[On the description of "Forum" by Drs. Futatsuka, Eto, and Uchino].

Q3 Medicine
Shigeru Takaoka
{"title":"[On the description of \"Forum\" by Drs. Futatsuka, Eto, and Uchino].","authors":"Shigeru Takaoka","doi":"10.1265/jjh.25002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In response to the review of my book \"Minamata Disease and the Responsibility of Medicine\" by Makoto Futatsuka, Komyo Eto, and Makoto Uchino, I submitted a \"Reply\" pointing out that the review contained many medical errors, logical inconsistencies, and ethical problems. In the \"Forum\" that the three authors subsequently contributed, they presented six more points of negative findings on exposure and health problems related to Minamata disease in a fragmented manner, without responding to the various issues that I had pointed out in the \"Reply.\" In the case of environmental pollution causing diseases such as Minamata disease, the tasks of researchers in the field of medicine and public health are to (1) investigate the temporal and spatial spread of health problems, (2) investigate the pathophysiological factors for the health problems caused by environmental pollution, and (3) establish diagnostic criteria based on toxicological and epidemiological information. However, the three authors' opinions and logic clearly indicate that they lacked a standard academic or practical approach to methylmercury poisoning to pursue these three points, and that their understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease was inadequate and the premise for pursuing a diagnosis was flawed. Through discussions in this forum, the inaction of experts in the fields of public health, neurology, and pathology with regard to Minamata disease, as insisted in my book, was considered to be further confirmed.</p>","PeriodicalId":35643,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Hygiene","volume":"80 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1265/jjh.25002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In response to the review of my book "Minamata Disease and the Responsibility of Medicine" by Makoto Futatsuka, Komyo Eto, and Makoto Uchino, I submitted a "Reply" pointing out that the review contained many medical errors, logical inconsistencies, and ethical problems. In the "Forum" that the three authors subsequently contributed, they presented six more points of negative findings on exposure and health problems related to Minamata disease in a fragmented manner, without responding to the various issues that I had pointed out in the "Reply." In the case of environmental pollution causing diseases such as Minamata disease, the tasks of researchers in the field of medicine and public health are to (1) investigate the temporal and spatial spread of health problems, (2) investigate the pathophysiological factors for the health problems caused by environmental pollution, and (3) establish diagnostic criteria based on toxicological and epidemiological information. However, the three authors' opinions and logic clearly indicate that they lacked a standard academic or practical approach to methylmercury poisoning to pursue these three points, and that their understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease was inadequate and the premise for pursuing a diagnosis was flawed. Through discussions in this forum, the inaction of experts in the fields of public health, neurology, and pathology with regard to Minamata disease, as insisted in my book, was considered to be further confirmed.

[关于“论坛”的描述。Futatsuka, Eto和Uchino]。
对于我的书《水俣病与医学的责任》,作者是Futatsuka Makoto、Eto Komyo Eto和Uchino Makoto,我提交了一份“回复”,指出该评论中存在许多医疗错误、逻辑不一致和伦理问题。在三位作者随后撰写的“论坛”中,他们又以支离破碎的方式提出了六点关于与水俣病有关的接触和健康问题的负面调查结果,而没有回应我在“答复”中指出的各种问题。在水俣病等环境污染引起疾病的情况下,医学和公共卫生领域研究人员的任务是:(1)调查健康问题的时空传播;(2)调查环境污染引起健康问题的病理生理因素;(3)根据毒理学和流行病学信息建立诊断标准。然而,三位作者的观点和逻辑清楚地表明,他们对甲基汞中毒缺乏一个标准的学术或实践方法来追求这三点,他们对疾病的病理生理认识不足,追求诊断的前提是有缺陷的。通过这次论坛的讨论,人们认为,正如我在书中所坚持的那样,公共卫生、神经病学和病理学领域的专家对水俣病的不作为得到了进一步证实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Japanese Journal of Hygiene
Japanese Journal of Hygiene Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信