LETTERS: Operations based on sound evidence
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your positive reporting of the conference on the scientific basis of health services, which is exploring new methods of coping with the tidal wave of new health technologies, is welcome.
However, Liz Hunt's statement that "less than 15 per cent of health service interventions have been proved to be beneficial to patients" ("Routine operations on hit-list," 3 October) is a misinterpretation of Professor David Eddy's statement that less than 15 per cent of interventions are based on scientific evidence. This does not mean that interventions not so proven are ineffective. As a surgeon, I do not need the rigour of a randomised controlled trial to tell me that, unless I stop bleeding from a major blood vessel, the patient will die.
Additionally, Professor Eddy's views have recently been challenged in a paper by Professor David Sackett and his colleagues, published in the Lancet, which demonstrated that around 80 per cent of interventions undertaken in an acute medical ward of district hospitals indeed are based on sound evidence.
Yours faithfully,
Miles Irving
Director
NHS Health Technology
Assessment Programme
London, SW1
3 October
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments