Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Erwin Kay case is not about machines.
Go read the SMC published grounds of decision.
Also google the trials for antifungals and autism. It is not totally absurd or unheard of. Does it really cause a lot of harm to prescribe antifungals to children? Sometimes lack of evidence doesnt necessarily mean is violates the "do no harm" principle. Sounds more about politics. Is the evidence for the covid vaccines that robust and clear cut when it was given out en masse? |
?? ey, u not a bright spark also dun assume other pple dumb ok?
Erwin case is about him using an unproven method of treatment without prior approval as a professional.
If he is a beautician operating from a parlour, he actually wouldn't get into trouble, but he is a medical professional with treatment privileges bestowed upon him and he abused it to earn money.
What is his real intention? He wants to make money from his machine. That's the problem which is what i pointed out. You don't stop him there, its going to be use to treat hair loss, ED, piles and everything. You can't understand it and assume i'm talking about machines...
Google trials? A primary 6 student can also google anything.
Got trials doesn't mean anything. Got evidence it work or not? What kind of trial is it? Power size ? Evidence applicable to the population you treating or not?
Piang ey.
'Got trial lei. Not unheard of' . I can't believe u actually use such statements to justify treatments.
Hang on, dont tell me u also locum somwhere in bedok. Are u the shitty locum who empirically dispense levothyroxine to a patient complaining of fatigue? because i can so totally envision u saying ' not unheard nor absurd to give levothyroxine as a trial for patient complaining she got fatigue...got trials lei'