Also in October 2012, the Italian Supreme Court ruled that cell phones caused one man's brain tumor.
Since when does the Court decide on matters of scientific validity?
And even more importantly, what does this have to do with ENT???
I'm sure people here and there will shake their heads and say how ridiculous. "Unbelievable" that the Italians Courts have made such a stupid decision.
I hate to break it to you all... but it happens ALL THE TIME, especially in the field of medicine. The Court and Lawyers have profoundly influenced how medicine (and now seismology) is practiced whether scientifically valid or not. No matter how ridiculous it may be seen in hindsight or not.
Let's go back to those poor convicted earthquake scientists...
At least in Italy, it's likely that these Court decisions will having a chilling influence over how scientists will behave in the future whether scientifically valid or not. For every single minor tremor, scientists will now have to weigh potential for jail-term if they are inaccurate with their predictions (even though everybody knows predicting major earthquakes accurately is impossible).
I can imagine them to report in the future every single minor tremor as a potential threat of a major earthquake and as such, citizens of Italy are warned to take precautions and evacuate the area for 1 month.
I wonder how Californians will react to such predictions.
In medicine, especially in the field of radiology and pathology, diagnostic dilemmas equivalent to what Italian seismologists go through are common. For fear of the Court and Lawyers, radiologists and pathologists commonly overcall grey areas leading to further testing and even surgery for ultimately reasons that were totally unnecessary.
Thyroid masses is one particularly thorny area for both radiologists and pathologists.
In radiology, they will report every single nodule and cyst no matter how small for fear of Court and Lawyers. In the huge majority of the time, such thyroid masses are benign and no intervention is needed. However, should one of those nodules/cysts actually end up being thyroid cancer, the radiologist may end up being sued if he did NOT report them. As such, they are all reported and the burden of lawsuit than falls upon the doctor who ordered the CT scan or ultrasound in the first place.
What does this mean for the patient? For fear of Court and Lawyers, patients will end up getting more tests done and even undergo surgical removal "just to make sure" that it is not cancerous.
Which leads to the next diagnostic dilemma...
In pathology, fine needle biopsies of such thyroid masses is common. However, making a pathological diagnosis is sometimes quite difficult, especially if cancer is on everybody's mind. So what is the pathologist to do if he is uncertain whether cancer is present or not? For fear of Court and Lawyers, he makes an ambiguous statement:
There are some atypic cells suggestive of cancer. Clinical correlation recommended.Now the legal burden is on the surgeon. The surgeon, for fear of Court and Lawyers, will now suggest to the patient that to be absolutely sure there is no cancer present, it is perhaps best to remove the thyroid gland.
Low and behold, many patients who undergo thyroid removal for such ambiguous findings on radiology and pathology reports end up with no cancer found in the thyroid gland. All that testing and surgery was, in the end, totally unnecessary.
The judgements of four physicians have been consecutively affected and compounded with each other for fear of Court and Lawyers:
- Primary Care Doctor who ordered the CT scan or Ultrasound of the thyroid gland
- Radiologist who reported the thyroid nodules/cysts
- Pathologist who interpreted the needle biopsies of those nodules/cysts
- Surgeon who ends up removing the thyroid gland based on the pathology and radiology results
Does this actually happen???
Absolutely. All the time.
In fact, it happened to the President of Argentina who had her entire thyroid gland removed for fear of cancer, but ended up that no cancer was found. Read more.
The 
