Igen denne meget direkte stil, som kan forekomme fjern fra vores mere respektfulde holdning. Set herfra svækker formen troværdigheden, men man kan jo ihvertfald vælge at gå bagom og undersøge videre: har nogle af påstandene om de meget bedre resultater noget på sig?
When I ask the question it is more of a shout to the world — because I feel that many people die sooner than they need to, and I just hate the thought of it! I am just beside myself in understanding why there is such a difference between what is and what could be. That is the reason I started this blog in the first place. The what could be is that many centers have patients who live for an average of 10 years or more, and the average life expectancy for all multiple myeloma patients is just 4 years based on the most recent National Cancer Institute survival data. So why the big gap between the two?
Kan en kliniks resultater fx overhovedet sammenlignes med andre. Er det sammenlignelige patientgrupper, har de samme fysiske, sociale o.s.v. udgangspunkt?
Det er meget muligt tallene absolut totalt er korrekte, men korrigering for andre forhold kan jo ændre alt.