So what else is new?
I recently received a letter commenting adversely on one of my posts here. The post was headed "Another useless (Sorry: "underqualified") Muslim doctor in Britain". The writer took umbrage at that heading. He evidently felt that I was defaming Muslim doctors generally or perhaps Muslims generally. Where have I heard that sort of accusation before? You can say anything you like about Christians and conservatives but some classes of people -- such as Muslims and homosexuals -- are especially protected from criticism.
And that is bigotry. Closing your mind to certain possibilities is a good rough definition of bigotry and my correspondent has clearly closed his mind to the possibility of any general defect among Muslim doctors.
I do in fact suspect that doctors from Muslim countries are in general of lower quality but I don't know that and I have never asserted that. All my post conveyed was that there are some Muslim doctors of lower quality. "Some" could be a small minority and maybe it is a small minority that is involved. I was at most suggesting the hypothesis that the effect might be general. And why should that hypothesis not be suggested? Only a bigot rules out hypotheses in advance.
I reproduce the rapidly deteriorating correspondence concerned below. I give my replies in italics. I kinda feel sorry for the guy. He is so used to having his prejudices celebrated that he is unable to see that they are prejudices.
Dr. Ray,
We look to your web site often as a valuable pointer to information. But your reference to the religion of an incompetent doctor does your site no credit, and it doesn't help the cause of reducing errors. Aside from its irrelevance, do you know of some evidence that doctors who come from predominately Muslim countries commit more errors that doctors trained in the UK? Where in your linked article does it say that he is Muslim? Where does it say that he isn't a native Brit, or mention anything about this religion.
Are you planning to include a mentions from now on like "Another useless Christian doctor botches procedure," Or "Again a Jewish doctor kills a patient"?
Nicolas Martin [aia@iatrogenic.org]
Executive Director
American Iatrogenic Association
There have been some awful Muslim doctors recently so I think "another" is warranted.
His name is a Muslim one
I oppose political correctness
JR
There is a difference between PC and simply being civil. I have had plenty of Arab Christian acquaintances who had what you think is a "Muslim" name. If you really oppose political correctness, then I'll look for that headline that says "Another useless Christian doctor botches a surgery." Now that would be un-PC. As it presently stands, I can't think of anything more PC than to be anti-Muslim. How much guts does it take to libel Muslims? None.
Like I said, you have provided no evidence that Muslim doctors commit more errors that non-Muslim ones, so your objective is more to defame them than to shine a light on the facts. Since there are many Muslim doctors one would hope that you would want them to be oppose socialized medicine, too. And some of them maybe be very receptive to the free market message. But maybe hate is more important to you than freedom.
Nicolas Martin
"Another" does not mean "all". I made no claim about Muslims in general. I just describe reality as I see it. You are reading into what I wrote things that I did not say. Perhaps you should examine your own biases.
JR
That's a joke, right? Then, as I said, I look forward to reading about the religion of all the doctors you mention. You describe reality as a bigot sees it. I'll make damned sure that we don't refer to your site again.
Nicolas Martin
Bigot!
JR
Drugs for dementia 'killing thousands' of British elderly
Drugs prescribed to make dementia sufferers more manageable in care homes could be killing more than 23,000 people prematurely each year, a report claims today. Anti-psychotic drugs prescribed to treat agitation, sleep disturbance and aggression are being given to 100,000 elderly people each year to keep them "quiet and manageable", according to the report by the Liberal Democrat MP Paul Burstow.
Mr Burstow bases his figures on the findings of a study by King's College London, which compared survival rates between a group of patients given the drugs and a group given a placebo. After 24 months those taking a placebo had a 78 per cent survival rate, compared with 55 per cent for those on drugs; after 42 months the survival rates were 60 per cent on the placebo and 28 per cent for those prescribed the drugs.
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment