>"There's a common misconception
>that evidence-based medicine excludes or belittles experience or clinical
>intuition, which it does not."
>
>I did not say anything of the sort and my argument was not with the concept
>of "evidence based medicine".

I didn't say that you said that. But I do stand by my statement that this
is commonly misunderstood.

>What I was trying to say, but was obviously
>misunderstood, is this.  Just like any invention can be used for good and
>bad, just as email can be used for getting out useful information and also
>for receiving spam, the term "evidence based medicine" is being used in
>sinister ways, to pommel the opposition into submission.  The pommelers
>frequently are defending the status quo, in the case of breastfeeding as one
>example, often based on no evidence at all (clinical or experimental), and
>demanding that those who question them provide evidence.

I think your clarification is much more riveting. I'd probably go a step
further and say that somehow, we breastfeeding advocates are put on the
defensive. Yet, interventions like electronic fetal monitoring, and fasting
during labor which have never been proven to result in better outcomes,
were begun with no evidence to support their use, and continue. (Sigh....)



--
Marie Biancuzzo, Perinatal Clinical Nurse Specialist
[log in to unmask]
Resources to simplify breastfeeding management are available at
http://www.wmc-worldwide.com

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html