So we are currently in the middle of our Brain and Behaviour course. Last week, we had a PBL session focussing on multiple sclerosis. Our discussions of the disease naturally included a consideration of the Liberation Treatment which was developed by Dr. Paolo Zamboni in Italy. Dr. Zamboni believes that many cases of multiple sclerosis are due to a condition called ‘Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency’ that can be treated with endovascular therapy. Dr. Zamboni’s work was featured in a segment by W5 on CTV on November 21, 2009 (See http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091120/W5_liberation_091121/20091121?s_name=W5). After this news segment aired, there was a media frenzy surrounding the Liberation Treatment and patients all over the world started to demand the treatment from their doctors. The problem was that many physicians felt that the evidence supporting the treatment was anecdotal, at best, and refused to endorse the treatment. The fact remains that endovascular therapy has risks associated with it like any surgical procedure and should not be prescribed unless proper evidence has been assembled. In the era of evidence-based medicine, it is important to conduct more studies to meet the same scientific standards to which we hold other medical procedures accountable. What really surprised me was how a simple news program was able to spark what has been dubbed a “Liberation War” pitting patients against their doctors. What do you think about the role of media in the medical world? What are your thoughts on this situation? Has CTV overstepped? Let me know your thoughts on the subject.

For more information, check out the W5 website.

So, I was reading the paper the other day and I was surprised to see that the next iPhone had accidentally been leaked by an Apple software engineer, especially because Apple is so secretive with these things. I feel really bad for the engineer who leaked it...

For more information, see:
http://gizmodo.com/5520164/this-is-apples-next-iphone

The American College of Physicians is in town this weekend for the Internal Medicine 2010. They have a few programs for medical students including "Mastering the Match" and "Interacting with Pharmaceutical Industry Representatives".
For more information, see http://www.acponline.org/meetings/internal_medicine/2010/.

So during this past week, there was a lot of commotion regarding Canada’s commitment to the G8 Maternal Health Initiative. The tension, specifically, revolved around the issue of including legal and safe abortion in Canada’s maternal health initiative in Third World Nations. Whereas Canada’s closest allies recognize that maternal health must include reproductive health, family planning, and access to safe abortion, Canada’s Prime Minister and current Conservative government rejected the inclusion of safe abortion in its initiatives in an attempt to avoid the abortion debate. To gain some context on Canada’s official stance on the issue, we look to the events of January 28, 1988 when the Supreme Court of Canada removed all legal restrictions on abortion. In other words, abortion was allowed throughout all nine months of pregnancy. There still exist provincial guidelines, but they do not have the force of law.

So, I thought I would just share this with you and see what your opinions are on the matter.

For some background information on the issue, please see the following news articles:

Check out the "Interview" link for new articles: "The GIANT List of Interview Questions" and "Top 15 Interview Tips".

Here, this should help:


Enjoy! :)

Ref: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-rost/want-to-become-a-doctor_b_20148.html (via BMJ)