Tools for Practice Outils pour la pratique


Health and Environment Educational Webinar Series – MIGs







CFPCLearn Logo

Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ Credits

La lecture d'articles d'outils de pratique peut vous permettre de gagner des crédits MainPro+

Join Now S’inscrire maintenant

Already a CFPCLearn Member? Log in

Déjà abonné à CMFCApprendre? Ouvrir une session





b keith comeau November 27, 2024

Thank you.

b keith comeau November 27, 2024

Thank you

b keith comeau December 1, 2024

Thank you

b keith comeau December 5, 2024

Thank you.

b keith comeau January 9, 2025

Would be helpful to have brief clinical summary that could be printable

Howe Leam February 2, 2025

NA

michael kates March 10, 2025

THANKS!!

brett jamieson March 14, 2025

n/a

Mark Azzopardi March 16, 2025

Where to begin. First there was no rationale to the Jennifer’s work up including why an MRI Brain was needed. Second , I did not see any information that related sensitivity to various volatile compounds to harm… at least directly. I do note that there has been extensive work on the effects of these compounds on physiology, but I am alarmed that we can infer harm from this information. This is a TERRIBLE mistake made by health care professionals. Inferring harm from basic science is the basis of many misrepresentations. I see many non medical people use exactly the same techniques to advise against vaccination, for instance. I am VERY concerned when we use these kinds of techniques to instill fear, and doubt. Using basic scientific observation [valid, I assume] to infer harm is irresponsible, as it lets fear of the unknown to guide policy. For instance many antivaccination advocates during the recent covid -19 epidemic used the EXACT SAME arguments, citing the lack of long term data re safety of vaccinations as a reason NOT to get vaccinated. Shameful. With respect to the CMAJ articles there was a very old article that could not find direct evidence for harm from scents… and a few years later, a follow up article that suggested because people thought it was a problem, then scent free policies were either reasonable, or not unreasonable. Incidentally, I tried a search for the CMAJ 2002 article several different ways this morning, and the request timed out repeatedly. I did not see the bibliography promised, apologies if it was there but there were supposed to be over 50 citations. Nada. Lastly the questions were clearly staged, and the answers prepared in advance. While this isn’t bias, it does make the presentation less authoritative. Thank you for allowing me to vent. I do have a scent policy at my office however: some thing nice, two sprays only.

Dr Rick Zabrodski March 17, 2025

No reference to PEMF as a therapy

b keith comeau March 27, 2025

Thank you.

b keith comeau May 7, 2025

Thank you

Aderemi Alagbe May 8, 2025

None

Kathleen Kerr May 9, 2025

excellent

robert marsden May 12, 2025

I only do surgical assisting


Latest Tools for Practice
Derniers outils pour la pratique

#389 An ASA a day keeps the Afib at bay?

How do ASA and direct oral anticoagulants compare in atrial fibrillation and bleeding risk?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#388 Stop the Drip: Tranexamic Acid Solution for Nosebleeds

Can topical tranexamic acid treat epistaxis?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#387 Side effects of long-term PPI use: Leaving a bad taste in your mouth?

What are the side effects of long-term proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

This content is certified for MainPro+ Credits, log in to access

Ce contenu est certifié pour les crédits MainPro+, Ouvrir une session


Authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Les auteurs n’ont aucun conflit d’intérêts à déclarer.