Veterinary Practice News Evidence-based Medicine Column

Last summer, I was asked to take over the Evidence-based Medicine Column (previous the Alternative Medicine Column) in the trade magazine Veterinary Practice News from Dr. Narda Robinson. This was an excellent opportunity to  illustrate the principles and techniques of evidence-based medicine in action, evaluating specific medical practices and discussing general issues related to EBM. Some of these columns will cover alternative therapies, but many focus on conventional medical therapies as well, since I have always advocated evaluating all therapies by the same, science-based standards. I will keep a running collection of links to these columns here as each becomes available to the public, as well as occasionally posting those with content that hasn’t appeared here before. Enjoy!

 

A new perspective on evidence-based medicine
July 27, 2017

Cannabis-based remedies lack reliable clinical evidence for veterinary use
August 9, 2017

Pros, cons of surgical sterilization, neutering options for females
September 14, 2017

Surgical sterilization, neutering options for male cats, dogs
November 21, 2017

Yunnan baiyao for patients with hemorrhage, neoplasia
December 11, 2017

Probiotics and today’s pets
January 10, 2018

Why do we run diagnostic tests?
February 7, 2018

Pheromones’ therapeutic use in animals
March 14, 2018

Evidence-based Medicine is Key in Achieving Ethical Clinical Practice
April 17, 2018

Lysine: A therapeutic zombie?
May 16, 2018

Is tramadol an effective analgesic for dogs and cats?
June 26, 2018

What is a placebo?
July 10, 2018

Uses, evidence, and safety for laser therapy.
August 16, 2018

Assessing claims of vaccine-induced ITP, IMHA
August 29, 2018

Is cancer increasing in dogs and cats?
October 2, 2018

 

This entry was posted in Presentations, Lectures, Publications & Interviews. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Veterinary Practice News Evidence-based Medicine Column

  1. Robert Nix DVM says:

    With the alphabet soup of certifications veterinarians add behind their degrees, I have not seen the cVMA and would like to know what it means.

  2. skeptvet says:

    It stands for “certificate in Veterinary Medical Acupuncture.” Since I am quite skeptical of acupuncture and critical of many of the claims made about it, I elected to take a certification course run by Dr. Narda Robinson at CSU so that I could honestly say I had thoroughly and fairly considered the arguments and and evidence presented by defenders of the practice. I blogged the experience of the course here, and while it didn’t do much to change my views on the subject, it was an interesting exploration of a controversial topic.

  3. art malernee dvm says:

    I noticed Veterinary Practice News pulled the controversial online Dr Poll article written by a lawyer. I thought it was well written and very informative. Probably their most important article with maybe the exception of your articles. Good luck.

  4. Bob says:

    I find it suspect that this article omitted any mention of the studies done in regards to long term benefits of OS procedure.

  5. skeptvet says:

    If you read the article, you will note that I specifically said I wasn’t going to talk about risks and benefits of spaying in general because 1200 words is barely enough space to talk about the evidence regarding the differences between the specific procedures. I have addressed the debates about whether and when to spay in detail elsewhere. For example:

    This collection of all my articles on neutering.

    My detailed review of the research evidence on risks and benefits of neutering

  6. art malernee dvm says:

    A good prospective randomized study would be take litters of lab pups. Spay 1/3 of them Leave 1/3 of them intact and start 1/3 of them on Cheque drops (mibolerone) and follow them out. My guess is there might already be prospective randomized trials that compare spay vs Cheque drops that were done just before upjohn almost released this drug in dog food thirty years ago. I tried to find such studies on the internet with no luck. Who ever owns Upjohn now might have them if they exist. Since most animals, human nurses included,
    seem to live longer with their ovaries it would be interesting to see the results of these studies

  7. art malernee dvm says:

    human doctors thought a few years back human ovaries should go also.
    see
    https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/health/research/28ovar.html
    Now that there are no male stray dogs sitting in your front yard when your dog comes in heat the reason most of my clients want their dog spayed is to avoid blood on the bed sheets twice a year. In most of the free world, except the usa, vets have a shot they can give dogs to keep them out of heat. If studys have been done to see what’s safer spay or the shot(suprelorin) I have not seen them. Suprelorin for dogs have been coming soon to the usa for over a decade. Not sure of the politics behind that. The reason given why the fda would not allow mibolerone in the dog food was because a study showed a lot of humans eating dog food.

  8. kelly howard says:

    I find it both terrifying that an ever-growing segment of the population automatically considers anyone who calls themselves a “skeptic” to be negative, suspect, evil, hostile to them personally (as opposed to unwilling to instantly swallow whole whatever their particular cherished belief) or any combo of the above. If the goal of education in the last several decades was to encourage critical thinking, it has failed dismally.

    Then we have online definitions such as: “Sometimes people are skeptical just because they don’t believe something, in spite of scientific evidence.” I wouldn’t call such people skeptical, I’d call them anti-skeptical –determined to hang on to beliefs despite proof to the contrary.

    Or a site that apparently explains: “why people are negative, pessimistic and skeptical,” which again paints skeptics as bad.

    I prefer (credited to Steven Novella): “A skeptic is one who prefers beliefs and conclusions that are reliable and valid to ones that are comforting or convenient, and therefore rigorously and openly applies the methods of science and reason to all empirical claims, especially their own.”

    Why are people so scared of evidence-based ideas? I’m having to get a new physician (mine retired) and was startled to see in one bio that the doc “favors evidence-based medicine.” The fact that a physician finds it necessary to spell this out is appalling, though I assume it weeds out those who would waste his time seeking homeopathy, de-toxing, “cleansing,” and all the other ludicrous snake oils of today. I’ve spent my life in science, as a vocation & avocation, and cannot understand why so many are determined to navigate the realities of life using utter nonsense as their guides. Or why they become deranged when someone tries to provide a some evidence-based facts. Makes me despair of the future…and the near present, for that matter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This blog is kept spam free by WP-SpamFree.