only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound

According to the editor of the British Medical Journal, Richard Smith, only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid scientific evidence.

According to Professor David Eddy, of Duke University, only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound and many treatments have never been assessed at all.

The British Medical Journal (BMJ) website Clinical Evidence reports that, of the 2404 treatments they have surveyed, only 15% are rated as beneficial, while 47% are of unknown effectiveness.

Where is the wisdom…? The Poverty of Medical Evidence

By RICHARD SMITH, Editor of BMJ

British Medical Journal 1991 (Oct 5); 303: 798–799

Safety and Ethics in Healthcare

"...professionals may adopt unreasonable practices. Practices may develop in professions, particularly as to disclosure, not because they serve the interests of the clients, but because they protect the interests or convenience of members of the profession. The court has an obligation to scrutinize professional practices to ensure that they accord with the standard of reasonableness imposed by the law."

Incresingly, the question is not whether the defendant's conduct conforms with the practices of the profession, but whether it conforms with standards of reasonableness. (p. 150)

"The right of patients self-determination is well entrenched both in law and in ethical codes. Respect for patient autonomy now occupies centre stage in medical ethics. In considering patient autonomy one needs to think about truth telling, confidentiality, privacy, disclosure of information and consent. Each is important and all have important implications for healthcare professionals." (p. 167)

Safety and Ethics in Healthcare: A Guide to Getting it Right, By Bill Runciman, Alan Merry

Published by Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2007