Cassidy Mullen
Mr. Ippolito
AP Biology
9/30/18
Patel, Neel V. “Many Folks with Appendicitis Could Skip Surgery.” Popular Science, 27 Sept. 2018, www.popsci.com/appendicitis-antibiotics.
Appendicitis is a serious medical condition where the appendix becomes inflamed and painful
and entails that patients undergo surgical treatment. According to author Neel V. Patel, almost
1 in 20 americans will get appendicitis, but there may be an alternative treatment which consists
of the use of antibiotics instead of surgery. This new method might take a great deal of convincing
considering the fact that many doctors, patients, and surgeons must alter their prefixed mindset on t
he issue. Many doctors including pediatric surgeon Janice Taylor claim that the appendix cannot hurt
the patient again if it is already out of their body, but Patel argues that even routine surgeries such as an
appendectomy can have complications and are less financially practical. Patel also mentions that the purpose
of an appendix is unknown and removing it could have unknown harmful effects even though there
are no obvious ill effects known at the moment. Patel then assures the reader that the method of
treatment which entails the use of antibiotics has only worked on roughly 6 out of 10 people, meaning
4 out of 10 must come back for surgery, but those who decided to have surgery without trying antibiotics
first had a higher risk of surgical complications and the cost of treatment for immediate surgery patients
was about 60% higher. Lastly, the author mentions moving towards patient-centered decision-making and
identifying whom each treatment is optimal for in order to get the best results for each patient.
and entails that patients undergo surgical treatment. According to author Neel V. Patel, almost
1 in 20 americans will get appendicitis, but there may be an alternative treatment which consists
of the use of antibiotics instead of surgery. This new method might take a great deal of convincing
considering the fact that many doctors, patients, and surgeons must alter their prefixed mindset on t
he issue. Many doctors including pediatric surgeon Janice Taylor claim that the appendix cannot hurt
the patient again if it is already out of their body, but Patel argues that even routine surgeries such as an
appendectomy can have complications and are less financially practical. Patel also mentions that the purpose
of an appendix is unknown and removing it could have unknown harmful effects even though there
are no obvious ill effects known at the moment. Patel then assures the reader that the method of
treatment which entails the use of antibiotics has only worked on roughly 6 out of 10 people, meaning
4 out of 10 must come back for surgery, but those who decided to have surgery without trying antibiotics
first had a higher risk of surgical complications and the cost of treatment for immediate surgery patients
was about 60% higher. Lastly, the author mentions moving towards patient-centered decision-making and
identifying whom each treatment is optimal for in order to get the best results for each patient.
Despite the fact that using antibiotic treatments instead of doing a relatively successful surgery is a new
idea when it comes to appendectomies, this idea opens up the possibility of curing other health issues
with antibiotics instead of putting people under the knife. It also means that doctors could overmedicate
people without reassurance of their exact condition. We are venturing into the unknown when trying to
cure previously surgical cases with only medicine, but discovering the unknown is essential to the future
of medicine. Patel makes a good point when he says, “...minor changes to our health could have larger
ramifications we’ve yet to unravel.” This reminds me of Juuling in current day high schools because so
many students have Juuled and claimed it is not that bad for their health because doctors do not know
] the exact consequences of Juuling, but we cannot ignore the unknown because almost everything has
negative aspects to compliment its positive ones.
idea when it comes to appendectomies, this idea opens up the possibility of curing other health issues
with antibiotics instead of putting people under the knife. It also means that doctors could overmedicate
people without reassurance of their exact condition. We are venturing into the unknown when trying to
cure previously surgical cases with only medicine, but discovering the unknown is essential to the future
of medicine. Patel makes a good point when he says, “...minor changes to our health could have larger
ramifications we’ve yet to unravel.” This reminds me of Juuling in current day high schools because so
many students have Juuled and claimed it is not that bad for their health because doctors do not know
] the exact consequences of Juuling, but we cannot ignore the unknown because almost everything has
negative aspects to compliment its positive ones.
Neel V. Patel did a good job of explaining both the negative and positive aspects of using antibiotics
to cure people with appendicitis. He used research and references from other doctors, such as Pediatric
Surgeon Janice taylor and Surgeon F. Thurston Drake, to support the information presented in the text.
It would have been helpful if Patel defined or explained what appendicitis and appendectomies are. This
information would have given the reader more background context and therefore a better understanding
of the article as a whole. Patel does clarify and explain the statistics he presents which resulted from
the JAMA study on the effects of antibiotics which is beneficial to the reader’s understanding of the
article. My criticism about the way the study is presented is that Patel wrote, “A study published Tuesday
in JAMA suggests…” without telling the reader exactly who conducted the study and came up with this
new idea. Patel adds details about how the idea of the study originated from our knowledge of submariners
during the Cold War which was interesting.
to cure people with appendicitis. He used research and references from other doctors, such as Pediatric
Surgeon Janice taylor and Surgeon F. Thurston Drake, to support the information presented in the text.
It would have been helpful if Patel defined or explained what appendicitis and appendectomies are. This
information would have given the reader more background context and therefore a better understanding
of the article as a whole. Patel does clarify and explain the statistics he presents which resulted from
the JAMA study on the effects of antibiotics which is beneficial to the reader’s understanding of the
article. My criticism about the way the study is presented is that Patel wrote, “A study published Tuesday
in JAMA suggests…” without telling the reader exactly who conducted the study and came up with this
new idea. Patel adds details about how the idea of the study originated from our knowledge of submariners
during the Cold War which was interesting.
Sunday Ladas
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology C-EVEN
30 September 2018
Patel, Neel V. “Many Folks with Appendicitis Could Skip Surgery.” Popular Science, 27 Sept. 2018, www.popsci.com/appendicitis-antibiotics.
I like how Cassidy informed the reader as to what appendicitis was and what it was and how she explained the symptoms of having appendicitis. I also found it interesting how she explained the positive and negative effects of the new treatment that is being researched as the writer of the article did. I also liked how she incorporated current problems with teens such as Juuling and tying it to how it could affect appendicitis. Lastly, I thought that she did a really good job incorporating the article into her article, I liked how she incorporated quotes that the Author of the article she read said.
I did not like how she listed facts then talked about a dispute between two scientists and then listed facts again. I felt she could have listed the facts and then talked about the dispute between the scientists regarding the new treatment. Although she did a good job tying the article into current day events and problems, I felt she could have added more to tie in appendicitis to current events or given more examples as to what causes appendicitis.
When reading this article I learned lots of new things about apendicitis that I didn’t know before. I found that the new treatment that doesn’t require surgery could potentially be safer. As they still do have to do some more trial runs, I felt that learning this information will stay with me in the future and possibly if this day ever comes deciding to proceed with the procedure that doesn’t require surgery. Me, being terrified of needles going into my body, I feel that this is information that I will continue to remember and will help me in the future.
Anton Tarazi
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
AP Biology
8 October 2018
Patel, Neel V. “Many Folks with Appendicitis Could Skip Surgery.” Popular Science, 27 Sept. 2018, www.popsci.com/appendicitis-antibiotics.
Cassidy read an interesting article about a new development in medicine. In her review of Neel Patel’s “Many folks with Appendicitis Could Skip Surgery,” I liked how Cassidy informed the reader as to what appendicitis was by explaining the symptoms of having the illness. Additionally, I thought that she did a good job echoing the benefits and drawbacks of the potential medication that the article discusses. I also thought it interesting how she tied in current problems with teens such as Juuling to relate to something common (like an appendix removal) that could potentially have unforeseen consequences down the road.
Despite the good parts of her review, there were a few things I did not like. I found that the organization of Cassidy’s critique was somewhat jumbled and did not flow smoothly. I did not like how she listed facts, then discussed the different perspectives of two scientists, and then went back to naming facts. I feel that if she were to change around the order of parts of her critique, it would sound much better. Another thing I found troublesome was the grammar. The sentences were not as elegant as they could have been and it made it slightly harder to read. A quick revision, though, would be sufficient to remedy this.
After reading the article and Cassidy’s critique, I learned a lot of new things about appendicitis. I chose to read this review because appendicitis is not that rare and it is something many of us may have to deal with down the road. Knowing that there may one be a medication, which is significantly less invasive than a surgery, could completely change the way patients and doctors will handle diagnoses. For me, personally, if I had the choice between going under the knife or simply taking a few pills, I would surely chose the latter.