That's not what happened here. The team was too ambitious and not careful enough but they were not trying to kill the child.
I just don't think there is any reason to put that additional context into what happened here.
I just don't think there is any reason to put that additional context into what happened here.
>But nowhere did the form explicitly indicate that any of this could end in death, nor did that come up during any conversations with Qiu or the other doctors, Jason and Linda say.
I have multiple sclerosis and at the time of my diagnosis the best treatment available to me in terms of slowing the progression of MS had a risk of triggering a rare brain infection that would kill you. So it was a choice between treatments that didn't work as well but had lower risk and treatments with greater odds of being able to walk/work/not be in horrifying constant pain in 10 years but also a small chance of death.
These decisions can end up being horribly complicated, and they are definitely revealing in terms of your values.
That's why we need external controls, ethical commites and so on.
Wisdom teeth removal under general anesthesia is around 1 in 100,000.
It doesn’t sound so crazy if the risks were presented as “only 10x as risky as wisdom teeth extraction”.
Which also omits the base level mortality of dental complications wisdom teeth are likely to cause.
Nor does the discussion section nor overall summary figure, which is 3 in a million for all forms of anesthesia (local, sedation, and general), where you have to at least exclude local anesthesia (the most common type) as having a fundamentally lower risk of death than sedation or GA.