It's hard to watch a professional espouse two seemingly contradictory statements with a serious manner. It's amazing that she would allow herself to be vidoe'ed saying these things. But there they are. Reporting that a meeting of professionals concluded that 85% of umbilical hernia are "very small". Concluded that, therefore, a mesh device is appropriate for repair, apparently, for all umbilical hernias. It feels like insanity but it's just the mesh makers making more inroads. More market share. I could only find the video but it would be no surprise to find that the specific meetings were financed directly by a mesh maker or two, as was much of the conference itself. She also reports that the results were "voted" on, and talks about the "community" but seems oblivious to the fact that only meeting attendees were voting. People who go to meetings.
Scroll down the first page in the second link and you'll see many, maybe all, of the mesh makers as major sponsors. They should call these meetings what they are: market development meetings for medical devices. Modern medicine is owned by companies that only profit if a product is sold. They gain nothing by showing that a few sutures would be the best method. The conflict is so bright is can't be avoided.
https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/V..._medium=button
https://ehs2019hamburg.com/
Scroll down the first page in the second link and you'll see many, maybe all, of the mesh makers as major sponsors. They should call these meetings what they are: market development meetings for medical devices. Modern medicine is owned by companies that only profit if a product is sold. They gain nothing by showing that a few sutures would be the best method. The conflict is so bright is can't be avoided.
https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/V..._medium=button
https://ehs2019hamburg.com/
Comment