The hottest Patient Safety Substack posts right now

Many people are labeled allergic to drugs they aren’t actually allergic to — penicillin is a common example where most recorded allergies are likely wrong.
False allergy labels cause worse care, higher costs, more drug-resistant infections, and longer hospital stays because clinicians avoid preferred medicines.
Most suspected drug allergies can be safely checked and removed with supervised testing (direct oral challenges), so getting evaluated by an allergist can let you use better treatments and help public health.

COVID is fully airborne and hospitals need to implement proper infection control measures to protect vulnerable patients.
The WHO's initial guidance on COVID transmission was based on outdated science and hindered early control of the pandemic.
Hospitals are failing to prioritize infection control due to financial interests, putting patients and healthcare workers at risk.

UnitedHealth faced a serious cyberattack, showing that even big companies can be vulnerable to cybercrime. This situation highlights the risks of having too much sensitive data controlled by a few large corporations.
The healthcare system is focused more on profit than patient care. This has left it weak against modern threats like cyberattacks, which can disrupt services and harm patients.
To fix these issues, we need stronger rules to protect patient data and make sure healthcare companies prioritize patient safety over making money. It's important to shift our focus from profits to genuine care for patients.

Private equity firms, like Steward Health Care, have been negatively impacting hospitals by cutting resources and making false promises. This has led to unsafe conditions for both staff and patients.
Steward Health Care has a history of financial mismanagement and failed commitments, which has raised concerns among local leaders and health officials. They’ve been accused of prioritizing profit over patient care.
Many hospital employees and doctors are frustrated with the situation, as it puts patient safety at risk. They feel helpless in trying to provide good care amidst the company's failures.

Many common medical treatments are not supported by solid evidence, with around 90% lacking strong trials to prove their effectiveness.
A lot of spending on treatments comes from practices that might actually be harmful or useless, putting patients at risk.
Creating a system to test these questionable treatments could save billions of dollars and improve patient health significantly.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Many drugs have been approved by the FDA without solid proof that they actually work. This means patients might be taking medication that doesn't help them at all.
The FDA's approval process has become too focused on getting drugs to market quickly rather than ensuring they are genuinely safe and effective. This can lead to harmful or ineffective treatments being available for long periods.
Many doctors and patients misunderstand what FDA approval really means. Just because a drug is approved doesn’t mean it has clear benefits or is safe to use.

Just like any medication, sneezing can have surprising side effects, some of which might seem extreme. It's funny to think about how silly the side effects of something natural like sneezing could sound if listed like a drug's.
Holding in a sneeze can be harmful too and might lead to serious injuries like broken bones or damage to the windpipe. It's a reminder that our bodies have their ways of reacting, and sometimes we should let them do their thing.
Reports about weight loss drugs like Ozempic highlight the complexity of medications and their side effects. It shows that we often overlook the risks connected with common actions, like sneezing or taking a medication.

Innovation Breakdown tells the story of a startup harmed by FDA actions, highlighting the challenges of bringing a new medical device through the FDA.
Medical device approvals at the FDA involve complex processes with regulatory uncertainties and the potential for regulatory roadblocks.
The book raises questions about regulatory transparency, advocating for policy reforms to speed up approvals, reduce uncertainty, and balance strictness and effectiveness testing.

The FDA approved Rebyota, a new treatment for serious gut infections that is basically just processed poop, but it comes with a very high price tag of around $9,487, sparking concerns about its affordability compared to existing fecal microbiota transplants.
Fecal microbiota transplants (FMT) have been used effectively for years but face regulatory challenges, leading to limited access and insurance coverage, which leaves patients with expensive options like Rebyota.
The FDA's new rules seem to restrict the use of lower-cost stool banks for FMTs, creating a monopoly for companies producing expensive versions, which raises questions about priorities in healthcare and profit vs. patient care.