The Internet can undoubtedly provide us with helpful information and resources when it comes to our medical concerns, but while the Web is a powerful tool for acquiring information and putting knowledge at our fingertips, it can also be misleading when it comes to health and illness and lead our frazzled minds to jump to worst-case-scenarios, or potentially misdiagnose when we require serious medical attention.
Because of the risk factors in diagnosing our own conditions, self-diagnosis is highly discouraged by governments, physicians and patient-care organizations, mainly because it could lead to wrong treatments or lack of care for serious conditions. For instance, a person may experience all the symptoms of someone with an anxiety condition unknowing that they have a heart arrhythmia and need a pacemaker.
Surely, when it comes to inquiring about home remedies or common symptoms and ailments, an online search may have just the answer for you and even free up some precious space in our overcrowded hospitals. Investigating the symptoms is one thing- taking the diagnosis into our own hands is quite another. The chance of missing certain symptoms and the lack of objectivity in trying to self-diagnose is far too risky and can potentially be more damaging than helpful.
Not to say that doctors never make mistakes. Doctors may misinterpret or disregard certain symptoms. It is possible that a doctor will fail to conduct proper tests, maybe even inadequately evaluate results. Or, worse yet, miss an underlying disease. Online medical sources can help put more power in patients’ hands as they can easily access information concerning their medical queries, which in turn can help doctors diagnose and treat their patients more effectively.
But the plethora of information available out there can be fuel for hypochondriacs or the new breed of cyberchondriacs (cyberchondria being “an unfounded medical fear, or heightened attention to serious disorders, based on the review of Web content”). Learning about terrifying diseases can certainly lead to pretty vivid delusions. All of a sudden, one becomes much more in-tune with symptoms that are consistent to that of the disease while the inconsistent ones get ignored.
Similar to medical student syndrome, beginning med students are claimed to be some of the biggest hypochondriacs around. Like them, we have basic information, but not a complete and thorough context to put it in. Not to mention the years of training and hands-on experience health professionals have to make educated, correct conclusions. And anyone with a Merck Manual at home can just as quickly fall prey to this trend. People can read one thing and take it as ultimate truth or skew it to adhere to their preconceived notions.
Just because you have a fever doesn’t mean you have meningitis (but maybe you have Swine Flu); just because you have a headache doesn’t mean you have a brain tumour; just because you’re sad, doesn’t mean you have clinical depression. Although a picture or description may seem to be an exact representation of our ailment, it can be found to describe a multitude of different diseases, as we can all relate to having had irritability, sleeplessness and even diarrhea at some point or another.
According to a 2008 research report by Microsoft concerning the escalation of medical concerns in web searches, of the 8 in 10 American adults that have searched for healthcare information online, “75 percent refrain from checking key quality indicators such as the validity of the source and the creation date of medical information”.
Moreover, though the medical information that can be found on web sites is generally valid, much of the research by the medical community on medical web content- suggests that the information is also incomplete. People with no medical training trying to understand complex terminology in regards to medical conditions may be at risk for harmful self-diagnosis and self-treatment. The Web may offer a lot, but unlike exchange hosting servers which are managed in data centers, the information can be erroneous and cannot be the primary tool for diagnosis. A simple search for ‘sore throat’ could return everything from strep to sinus cancer. A study looking at the accuracy, completeness and design of health-related websites showed that in 70 percent of the studies examined, the quality of health-related Web content was low [EYSENBACH, G., POWELL, J., KUSS, O. AND SA, E.-R. (2002). Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the World Wide Web, a systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(20): 2691-2700.].
It’s really important to keep in mind that doctors have a much fuller understanding of symptoms. Many diseases share similar symptoms but what distinguishes them from each other is the combination, severity and frequency of these symptoms. For the most part the average person won’t have the tools and experience to make a truly informed diagnosis and in many cases will just cause themselves unnecessary panic.
The safest and most reliable way to use the Internet effectively when it comes to health matters is to use it in conjunction with regular visits to a doctor. Also be sure to visit reliable sites, such as hospital and government sites, or reputed associations and university sites. Visiting various medical discussion forums can also give you an idea of what other people may be experiencing which could be beneficial to your research. But this information is subjective and has to be considered as such. Relying on the Internet for all our health questions can steer us in the wrong direction and in some cases cause unwarranted panic. There are certainly a host of good reasons that people would and should want to get informed about a medical concern they have, but the Internet cannot replace a medical health expert.
Improvements for enhancing the search and navigation experience for health seekers online are constantly underway, helping to minimize unnecessary concern and provide the most relevant and up-to-date information for the user.
Very well written.