Popular Medicine and Empirics in Greece, 1900-1950: An Oral History Approach

Western literature has focused on medical plurality but also on the pervasive existence of quacks who managed to survive from at least the eighteenth to the twentieth century. Focal points of their practices have been their efforts at enrichment and their extensive advertising. In Greece, empirical, untrained healers in the first half of the twentieth century do not fit in with this picture. They did not ask for payment, although they did accept 'gifts'; they did not advertise their practice; and they had fixed places of residence. Licensed physicians did not undertake a concerted attack against them, as happened in the West against the quacks, and neither did the state. In this paper, it is argued that both the protection offered by their localities to resident popular healers and the healers' lack of demand for monetary payment were jointly responsible for the lack of prosecutions of popular healers. Moreover, the linking of popular medicine with ancient traditions, as put forward by influential folklore studies, also reduced the likelihood of an aggressive discourse against the popular healers. Although the Greek situation in the early twentieth century contrasts with the historiography on quacks, it is much more in line with that on wise women and cunning-folk. It is thus the identification of these groups of healers in Greece and elsewhere, mostly through the use of oral histories but also through folklore studies, that reveals a different story from that of the aggressive discourse of medical men against quacks.

Legal and ethical aspects of telemedicine

There are many issues of concern regarding the legal and ethical aspects of telemedicine. These include the responsibilities and potential liabilities of the health professional, the duty to maintain the confidentiality and privacy of patient records, and the jurisdictional problems associated with cross-border consultations. There is also the issue of reimbursement for care provided using a telemedicine service. Telemedicine allows the transmission of health information across the borders of nation states. Cross-border telemedicine services have begun, particularly in specialties such as teleradiology, but questions of jurisdiction and registration have yet to be answered definitively. While this may be true of many of the legal and ethical aspects of telemedicine generally, it is also the case that health-care professionals who undertake telemedicine in a prudent manner will minimize the possibility of medicolegal complications.

The 19th Century Origins of Facial Cosmetic Surgery and John H. Woodbury

John H. Woodbury was an incredibly entrepreneurial, self-trained dermatologist who, between 1870 and 1909, built an empire of cosmetic surgery institutes in 6 states, with 25 physician/surgeon employees and an advertising budget of $150,000/year (1892 data). Under his management, his surgeons, and perhaps Woodbury himself, performed multiple facial cosmetic surgeries, including early versions of browlifts, frown excisions, lower facelifts, mid-face lifts, rhinoplasties, double-chin reductions, and dimple creation. In addition, Woodbury developed a proprietary soap and cosmetic line, which he sold to Jergens for $212,500 in 1901 (retaining a 10% royalty). Woodbury's story has been unknown until now because this nonacademic concentrated his publishing in articles and advertisements in lay magazines. Woodbury's life ended in bankruptcy, litigation, and suicide when the corporate practice of medicine and advertising were made illegal. In his legal proceedings, Woodbury conceded that he was not a doctor, although he went by the title. Regardless, his surgical innovations are of major historical significance, as these cosmetic procedures are the first of their kind to be noted in the lay or academic press and predate, by years and even decades, the previously earliest known cosmetic surgeries in the United States.

Refusal to grant provisional General Medical Council registration to U.K. medical graduates

In the last five years, 2010-2014, there have been 17 instances when an application for provisional registration by a U.K. medical graduate was refused by the General Medical Council because the Registrar considered that the applicant's fitness to practise was impaired. While this number is small, the fact that this can happen is largely unappreciated by medical students and their teachers, the prevailing false assumption being that passing finals and graduation is the final hurdle before taking up a Foundation Programme post. It is a poorly recognised fact that just because a university fitness to practise committee has concluded that a student is fit to practise there is no guarantee that the General Medical Council will come to the same decision. This paper explains the reasons for these refusals and makes suggestions for students and medical schools.

Three controversies over item disclosure in medical licensure examinations

In response to views on public's right to know, there is growing attention to item disclosure - release of items, answer keys, and performance data to the public - in medical licensure examinations and their potential impact on the test's ability to measure competence and select qualified candidates. Recent debates on this issue have sparked legislative action internationally, including South Korea, with prior discussions among North American countries dating over three decades. The purpose of this study is to identify and analyze three issues associated with item disclosure in medical licensure examinations - 1) fairness and validity, 2) impact on passing levels, and 3) utility of item disclosure - by synthesizing existing literature in relation to standards in testing. Historically, the controversy over item disclosure has centered on fairness and validity. Proponents of item disclosure stress test takers' right to know, while opponents argue from a validity perspective. Item disclosure may bias item characteristics, such as difficulty and discrimination, and has consequences on setting passing levels. To date, there has been limited research on the utility of item disclosure for large scale testing. These issues requires ongoing and careful consideration.

Big push for tort reform this legislative session

These are just a few of the things we'll see this year, but it doesn't come close to being an exhaustive list. We anticipate having our yearly discussions over the worthiness of state's motorcycle helmet law. We'll find ourselves advocating for stricter texting-while-operating laws and seat belt enforcement. The insurance companies will probably get an earful over narrow networks and prior authorization. Telemedicine will likely come up; as will the pharmaceutical industry and their numerous endeavors. We'll have to watch some public health groups who will attempt to offer solutions to their own issues for their select set of patients. We're the only state without a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), so that will be in play Plus, the chiropractors, optometrists, midwives, etc., never seem to go away And on and on and on... Be sure to read MSMA's weekly Legislative Report during the 2015 session. It will keep you in the loop on all the above and then some. And don't forget to volunteer as the MSMA Physician of the Day at the Capitol. It's not difficult, and the legislators love seeing one their physicians from back home. Look for a sign-up sheet on the MSMA website soon. If you have any questions about our advocacy efforts on your behalf, feel free to give me a call anytime at 573-636-5151, or email jhowell@msma.org.

Accountability: the challenge for medical and nursing regulators

Little has been written about how regulatory bodies define and demonstrate accountability. This paper describes a substudy of a research project on accountability in healthcare. The aim was to increase understanding of how regulatory bodies perceive and demonstrate accountability to their stakeholders. Twenty-two semi-structured interviews were conducted with provincial/territorial CEOs from the two largest health professional regulatory bodies in Canada: medicine and nursing. The regulators indicated that accountability was essential to their mandates and provided the foundation for regulatory frameworks. However, they did not offer a common definition of accountability. They agreed that they were accountable to three constituencies: the public, government and their members. Regulators noted that protecting the public and meeting the demands of the government and their members creates tension. They were also concerned about maintaining independence in the regulatory role.