• bratosch@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    What I’m wondering is why the midwives for some reason had cleaner hands hand the male doctors?

    • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The doctors at the hospital where this happened were also doing autopsies and would often go directly from an autopsie to the delivery ward without washing their hands.

      The midwives did not perform autopsies.

      It was not that the midwives’ hands were especially clean, it was that the Dr’s hands were very contaminated.

    • Kage520@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think once when this was posted they said doctors would see other patients and even perform autopsies then do surgeries with no hand washing between.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      They weren’t dealing with other sick people I imagine. Also I bet they tended spend more time with each patient since they only did one specialist task.

    • cameron_vale@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      64
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you really wondering?

      State your case and move on. You are probably filled with foolish ideas too. We all are. All you can do is grow.

        • cameron_vale@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          52
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Did you not research the phenomenon a bit? Google it?

          One hypothesis is that they didn’t touch the stuff that the doctors touched.

          I mean I’m getting that your question is rhetorical. Which is to say it doesn’t get to the point quickly. And I think you’d be better off getting to the point quickly. So you can move on to more meaningful investigations.

          • KingJalopy @lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            ·
            1 year ago

            There was nothing rhetorical about the question. He asked a question. Rhetorical doesn’t mean anything about getting to the point quickly. It means a question that doesn’t need an answer.

            • cameron_vale@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              32
              ·
              1 year ago

              A rhetorical question avoids getting to the point because getting to the point is not the point of rhetoric. The point of rhetoric is emotional effect. Therefore when swift and easy arrival at the point is eschewed (a moment’s google), and an emotional effect is clearly evident, then rhetoric is clearly the point.

              Tangentially, consider the phenomenon of “smugnorance”.

              • KingJalopy @lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                20
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                And his question wasn’t beating around the bush. He literally just asked a question. It wasn’t rhetorical. Just because you say it’s rhetorical doesn’t make it rhetorical. Rhetorical.

                • cameron_vale@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  31
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  And repeating your thesis sways me not at all.

                  Have you tried whacking yourself in the head with a rock?

                  • KingJalopy @lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    22
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah but it led to me having this conversation with you so I’m not going to recommend anyone else try.