<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4727.700" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN-TOP: 2px; FONT: 12pt Verdana; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px">
<DIV>Vadim Antonov wrote:<BR><BR>>I definitely would NOT want to see my
doctor over a video link when I need<BR>>him. The technology is simply
not up to providing realistic telepresense,<BR>>and a lot of diagnostically
relevant information is carried by things like<BR>>smell and touch, and
little details. So telemedicine is a poor substitute<BR>>for having a
doctor on site; and should be used only when it is<BR>>absolutely the
only option (i.e. emergency on an airplane, etc).<BR><BR>If you are really ill,
this is true but there are always gray areas that go into the decision whether
the 'illness' is worth a visit. Physicians often order things for patients they
know based upon a phone call or even e-mail if they feel reasonably comfortable.
I think that there are lots of situations that a physician would recommend "just
keep Johnny home for a couple days, give him plenty of fluids and [fill in the
blank] — call me in two days if he isn't feeling better." Having live video of
Johnny is a pretty good supplement to voice, or for that matter the receptionist
could record the video call for the physician and he could play it back when he
has a few minutes. It's potentially even more important with elderly shut-ins,
because bringing them in can be difficult and expensive and their immune systems
are typically weaker so you should try to minimize their exposure to people with
contagious diseases.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jere</DIV></BODY></HTML>