Among the wide-spectrum contribution of the Rambam – the Maimonides – in philosophy to the word and to Judaism are his ideas on the body and on the soul and on the relations between them. His major approaches in these subjects are the following: 1) The body is the home of the soul, and the soul guides the body. That means the body and the soul are one unit. 2) The soul has five virtual parts. Each part is responsible for another activity in the human being. 3) Except for the treatment of diseases of the body and the soul with drugs, foods, physical exercise, etc., the Rambam believes that maintaining the health – of the body and of the soul – lies first of all, and probably exclusively, in observing the commandments and improving one’s ways, morals and conduct up to their highest levels, toward all of the world’s creatures. 4) The Rambam is of the opinion that one needs to persist in learning the Torah. One should worship God with awe and love and observe good values and virtues. All of these build the frameworks that maintain mental health and strengthen man’s abilities to develop skills for maintaining bodily health. This is so because body and soul are one – which is the basis of the Rambam’s philosophy of health and medicine.
The physician-scientist represents the medical-scientific version of the “triple threat” athlete. Yet, in medicine as in sports, specialization and business are ever more in the forefront. As the field of medicine evolves, it is likely that the role of the physician, the scientist, and the physician-scientist will continue to change. Whether this is for the good or bad will only be known in hindsight.
Genetic aberrations have become a dominant factor in the stratification of myeloid malignancies. Cytogenetic and a few mutation studies are the backbone of risk assessment models of myeloid malignancies which are a major consideration in clinical decisions, especially patient assignment for allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Progress in our understanding of the genetic basis of the pathogenesis of myeloid malignancies and the growing capabilities of mass sequencing may add new roles for the clinical usage of genetic data. A few recently identified mutations recognized to be associated with specific diseases or clinical scenarios may soon become part of the diagnostic criteria of such conditions. Mutational study may also advance our capabilities for a more efficient patient selection process, assigning the most effective therapy at the best timing for each patient. The clinical utility of genetic data is anticipated to advance further with the adoption of deep sequencing and next-generation sequence techniques. We herein suggest some future potential applications of sequential genetic data to identify pending deteriorations at time points which are the best for aggressive interventions such as allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Genetics is moving from being mostly a prognostic factor to become a multitasking decision support tool for hematologists. Physicians must pay attention to advances in molecular hematology as it will soon be accessible and influential for most of our patients.
This paper presents the full debate held on October 1, 2014, which focused on the following resolution: “Publications which promote political agendas have no place in scientific and medical journals, and academics should refrain from publishing in such journals.”
The debate moderator was Professor Shimon Glick. Taking the pro stance was Professor A. Mark Clarfield; the con stance was held by Professor Rael D. Strous. Following the first part of the debate, Dr Richard Horton, Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, gave his thoughts on the topic. This was followed by the opportunity for rebuttal by Professors Clarfield and Strous. The debate was summarized and closed by Professor Glick.
This paper provides a slightly edited text of the debate, for ease of reading.
In both primary care and consultative practices, patients presenting with fibromyalgia (FM) often have other medically unexplained somatic symptoms and are ultimately diagnosed as having central sensitization (CS). Central sensitization encompasses many disorders where the central nervous system amplifies sensory input across many organ systems and results in myriad symptoms. A pragmatic approach to evaluate FM and related symptoms, including a focused review of medical records, interviewing techniques, and observations, is offered here, giving valuable tools for identifying and addressing the most relevant symptoms. At the time of the clinical evaluation, early consideration of CS may improve the efficiency of the visit, reduce excessive testing, and help in discerning between typical and atypical cases so as to avoid an inaccurate diagnosis. Discussion of pain and neurophysiology and sensitization often proves helpful.
The Jewish principle concerning a decision with regard to a dangerous treatment is as following: A patient who is estimated to die within 12 months because of a fatal illness is permitted to undergo a treatment that on the one hand may extend his life beyond 12 months, but on the other hand may hasten his death. There are, however, several limitations to this ruling related to the chances of success with the proposed treatment, the nature of the treatment, whether it is intended to be curative or merely to postpone the danger and death, whether the treatment is absolutely necessary, and others. One is not obligated to undergo a dangerous treatment, but one is permitted to do so. The permissibility to forfeit a short life expectancy in order to achieve more prolonged life applies only with the patient’s consent. That consent is valid and is not considered a form of attempted suicide. Neither is a refusal to submit to treatment considered an act of suicide; the patient has the right to refuse a dangerous procedure. In all situations where a permissive ruling is granted for a patient to endanger his short life expectancy, the ruling should be arrived at after careful reflection and with the approval of the rabbinic authorities acting on the recommendation of the most expert physicians.
Mueller is to be congratulated for a comprehensive and detailed exposition on medical professionalism. There is no question but that professionalism is important—however, Mueller is correct to point out the complexities of the subject and the fact that there is no single or simple way to teach or assess professionalism. ...
An anniversary is not only a point of memory—it provides the opportunity for self-examination and paves the way to the future. Every anniversary marks a starting-point that was preceded by a vision. The beginning of any vision is a personal dream—someone wants to improve or repair the world as far as he is able. The vision motivates action; in its aftermath comes the reality. This is the 21st issue of Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal. This issue is particularly important as it marks the completion of five years of creative work pursuing our vision for a high-caliber scientific medical journal. Our vision has become reality.
As I shared in my January 2015 editorial, the furor surrounding publication in The Lancet of the open letter by P. Manduca et al. carried potential for bad and for good. Here at Rambam Health Care Campus, we have chosen and will continue to look for the good.
Background: Estimates of lifetime cancer risk are commonly used in the clinical setting and in health-care evaluations. These measures are based on lifetime cancer risk estimates and may create an unrealistically frightening perception of cancer risk for an individual. We suggest using two new measures of cancer risk to complement the cancer lifetime risk measure, namely estimates of cancer risk from birth to a specific age or from a specific age to life expectancy.
Methods: We calculated risks using incidence density data from the Israel National Cancer Registry of 2013, applying a well-known formula for calculating risk, for a follow-up time. The joint disease-free survival probability is calculated for several age intervals, and hence the risk (i.e. 1–survival) for the intervals.
Results: The risk of cancer to age 80 in Jewish men and women, respectively, ranged from about 0.336 and 0.329 at age 0, to 0.279 and 0.237 at age 60. The risk of cancer from birth up to an age in Jewish men and women, respectively, ranged from 0 and 0 at birth to 0.088 and 0.129 at age 60. The risk of cancer to age 80 in Arab men and women, respectively, ranged from 0.298 and 0.235 at age 0 to 0.249 and 0.161 at age 60. The risk of cancer from birth up to an age in Arab men and women, respectively, ranged from 0 and 0 at age 0 to 0.074 and 0.095 at age 60. In Jewish and Arab women, breast cancer risk to age 80 decreased from about 0.127 in Jewish women at age 40 to 0.079 at age 60 and from 0.080 to 0.043 in Arab women; the risk from birth up to a specific age ranged between 0 and 0.056, and 0 and 0.040, respectively.
Conclusion: The two proposed new estimates convey important additional information to patients and physicians. These estimates are considerably lower than the frequently quoted 33% lifetime cancer risk and are more relevant to patients and physicians. Similarly, breast cancer risk estimates up to or from a specific age differ considerably from the frequently quoted lifetime risk estimates of 1 in 8 women.
