I ask because there is a lot of flawed research out there on topics such as this, and opioid abuse. Often, if you follow the money, you will see the bias in the research. I like to see the original documents because often you can find a nefarious connection to funding from a source that makes the whole document suspect, and likely biased.
A couple of years back, when i visited my orthopedic guy, i saw a new chart under his glass on his desk. it was giving suggestions about suggested doses and duration that doctors should write opioid prescriptions for. they were lower than what he was writing. i asked him where it came from, he said one of the girls found it in the office mail, so she put it there for him. he said it was not really useful because it was geared more to general practitioners, and it too much of a one size fits all recommendation, and the numbers seemed a bit low. I looked at the source of the info. It was printed by the National Association of Medicaid Directors. Sounds legit, right?
Of course not. Follow the money. I researched that entity, and found that the stated purpose of their existence was to help local governments' medicaid programs cut costs and save money. Nowhere did it have improving patient care listed anywhere. One of their main goals is to get doctors to prescribe less medication, thereby lowering the cost to medicaid programs. Meanwhile, the patient suffers increased pain levels and diminished quality of life.
It was like the cigarette companies who financed the medical studies that said smoking was good for you.
Dont take research at face value to form an opinion, without using critical thinking while reading it. Always follow the money.
The author on much of DWI research is Ralph Hingson, who was discredited when he failed to report that he was on the board of MADD at the same time that he was producing a lot of DWI research. To see what a scam MADD is, read this article.
https://www.activistfacts.com/organi...drunk-driving/
In a three-page 1998 report, sociologist and MADD national board member Ralph Hingson claimed that lowering the nationwide drunk-driving arrest threshold from .10% to 0.08% blood alcohol concentration (BAC) would save 500 lives a year. Despite being thoroughly discredited by highway traffic safety experts — the U.S. General Accounting Office labeled his claim “unfounded” in its 1999 report to Congress — MADD continued to cite his research and repeatedly used it to convince many states to adopt “.08” legislation.
https://www.foxnews.com/story/colleg...oxicating-scam
College Drinking Study Is Intoxicating Scam
REPOST needed to fix spelling and grammar, due to lack of edit button.
