【24h】

Not for everybody

机译:不适合所有人

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In thinking about this debate I suggest two broad themes to consider before turning to precise clinically based contraindications. The first is that if hormone replacement therapy really is so good for you why do so few women take it? The figures may be changing slightly, but at present in the United Kingdom fewer than 15% of eligible women are thought to start the treatment and fewer than 5% persist with it for more than a couple of years. When patients reject our advice doctors tend to lapse into omnipotence and berate them for their ignorance or fecklessness. It is therefore of great interest that Isaacs et al recently published the results of a study of 1200 women doctors aged between 40 and 60: they found that 40% of those who were postmenopausal had never even tried hormone replacement therapy. Is it that our medical colleagues are feckless and ignorant, or is there something they know that Toozs-Hobson and Cardozo and I don't?
机译:在思考这场辩论时,我建议在转向基于临床的确切禁忌症之前要考虑两个广泛的主题。首先是,如果激素替代疗法真的对您有好处,为什么很少有女性服用呢?这些数字可能会略有变化,但是目前在英国,只有不到15%的合格女性开始接受治疗,并且坚持使用这种药物的时间不到两年。当患者拒绝我们的建议时,医生往往会变得无所不能,并因他们的无知或无暇而受到指责。因此,以撒等人最近发表了一项对1200位年龄在40至60岁之间的女医生的研究结果,引起了极大的兴趣:他们发现绝经后的40%的医生甚至从未尝试过激素替代疗法。是我们的医务人员无懈可击而且无知,还是他们知道Toozs-Hobson和Cardozo而我却没有?

著录项

  • 来源
    《British Medical Journal》 |1996年第7053期|p.351-352|共2页
  • 作者

    H S Jacobs;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 医药、卫生;
  • 关键词

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号