Business Insight presented by Arlington Dermatology Free Speech In Medicine! Is it possible to allow and entertain our rights to free speech in medical science? Science in general is based on evidence. It can be empirical, practical evidence, or evidence based on scientific conclusions. In either case, strong background of facts must be presented to proof any scientific point. Medicine is no different: we gather facts, analyze them, and recommend conclusions. We do practical testing, research, and gather data to show medical evidence of a disease or effectiveness of treatment. Medical science has been based on international codes for diseases that are recognized around the globe, with new diseases every year added to the listings. Similar way, international codes for treatments and procedures have been developed and updated every year. Often, you may hear about ICD and CPT codes that are re-established annually and have been utilized for many years. Further, medical associations and accreditations set standards for what should be done or conducted for any particular disease. Those are based on experts' discussions and researches that are approved for various medical problems and may be accepted by many countries. As an example, we can use hypertension, high blood pressure. There is a definition of what is a normal blood pressure, what is borderline pressure and when we consider the diagnosis to be fully established hypertension. Then, respectively, there will be options of medical intervention in a form of prescription drugs, at various doses, again, indicative of the severity of the condition. Most of the hypertension drugs are developed globally and are available globally, although they might have a different brand name. Thus, every drug has a'generic' name that explains the class of medication it belongs to. We can assume that most of people who actively speak publicly about medicine are doctors or medical scientists and that they would have knowledge of the above standards. And in majority of cases, this is true. It is safe to say that those individuals follow the uniformity of established medical rules, based of scientific evidence. As science is not stale and has always been going through progressive changes related to new inventions and developments, so do the established rules to follow. New cells are discovered, new methods of treatments are invented, and the codes need to be updated on a regular basis. Like any other science, we enjoy progress in medicine, because it makes us healthier and safer. Sometimes, we hear about medical opinions that are different from established standards of care. We always need to be careful verifying who presents those opinions and what factual material they use as evidence. Considering the fact that anybody can practically say anything they want under the 'free speech' cover, it is up to us individually to recognize what is supporting the comments and whether we can trust those opinions. This is not an easy task, especially in the era of overwhelming social media flooding us with a lot of un- verified information. The question remains unanswered by me and by many other doctors of whether public speaking presenting opinions that might be harmful to the society should be allowed or should it be filtered. We will not be able to find a common answer for all of us. However, you should always remember, when trying to find your own answer, that medical science should always provide higher benefit than risk to any patients and those who hold public positions speaking about medicine should carry the same obligation that doctors do: do no harm. If they refuse to submit to those rules, they should not be trusted with their speaking. Michael Bukhalo, MD Arlington Dermatology 5301 Keystone Court Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 Tel. 847 392 5440 | www.arlingtondermatology.net Business Insight presented by Arlington Dermatology Free Speech In Medicine ! Is it possible to allow and entertain our rights to free speech in medical science ? Science in general is based on evidence . It can be empirical , practical evidence , or evidence based on scientific conclusions . In either case , strong background of facts must be presented to proof any scientific point . Medicine is no different : we gather facts , analyze them , and recommend conclusions . We do practical testing , research , and gather data to show medical evidence of a disease or effectiveness of treatment . Medical science has been based on international codes for diseases that are recognized around the globe , with new diseases every year added to the listings . Similar way , international codes for treatments and procedures have been developed and updated every year . Often , you may hear about ICD and CPT codes that are re - established annually and have been utilized for many years . Further , medical associations and accreditations set standards for what should be done or conducted for any particular disease . Those are based on experts ' discussions and researches that are approved for various medical problems and may be accepted by many countries . As an example , we can use hypertension , high blood pressure . There is a definition of what is a normal blood pressure , what is borderline pressure and when we consider the diagnosis to be fully established hypertension . Then , respectively , there will be options of medical intervention in a form of prescription drugs , at various doses , again , indicative of the severity of the condition . Most of the hypertension drugs are developed globally and are available globally , although they might have a different brand name . Thus , every drug has a'generic ' name that explains the class of medication it belongs to . We can assume that most of people who actively speak publicly about medicine are doctors or medical scientists and that they would have knowledge of the above standards . And in majority of cases , this is true . It is safe to say that those individuals follow the uniformity of established medical rules , based of scientific evidence . As science is not stale and has always been going through progressive changes related to new inventions and developments , so do the established rules to follow . New cells are discovered , new methods of treatments are invented , and the codes need to be updated on a regular basis . Like any other science , we enjoy progress in medicine , because it makes us healthier and safer . Sometimes , we hear about medical opinions that are different from established standards of care . We always need to be careful verifying who presents those opinions and what factual material they use as evidence . Considering the fact that anybody can practically say anything they want under the ' free speech ' cover , it is up to us individually to recognize what is supporting the comments and whether we can trust those opinions . This is not an easy task , especially in the era of overwhelming social media flooding us with a lot of un- verified information . The question remains unanswered by me and by many other doctors of whether public speaking presenting opinions that might be harmful to the society should be allowed or should it be filtered . We will not be able to find a common answer for all of us . However , you should always remember , when trying to find your own answer , that medical science should always provide higher benefit than risk to any patients and those who hold public positions speaking about medicine should carry the same obligation that doctors do : do no harm . If they refuse to submit to those rules , they should not be trusted with their speaking . Michael Bukhalo , MD Arlington Dermatology 5301 Keystone Court Rolling Meadows , IL 60008 Tel . 847 392 5440 | www.arlingtondermatology.net