> Whenever the topic of, as you call them "out-of-band" treatments arose, the look on their faces would silence the topic. So, if you feel adventurous, I would

> Whenever the topic of, as you call them "out-of-band" treatments arose, the look on their faces would silence the topic. So, if you feel adventurous, I would suggest to cross-check your opinion with someone in the field. Let's agree that "the field" is not exclusive to US medicine with all the associated malpractice litigation risks. That might be an explanation for faces turning sour in your personal sample of acquaintances. > They are called protocols and not algorithms for a reason. > Every patient is different and the doctor has incomplete knowledge, and the protocols are in the end just that: Guidelines. > we are talking here about deviating from the guidelines without good evidence or without a procedure to gain knowledge from it in a structured manner I think you are taking a very elastic view on what protocols are. They either demand adherence or they are mere guidelines. Either evidence is required before straying out of protocol or doctors are expected to operate under incomplete knowledge.