • Groupthink in medicine: The author highlights how groupthink silences dissenting opinions, leading to adherence to flawed practices.

How does Blind Spots suggest improving patient care?

  • Emphasizing evidence-based practices: Makary advocates for treatments grounded in solid research.
  • Encouraging patient involvement: The book stresses involving patients in care decisions, empowering them to ask questions.
  • Addressing systemic issues: It calls for systemic changes prioritizing patient welfare over profit, advocating for transparency.

What are some common misconceptions in medicine discussed in Blind Spots?

  • C-Section necessity: The book challenges the idea that a C-section must always follow a previous one, citing successful VBAC rates.
  • Routine induction of labor: Makary critiques the ARRIVE trial, arguing its methodology led to unnecessary interventions.
  • Oxygen use in newborns: It highlights the outdated practice of administering 100% oxygen to newborns, which can cause harm.

What role does humility play in Blind Spots?

  • Acknowledging limitations: Humility is essential for recognizing limitations and the evolving nature of medical knowledge.
  • Encouraging open dialogue: The book advocates for discussions about uncertainties, fostering an environment of questioning and learning.
  • Patient trust: Demonstrating humility helps build trust with patients, leading to better communication and care.

What are the implications of the findings in Blind Spots for future medical practices?

  • Need for continuous research: The book underscores the importance of ongoing research to validate or refute current practices.
  • Cultural shift in medicine: Makary suggests a shift towards humility, open-mindedness, and adaptation to new information.
  • Focus on patient outcomes: Future practices should prioritize patient outcomes and quality of life over procedural or profit-driven approaches.

评论

4.48 满分 5
平均评分来自 1k+ 来自Goodreads和亚马逊的评分.

《盲点》揭示了医疗实践中的缺陷,并挑战了长期以来的信念。读者们赞赏马卡里的基于证据的方法,强调了诸如花生过敏误解和抗生素过度使用等问题。该书批评了医疗教条,强调了透明度的重要性以及质疑既定规范的必要性。许多评论者认为这本书令人耳目一新,推荐给医疗专业人士和患者。尽管有些人提到偶尔存在矛盾,但大多数人欣赏马卡里对批判性思维和医疗改革的呼吁,称这本书引人深思,是必读之作。

Your rating:

关于作者

马蒂·马卡里博士是约翰霍普金斯大学医学院的外科医生和研究员。他因在患者安全方面的工作而闻名,包括开发了被世界卫生组织采纳的手术检查表。马卡里倡导医疗透明,并撰写了超过150篇学术出版物。他的书籍《不可问责》成为《纽约时报》畅销书。他专注于患者赋权,并在全国范围内就医疗保健的未来发表演讲。马卡里从事腹腔镜外科肿瘤学,并负责约翰霍普金斯胰腺岛移植中心。他是主要新闻网络的常驻医学评论员,居住在华盛顿特区地区。

0:00
-0:00
1x
Dan
Andrew
Michelle
Lauren
Select Speed
1.0×
+
200 words per minute
Home
Library
Get App
Create a free account to unlock:
Requests: Request new book summaries
Bookmarks: Save your favorite books
History: Revisit books later
Recommendations: Get personalized suggestions
Ratings: Rate books & see your ratings
Try Full Access for 7 Days
Listen, bookmark, and more
Compare Features Free Pro
📖 Read Summaries
All summaries are free to read in 40 languages
🎧 Listen to Summaries
Listen to unlimited summaries in 40 languages
❤️ Unlimited Bookmarks
Free users are limited to 10
📜 Unlimited History
Free users are limited to 10
Risk-Free Timeline
Today: Get Instant Access
Listen to full summaries of 73,530 books. That's 12,000+ hours of audio!
Day 4: Trial Reminder
We'll send you a notification that your trial is ending soon.
Day 7: Your subscription begins
You'll be charged on May 2,
cancel anytime before.
Consume 2.8x More Books
2.8x more books Listening Reading
Our users love us
100,000+ readers
"...I can 10x the number of books I can read..."
"...exceptionally accurate, engaging, and beautifully presented..."
"...better than any amazon review when I'm making a book-buying decision..."
Save 62%
Yearly
$119.88 $44.99/year
$3.75/mo
Monthly
$9.99/mo
Try Free & Unlock
7 days free, then $44.99/year. Cancel anytime.
Scanner
Find a barcode to scan

Settings
General
Widget
Appearance
Loading...
Black Friday Sale 🎉
$20 off Lifetime Access
$79.99 $59.99
Upgrade Now →