Lawsuit against "spermatic cord denervation" urologist won


Jesse - subtle difference, and it makes no consequence to your result, but I think we’d all be better served by agreeing that there’s a TON of hubris in the medical community. The doctors are well educated, so well educated that “they can’t possibly be wrong” and they go into this ego-centric denial mode when they are wrong or create a bad outcome. I don’t think it’s unique to urologists but I do think it’s more prevalent with urologists than other medical professions. That said, i don’t think any of them seek to hurt other or have murderous tendencies. I think the SCD practitioners are afraid of admitting all the time they spent studying and training was wasted.

Look at the monumental damage done to some, not all, who’ve taken statins. Statins work for some but cause permanent muscle damage to many. Yet I’ve seen cardiovascular physicians first-hand say that the collective benefit is worth the risk to the few. That’s the exact same attitude taken by uros with vasectomy, the attitude that a few percent of damaged men is acceptable risk.

For those of us in the tail of the distribution curve, we’re screwed. You worse so than others. I don’t think there’s murderous intent. I think that doctors took too many probability and statistics courses and not enough manufacturing quality courses. In the study of quality, we’re forced to identify the containment, corrective, and preventative actions when defects occur. Doctors are off the hook were it not for lawyers we unfortunately call ambulance chasers. Docs need to be held accountable for the percentages, even small, that they see as “acceptable risk” even if their intent wasn’t murderous.