We live in the day and age where we rely on the internet for a great deal of information. We review restaurants, products, businesses, etc...because we want to know what other people think. There is such a wide variety of information and material on the internet, ranging in its accuracy, reliability, and value. Even though we want to believe what we read as factual, it is important to be discerning when we read information over the internet.
Our pets are members of our family. When we make decisions about medication or other home remedies from an internet recommendation, we may be putting their lives at risk. There are too many instances where pet owners have treated their pets with something at home that was recommended online and ended in severe debilitation or even the death of their pet. It is important to know that the majority of what the medical community (human and veterinary) bases their decisions on is grounded in ‘evidence-based’ scientific studies.
Some questions to think about:
- Do you know how credible your source is? (i.e. Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, VeterinaryPartner.com, etc....)
- Are you reading fact or opinion?
- Do you feel comfortable risking your family member using a source who does not know the symptoms (signs) and history of your pet?
We are faced with so much ‘opinion’ on the internet. It is important to know the difference between our sources. Which of the two following categories would you trust more?
- Anecdotal: Based on personal observation, case studies, or random investigation. Simply put, this is ONE person’s experience that may be biased and potentially unreliable because it is based on a cause and effect without any account for variables. This approach usually relies on only a handful of cases.
- Statistically significant: Based on methodical and quantifiable approach utilizing various measures to cancel out variables and biases in order to determine whether the ‘cause and effect’ is reality in 95% of cases. Simply put, scientific studies are deemed reliable only when ‘statistical significance’ is achieved using the scientific method. A scientific study uses a large number of cases to solidify its credibility.
Summary of why an internet source is Good, Bad, and Ugly:
- What’s Good:
- Quick reference for description of diseases, common treatments, cautionary recommendation, and sometimes even guidelines as to when veterinary medical care is deemed appropriate for certain symptoms.
- Good research tool for preparing questions to ask your veterinarian.
- What’s Bad & Ugly:
- Opinion, Opinion, Opinion!!
- Disregard for source, support (statistics, peer-review, etc...), or credentials of author.
- Narrow focus (i.e. no consideration for each individual’s medical history, symptoms (all of them), a complete physical exam, or a diagnosis that is consistent with ALL symptoms.
REMEMBER: Just because it is written in black and white, it does not equal fact. Before the internet, most (not all) published material required certain ethical and factual standards be met that would lend credibility to what we read. That is no longer the case. If you have questions about the credibility of an internet source or something you read, please contact our hospital. We are here to help.
Recommended link: www.VeterinaryPartner.com
THE INTERNET AS A RELIABLE SOURCE
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly
By Dr. Zach Anderson, DVM
DECEMBER 2010
