Artwork

A tartalmat a First Opinion Podcast biztosítja. Az összes podcast-tartalmat, beleértve az epizódokat, grafikákat és podcast-leírásokat, közvetlenül a First Opinion Podcast vagy a podcast platform partnere tölti fel és biztosítja. Ha úgy gondolja, hogy valaki az Ön engedélye nélkül használja fel a szerzői joggal védett művét, kövesse az itt leírt folyamatot https://hu.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast alkalmazás
Lépjen offline állapotba az Player FM alkalmazással!

89: Putting an end to a racist "diagnosis"

36:41
 
Megosztás
 

Manage episode 382634432 series 2969153
A tartalmat a First Opinion Podcast biztosítja. Az összes podcast-tartalmat, beleértve az epizódokat, grafikákat és podcast-leírásokat, közvetlenül a First Opinion Podcast vagy a podcast platform partnere tölti fel és biztosítja. Ha úgy gondolja, hogy valaki az Ön engedélye nélkül használja fel a szerzői joggal védett művét, kövesse az itt leírt folyamatot https://hu.player.fm/legal.

The term "excited delirium" has been used for years by law enforcement and other first responders, including health care workers, to describe people who exhibit behavior that is considered "out of control." This diagnosis has been applied again and again, even posthumously, as a justification for extreme and sometimes deadly, interventions by law enforcement. It came up most recently in the trials of two police officers accused of causing the death of Elijah McClain, a Colorado man; both officers were acquitted this week.

But excited delirium is not an evidence-based medical diagnosis. The American College of Emergency Physicians recently withdrew a 2009 white paper endorsing the concept, and California has banned it as a cause of death. Other states may follow suit. This week, we are joined by emergency phyisicians Utsha G. Khatri and Brooks Walsh, who speak about why the "excited delirium" label is both unnecessary and dangerous.

Check out our episode of Color Code about "excited delirium" as well as a previous episode of the First Opinion Podcast on the topic. And sign up for the First Opinion newsletter.

  continue reading

109 epizódok

Artwork
iconMegosztás
 
Manage episode 382634432 series 2969153
A tartalmat a First Opinion Podcast biztosítja. Az összes podcast-tartalmat, beleértve az epizódokat, grafikákat és podcast-leírásokat, közvetlenül a First Opinion Podcast vagy a podcast platform partnere tölti fel és biztosítja. Ha úgy gondolja, hogy valaki az Ön engedélye nélkül használja fel a szerzői joggal védett művét, kövesse az itt leírt folyamatot https://hu.player.fm/legal.

The term "excited delirium" has been used for years by law enforcement and other first responders, including health care workers, to describe people who exhibit behavior that is considered "out of control." This diagnosis has been applied again and again, even posthumously, as a justification for extreme and sometimes deadly, interventions by law enforcement. It came up most recently in the trials of two police officers accused of causing the death of Elijah McClain, a Colorado man; both officers were acquitted this week.

But excited delirium is not an evidence-based medical diagnosis. The American College of Emergency Physicians recently withdrew a 2009 white paper endorsing the concept, and California has banned it as a cause of death. Other states may follow suit. This week, we are joined by emergency phyisicians Utsha G. Khatri and Brooks Walsh, who speak about why the "excited delirium" label is both unnecessary and dangerous.

Check out our episode of Color Code about "excited delirium" as well as a previous episode of the First Opinion Podcast on the topic. And sign up for the First Opinion newsletter.

  continue reading

109 epizódok

Minden epizód

×
 
Loading …

Üdvözlünk a Player FM-nél!

A Player FM lejátszó az internetet böngészi a kiváló minőségű podcastok után, hogy ön élvezhesse azokat. Ez a legjobb podcast-alkalmazás, Androidon, iPhone-on és a weben is működik. Jelentkezzen be az feliratkozások szinkronizálásához az eszközök között.

 

Gyors referencia kézikönyv