# data[].attributes.headline
Post #10: Critical Thinking Process Question Response (Word Document)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #10: Critical Thinking Process Question Response (Word Document)

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #9 Reasons for Belief: Ideology (image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #9 Reasons for Belief: Ideology (image)

# data[].attributes.body
Defintion:
The Ideology reason for belief can be defined as someone whose beliefs, and reasonings behind said belief, is strongly influenced by their political, religious, or cultural ideologies or upbringing. Essentially, it is what an individual values the most and what makes them the person they are today.

Connection:
This image is of a fetus in utero and connects back to the highly debated topic of abortions, and whether a woman should be given the choice whether or not to have an abortion. Many pro-life individuals come from a strong religious background, mainly the Catholic church, who are extremely against abortions, and who believe life begins at the moment of conception, rather than at birth. Pro-life individuals are strongly influenced by the Catholic church and the teachings of Jesus in the Bible, and use these reasonings to uphold their beliefs that woman should not be allowed to be given the option of having an abortion. Pro-life individuals value human life rather than valuing the choice that is given to a woman when it comes to an abortion.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #8 Reasons for Belief: Simplicity (image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #8 Reasons for Belief: Simplicity (image)

# data[].attributes.body
Definiton:
The Simplicity reason for belief can be defined as someone who will believe the more simple answer or simplistic approach to a phenomena, instead of the harder answer or more scientifically complex approach.

Connection:
This image of a tornado depicts one of the many natural disasters that can occur in our world. It is often said by many that when a natural disaster occurs, such as a tornado, and destroys small towns, causing a mass amount of damage and loss of life, it can be explained as an act of God, rather than an upset in the natural earth's processes. The simple answer or the simplistic approach would be for individuals to explain this terrible event as an act of God; his way of punishing humankind for the havoc we have caused to the planet and to one another. Whereas, the harder answer or the more scientifically complex approach for individuals to grasp would be that natural disasters, such as tornados, occur due to imbalances in the earth's natural processes and cannot be avoided.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #7 Reasons for Belief: Patternicity (image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #7 Reasons for Belief: Patternicity (image)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Patternicity reason for belief can be defined as someone who tends to find meaningful patterns in meaningful and meaningless noise. We, as human beings, looks for patterns in our everyday lives as part of our survival instinct, and to explain events that occur to us or abnormal images we may see that do not make sense to the average person.

Connection:
This image below depicts the common practice among humans to discern patterns within cloud formations that depict objects, animals, or faces. Although this particular image is meant to be more of a joke, often times, individuals will find patterns in their lives, such as in cloud formations, and relate it back to them in a meaningful way. An example would be when a loved one has passed away and butterflies always held a special meaning between you two. Seeing a cloud formation that you think resembles a butterfly can be your way of interpreting that this particular individual is looking down on you from heaven or the afterlife. However, a completely different person could look at the same cloud formation and not see a butterfly at all. A meaningful pattern was seen by an individual in a cloud formation, but was completely meaningless to an entirely different person.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #6 Red Flag: Confusion of Correlation with Causation (video)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #6 Red Flag: Confusion of Correlation with Causation (video)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Confusion of Correlation with Causation red flag can be defined as wrongly concluding a direct correlation with a particular event for the sole reason that the two events coincide with one another. The fact that two different events are occurring at the same time does not mean that the two events are caused by one another.

Connection:
This video clip from The Simpsons demonstrates Confusion of Correlation with Causation because as Homer sees the bear patrol van drive past him and Lisa, he comments on how he hasn't seen a bear in sight and the bear patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa replies how Homer has concluded a specious reasoning, as where Homer and Lisa reside, bears are not predominantly known to live in that area or it is a rare event for a bear to wander into a residential neighbourhood. Lisa provides an example using a rock that she claims is a tiger repellant rock. When asked how it works by Homer, Lisa replies it obviously doesn't work, but I don't see any tigers around here, do you? At this, Homer falls victim to this fallacy and purchases the rock from Lisa. Lisa proves that often times, individuals will confuse correlation with causation between two events when they in fact have no relation to one another at all.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #5 Red Flag: Ancient Wisdom (website) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #5 Red Flag: Ancient Wisdom (website) 

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Ancient Wisdom red flag can defined as alternative medical treatments used by individuals from ancient civilizations. These medical treatments are quite dangerous and often harm the individual more rather than treat their illness, as ancient civilizations knew far less about the study of medicine than we do now in the modern age.

Connection:
The article I have provided below describes in great detail the history of bloodletting, and some of its famous victims, such as Charles II and George Washington. Blood letting first begin around 3000 years ago, beginning with the Egyptians, and after the 19th century decreased in practice substantially. It is rarely used in modern medicine today. Back in ancient times, Hippocrates believed that all individuals had four basic humours within them, blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile, to represent the four basic elements, earth, air, fire, and water. Ancient civilizations were led to believe that when one fell ill, this meant that one of the four humours were off balance, and to correct this imbalance, the humour in excess must be drained. This is how the treatment of bloodletting began. An incision would be made into an individual and their blood would then be drained in an effort to rebalance the humour within them. This was an extremely dangerous practice and often led the victim to acquire a substantial infection which caused them to die. It wasn't until Dr. Pierre Louis conducted clinical trials of his patients using the bloodletting method and discounted the credibility of the practice, determining that bloodletting in fact had no merits to its use. In today's society, bloodletting would be extremely frowned upon by any physician who partakes in this treatment, as the advancement of modern medicine has completely disputed this course of treatment for particular illnesses, as safer and reliable methods have been discovered.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With a history spanning at least 3000 years, bloodletting has only recently-in the late 19th century-been discredited as a treatment for most ailments.

The practice of bloodletting began around 3000 years ago with the Egyptians, then continued with the Greeks and Romans, the Arabs and Asians, then spread through Europe during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. It reached its peak in Europe in the 19th century but subsequently declined and today in Western medicine is used only for a few select conditions.

Humors, Hippocrates, and Galen
To appreciate the rationale for bloodletting one must first understand the paradigm of disease 2300 years ago in the time of Hippocrates (~460-370 BC). He believed that existence was represented by the four basic elements-earth, air, fire, and water-which in humans were related to the four basic humors: blood, phlegm, black bile, yellow bile.

Each humor was centred in a particular organ-brain, lung, spleen, and gall bladder-and related to a particular personality type-sanguine, phlegmatic, melancholic, and choleric.[ 1]

Being ill meant having an imbalance of the four humors. Therefore treatment consisted of removing an amount of the excessive humor by various means such as bloodletting, purging, catharsis, diuresis, and so on. By the 1st century bloodletting was already a common treatment, but when Galen of Pergamum (129-200 AD) declared blood as the most dominant humor, the practice of venesection gained even greater importance.[ 2]

Galen was able to propagate his ideas through the force of personality and the power of the pen; his total written output exceeds two million words. He had an extraordinary effect on medical practice and his teaching persisted for many centuries. His ideas and writings were disseminated by several physicians in the Middle Ages when bloodletting became accepted as the standard treatment for many conditions.

Methods of bloodletting
Bloodletting was divided into a generalized method done by venesection and arteriotomy, and a localized method done by scarification with cupping and leeches. Venesection was the most common procedure and usually involved the median cubital vein at the elbow, but many different veins could be used. The main instruments for this technique were called lancets and fleams.[ 3]

Thumb lancets were small sharp-pointed, two-edged instruments often with an ivory or tortoise shell case that the physician could carry in his pocket. Fleams were usually devices with multiple, variably sized blades that folded into a case like a pocketknife.

Localized bloodletting often involved scarification, which meant scraping the skin with a cube-shaped brass box containing multiple small knives, followed by cupping, which involved placing a dome-shaped glass over the skin and extracting the air by suction or prior heating.[ 4]

Leeches used for bloodletting usually involved the medicinal leech, Hirudo medicinalis. At each feeding a leech can ingest about 5 to 10 ml of blood, almost 10 times its own weight. The use of leeches was greatly influenced by Dr François Broussais (1772-1838), a Parisian physician who claimed that all fevers were due to specific organ inflammation. He was a great proponent of leech therapy along with aggressive bloodletting. He believed in placing leeches over the organ of the body that was deemed to be inflamed.[ 5]

his therapy was very popular in Europe in the 1830s, especially France, where 5 to 6 million leeches per year were used in Paris alone and about 35 million in the country as a whole. By the late 1800s, however, enthusiasm for leech therapy had waned, but leeches are still used today in select situations.

Famous bleedings
When Charles II (1630-1685) suffered a seizure he was immediately treated with 16 ounces of bloodletting from the left arm followed by another 8 ounces from cupping.[ 6] Then he endured a vigorous regimen of emetics, enemas, purgatives, and mustard plasters followed by more bleeding from the jugular veins. He had more seizures and received further treatment with herbs and quinine. In total he had about 24 ounces of blood taken before he died.

After riding in snowy weather, George Washington (1732-1799) developed a fever and respiratory distress. Under the care of his three physicians he had copious amounts of blood drawn, blisterings, emetics, and laxatives. He died the next night of what has been diagnosed retrospectively as epiglottitis and shock.[ 6] His medical treatment aroused significant controversy, particularly the bloodletting.

Warring physicians
The practice of bloodletting aroused deep emotions in both practitioners and detractors, with intense argument about the benefit and harm of venesection. Drs Benjamin Rush, William Alison, and Hughes Bennett exemplify this conflict.

Dr Benjamin Rush (1745-1813) was one of the most controversial physicians in his time. He was arrogant and paternalistic but dedicated to eradicating illness wherever he saw it. He worked tirelessly during the yellow fever epidemics in Philadelphia in 1793 and 1797 and devoted much time to the problem of mental illness.[ 7]

Unfortunately he had a very simplistic view of disease and thought that all febrile illnesses were due to an "irregular convulsive action of the blood vessels." Therefore in his mind all therapy was directed at dampening down this vascular overexcitement. He was a great proponent of "depletion therapy," which meant aggressive bloodletting and vigorous purging.

He was known to remove extraordinary amounts of blood and often bled patients several times. "It frequently strangles a fever... imparts strength to the body... renders the pulse more frequent when it is preternaturally slow... renders the bowels, when costive, more easily moved by purging physic... removes or lessens pain in every part of the body, and more especially the head... removes or lessens the burning heat of the skin, and the burning heat of the stomach..."[ 8]

In addition he held a firm belief in his calomel purgatives, which were loaded with mercury and which he called "the Samson of medicine." In numerous articles he boldly proclaimed the benefits of his therapy.

He aroused both extremely positive and negative reactions in those around him, including many physicians. Some doctors referred to his practices as "murderous" and his prescribed doses as "fit for a horse." He had a long-running feud with his college of physicians, which forced him to resign, and his application to the faculty of Columbia Medical School in New York was denied. However, Rush Medical College in Chicago was named in his honor and gained its charter in 1837.

At the Edinburgh School of Medicine Dr William Alison (1790-1859) and Dr Hughes Bennett (1812-1875) were a study in contrasts. The former was a dignified old-timer and strong believer in bloodletting, while the latter was an arrogant newcomer and resolute debunker of bloodletting. Whereas Dr Alison followed the old tradition of clinical experience and empirical observation, Dr Bennett believed in the new methods of pathology and physiology supported by the microscope and the stethoscope.[ 9]

Central to their debate was the observation that the improved outcome of patients with pneumonia paralleled the decreased usage of bloodletting. While Dr Alison ascribed this to a "change in type" of illness which had gone from sthenic (strong) to asthenic (weak), Dr Bennett believed it due to diminished use of a dangerous therapy.

Both were implacable in their point of view, thereby underlining the significant gap between their beliefs in empirical observation versus scientific verification. Dr Bennett had the advantage of the latest techniques and "grounded his rejection of bloodletting on pathologic concepts of inflammation and pneumonia derived from microscopic studies of inflamed tissues."[ 9]

The tide turns
In Paris Dr Pierre Louis (1787-1872) was another scientific-minded physician who wanted to assess the efficacy of bloodletting. He examined the clinical course and outcomes of 77 patients with acute pneumonia taken from his own and hospital records.

He compared the results in patients treated with bloodletting in the early phase versus the late phase of the illness. In his conclusions he did not condemn bloodletting but concluded that the effect of this procedure "was actually much less than has been commonly believed."[ 10]

Subsequent studies by Pasteur, Koch, Virchow, and others confirmed the validity of the new scientific methods, and the use of bloodletting gradually diminished to a few select conditions.

Bloodletting today
Today phlebotomy therapy is primarily used in Western medicine for a few conditions such as hemochromatosis, polycythemia vera, and porphyria cutanea tarda.[ 11]

Hemochromatosis is a genetic disorder of iron metabolism leading to abnormal iron accumulation in liver, pancreas, heart, pituitary, joints, and skin. It is treated with periodic phlebotomy to maintain ferritin levels at a reasonable level so as to minimize further iron deposition.

Polycythemia vera is a stem cell bone marrow disorder leading to overproduction of red blood cells and variable overproduction of white blood cells and platelets. Its treatment includes phlebotomy to reduce the red blood cell mass and decrease the chance of dangerous clots.

Porphyria cutanea tarda is a group of disorders of heme metabolism with an associated abnormality in iron metabolism. Phlebotomy is also used to decrease iron levels and prevent accumulation in various organs.

In the last 25 years leech therapy has made a comeback in the area of microsurgery and reimplantation surgery. Hirudo medicinalis can secrete several biologically active substances including hyaluronidase, fibrinase, proteinase inhibitors, and hirudin, an anticoagulant.

The leech can help reduce venous congestion and prevent tissue necrosis. In this way it can be used in the postoperative care of skin grafts and reimplanted fingers, ears, and toes. Because of concern regarding secondary infections a "mechanical leech" has been developed at the University of Wisconsin.[ 12]

Why did it persist?
We may wonder why the practice of bloodletting persisted for so long, especially when discoveries by Vesalius and Harvey in the 16th and 17th centuries exposed the significant errors of Galenic anatomy and physiology. However as Kerridge and Lowe have stated, "that bloodletting survived for so long is not an intellectual anomaly-it resulted from the dynamic interaction of social, economic, and intellectual pressures, a process that continues to determine medical practice."[ 9]

With our present understanding of pathophysiology we might be tempted to laugh at such methods of therapy. But what will physicians think of our current medical practice 100 years from now? They may be astonished at our overuse of antibiotics, our tendency to polypharmacy, and the bluntness of treatments like radiation and chemotherapy.

In the future we can anticipate that with further advances in medical knowledge our diagnoses will become more refined and our treatments less invasive. We can hope that medical research will proceed unhampered by commercial pressures and unfettered by political ideology. And if we truly believe that we can move closer to the pure goal of scientific truth.

References

1. Magner LN. A History of Medicine. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc; 1992:66-74.
2. Magner LN. A History of Medicine. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc; 1992:86-96.
3. McCormic S. Blood and magic-the evolution of phlebotomy. www.associatedcontent.com/article/959576/blood_and_magic_the_evolution_of_phlebotomy.html?cat=37 (accessed 4 April 2009).
4. Seigworth GS. Bloodletting Over the Centuries. New York State Journal of Medicine 1980;Dec:2022-2028. www.pbs.org/wnet/redgold/basics/bloodlettinghistory.html (accessed 4 April 2009).
5. Adams SL. The medicinal leech. Ann Intern Med 1988;109:399-405.
6. Parapia LA. History of bloodletting by phlebotomy. Brit J Haemat 2008;143:490-495.
7. North RL. Benjamin Rush, MD: Assassin or beloved healer? Proc Bayl Univ Med Cent 2000;13:45-49.
8. Rush B. A Defence of Blood-letting, as a Remedy for Certain Diseases. In: Medical Inquiries and Observations. Vol 4. Philadelphia, PA; 1815. Available online at: Arnebeck B. Benjamin Rush's A Defence of Blood-letting, as a Remedy for Certain Diseases. www.bobarnebeck/defence.html (accessed 4 April 2009).
9. Kerridge IH, Lowe M. Bloodletting: The story of a therapeutic technique. Med J Aust 1995;163:631-633.
10. Morabia A. P.C.A. Louis and the birth of clinical epidemiology. Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:1327-1333.
11. Lee GR, Foerster J, Lukens J, et al. Wintrobe's Clinical Hematology. 10th ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1999:1063,1079,1539.
12. Whitaker IS, Rao J, Izadi D, et al. Historical Article: Hirudo medicinalis: Ancient origins of, and trends in the use of medicinal leeches throughout history. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;42:133-137.

Dr Greenstone is a family physician in Surrey, BC.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With a history spanning at least 3000 years, bloodletting has only recently-in the late 19th century-been discredited as a treatment for most ailments. The practice of bloodletting began around 3000 years ago with the Egyptians, then continued with the Greeks and Romans, the Arabs and Asians, then spread through Europe during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #4 Red Flag: Confirmation Bias (image) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #4 Red Flag: Confirmation Bias (image) 

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Confirmation Bias red flag can be defined as someone who remembers confirming evidence, or a "hit", about a specific belief of theirs while ignoring evidence that in fact disputes their belief, or a "miss".

Connection:
This image of a full moon depicts the common belief medical professionals have that there is an increase in emergency room (ER) admissions during the nights when there is a full moon. Suppose a nurse who works in the ER notices that it will be a full moon during her shift. Noticing this, the nurse will pay more attention to the number of ER admissions during her shift, believing there is an increase in admissions. Whereas any other night when it is not a full moon, they will not take much notice to the number of admissions in the ER, leading them to believe that there is in fact a correlation between a full moon and the number of admissions to the ER.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #3 Red Flag: Appeal to Authority (image)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #3 Red Flag: Appeal to Authority (image)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Appeal to Authority red flag can be defined as individuals whose beliefs are altered by individuals in an authoritative position, such as celebrities. The claimant outshines the actual truth to the claim they are making. Specifically, celebrities who endorse products with no concrete knowledge to the claim they are making about the endorsed product.

Connection:
This picture depicts celebrity Kylie Jenner, who is notorious for her constant endorsing of products on her Instagram account. Kylie Jenner has amounted a massive following on Instagram, 85.1 million followers to be exact. In this image, you can see Kylie Jenner endorsing a product called SkinnyMint Tea, claiming it as a natural detox program that is going to allow her to get "healthy" for the summertime. Kylie Jenner has no certification or degree that would allow her to have knowledge of how this product specifically works or whether or not the claims made by this product are in fact true. The only thing that Kylie Jenner's followers see is a physically fit women who is appealing to the eye promoting a product that she claims helps her to stay healthy and physically fit, altering her followers belief's. If Kylie Jenner drinks this tea and claims it works, then the claim must be true.

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
The Red Herring red flag can be defined as a irrelevant distraction, usually during a conversation or argument, that an individual uses towards their audience to divert them away from the topic of the conversation or the true issue being discussed.

Connection:
This video demonstrates the Red Herring red flag because both Mayor West and Lois distract and divert the undecided voters away from the topic of their questions by producing an irrelevant distraction, causing them to forget the true issue being discussed. For example, when Mort Goldman poses the question to Mayor West about the possibility of an increase in garbage pickup, Mayor West proceeds to divert away from the question by proclaiming what an excellent question it is and how wonderful it is to live in a town where the citizens are able to ask questions of him, all the while, Mayor West never actually answers Mort's question about whether or not he will be increasing garbage pickup if re-elected, and Mort has forgotten all about the topic being discussed.

# data[].attributes.body
Made by Jami Molloy, working individually