6 ms·

A doctor's opinion on disease isn't merely an opinion, it's an educated guess based on experience and qualifications. New diseases and research are constantly a

A doctor's opinion on disease isn't merely an opinion, it's an educated guess based on experience and qualifications. New diseases and research are constantly appearing, thousands of articles are written each year. We can't expect doctors to know everything, but we can expect them to have more informed opinions, on average, than non-doctors. I say this because there's a rising trend of anti-intellectualism and distrust of doctors in the US, which leads to massive self inflicted wounds in Covid and vaccines. Doctors aren't infallible, but they're far better than random online sources.

inter_netuser 5y ago
Indeed, there is plenty of distrust. If they are doing such a great job though, why the distrust? I don't know a single person with a significant chronic condition in the US who would say the health system and all their physicians are amazing and great. Usually you hear the exact opposite. However, stories about that gem of a doctor they finally found over the years are very common. Most physician suck, not sure why. Loss of trust is indeed very unfortunate, counterproductive and indeed leads to unnecessary suffering. Physicians are highly educated professionals in a legally protected rent-seeking monopoly, backed by a powerful trade union, AMA, and the corresponding social status/wealth/authority that comes with all that. Seems to me it's only fair that the onus is entirely on them to win that trust back. I'm not holding my breath though. Medicine is just another business. Remember that next time you see a doctor.
- wildmanx 5y ago
  > I don't know a single person with a significant chronic condition in the US who would say the health system and all their physicians are amazing and great. Usually you hear the exact opposite. > However, stories about that gem of a doctor they finally found over the years are very common. Most physician suck, not sure why. Great example of reporting bias. Nobody goes around telling everybody "all is fine". That's not news and nobody wants to hear it. Something needs to be special, out of the ordinary, a sensation even. "All my doctors suck, listen to my 10-minute rant about my odyssey" is what people _think_ will be interesting. Ever heard a news anchor say "Nothing remarkable happened today. Have a good evening." Of course not. They will report something, no matter how unimportant, ridiculous, sensationalist.
nitrogen 5y ago
trend of anti-intellectualism and distrust of doctors As someone who knows a practicing doctor who is also anti-vax, these are orthogonal issues. Sometimes, distrusting a specific doctor is the more intellectual approach.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  You'd be surprised how many physicians and nurses refuse vaccination. You'll just never hear about it. AMA is one powerful beast, I wish I had a union like that. However, sometimes fun little things like this happen that show their true colors: "Starting in early 2003, the United States government started a program to vaccinate 500,000 volunteer health care professionals throughout the country. Recipients were healthcare workers who would be first-line responders in the event of a bioterrorist attack. Many healthcare workers refused, worried about vaccine side effects, and healthcare systems refused to participate. Fewer than 40,000 actually received the vaccine.[29]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine over 90% refused.
  - arn 5y ago
    That doesn't mean distrust of vaccination in general - at least by doctors. It was for a potential bioterrorist attack. It perhaps more reflects the low likelihood or belief that there would be a small pox attack. Meanwhile, 96% of physicians are vaccinated against COVID - https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-survey-shows-over-96-doctors-fully-vaccinated-against-covid-19 https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-sur...
    - inter_netuser 5y ago
      If you assume the low likelyhood of the attack was the reason, that means 90% of those physicians could be lying. The stated reason for refusal was concerns about side effects. It's in the quote. What you stated as a fact, 96% vaccination rate, is actually a self-reported survey. Why do a survey when public health CDC records could simply be matched with the physician licensing registrars? Seems an automatic search like that would save physicians their valuable time, aren't they very busy with a pandemic right now? Instead of hard data from CDC, we get self-reported, likely anonymous, self-reported survey. What do they have to hide?
mwigdahl 5y ago
I'd qualify that: "...we can expect them to have more informed opinions, on average, _for any random condition_, than non-doctors." The thing I think you're missing is that the resources to do good, deep research on a condition do exist, and the sufferer has very strong motivation to do that research and become very well informed in the etiology and treatment options. The doctor, less so. They have a lot of patients and a lot of demands on their time. Will a good doctor put in the effort, do the research, and come up with a superior treatment plan? Certainly! But not all doctors will do this. If you use the allegory of the pig and the chicken, the sufferer is the pig, the doctor is the chicken. It is reasonable that the average pig will put in more work and be better informed about their own condition than the average chicken.
- PebblesRox 5y ago
  For anyone else who isn't familiar with the Pig and Chicken story: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig
- wildmanx 5y ago
  The English language has a serious deficiency in the term "research". You can do "research" by spending your days in a lab, formulating hypotheses, doing experiments, reading related academic work, drawing conclusions, publishing their findings. You can do "research" by googling, reading blog posts and wikipedia articles, watching Youtube videos, following telegram links and possibly reading a popular-science book. These two things are very different activities and produce very different bodies of knowledge. "Do your own research!" is a common sentiment in Covid skeptic circles. It doesn't mean being in a lab. It means following links in your Google bubble. That doesn't necessarily produce useful knowledge. Properly trained researchers are aware of things like confirmation bias, selection bias, recollection bias. The "I did my own research crowd" is not and suffers seriously from it. Using the term with the doctor is blurring the line between both versions. They don't stand in the lab and "do their own research", but they are more educated in the medical field than the common patient and have context.
  - 5y ago

inter_netuser 5y ago

Indeed, there is plenty of distrust. If they are doing such a great job though, why the distrust? I don't know a single person with a significant chronic condition in the US who would say the health system and all their physicians are amazing and great. Usually you hear the exact opposite. However, stories about that gem of a doctor they finally found over the years are very common. Most physician suck, not sure why. Loss of trust is indeed very unfortunate, counterproductive and indeed leads to unnecessary suffering. Physicians are highly educated professionals in a legally protected rent-seeking monopoly, backed by a powerful trade union, AMA, and the corresponding social status/wealth/authority that comes with all that. Seems to me it's only fair that the onus is entirely on them to win that trust back. I'm not holding my breath though. Medicine is just another business. Remember that next time you see a doctor.

wildmanx 5y ago
> I don't know a single person with a significant chronic condition in the US who would say the health system and all their physicians are amazing and great. Usually you hear the exact opposite. > However, stories about that gem of a doctor they finally found over the years are very common. Most physician suck, not sure why. Great example of reporting bias. Nobody goes around telling everybody "all is fine". That's not news and nobody wants to hear it. Something needs to be special, out of the ordinary, a sensation even. "All my doctors suck, listen to my 10-minute rant about my odyssey" is what people _think_ will be interesting. Ever heard a news anchor say "Nothing remarkable happened today. Have a good evening." Of course not. They will report something, no matter how unimportant, ridiculous, sensationalist.

nitrogen 5y ago

trend of anti-intellectualism and distrust of doctors As someone who knows a practicing doctor who is also anti-vax, these are orthogonal issues. Sometimes, distrusting a specific doctor is the more intellectual approach.

inter_netuser 5y ago
You'd be surprised how many physicians and nurses refuse vaccination. You'll just never hear about it. AMA is one powerful beast, I wish I had a union like that. However, sometimes fun little things like this happen that show their true colors: "Starting in early 2003, the United States government started a program to vaccinate 500,000 volunteer health care professionals throughout the country. Recipients were healthcare workers who would be first-line responders in the event of a bioterrorist attack. Many healthcare workers refused, worried about vaccine side effects, and healthcare systems refused to participate. Fewer than 40,000 actually received the vaccine.[29]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine over 90% refused.
- arn 5y ago
  That doesn't mean distrust of vaccination in general - at least by doctors. It was for a potential bioterrorist attack. It perhaps more reflects the low likelihood or belief that there would be a small pox attack. Meanwhile, 96% of physicians are vaccinated against COVID - https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-survey-shows-over-96-doctors-fully-vaccinated-against-covid-19 https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-sur...
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    If you assume the low likelyhood of the attack was the reason, that means 90% of those physicians could be lying. The stated reason for refusal was concerns about side effects. It's in the quote. What you stated as a fact, 96% vaccination rate, is actually a self-reported survey. Why do a survey when public health CDC records could simply be matched with the physician licensing registrars? Seems an automatic search like that would save physicians their valuable time, aren't they very busy with a pandemic right now? Instead of hard data from CDC, we get self-reported, likely anonymous, self-reported survey. What do they have to hide?

mwigdahl 5y ago

I'd qualify that: "...we can expect them to have more informed opinions, on average, _for any random condition_, than non-doctors." The thing I think you're missing is that the resources to do good, deep research on a condition do exist, and the sufferer has very strong motivation to do that research and become very well informed in the etiology and treatment options. The doctor, less so. They have a lot of patients and a lot of demands on their time. Will a good doctor put in the effort, do the research, and come up with a superior treatment plan? Certainly! But not all doctors will do this. If you use the allegory of the pig and the chicken, the sufferer is the pig, the doctor is the chicken. It is reasonable that the average pig will put in more work and be better informed about their own condition than the average chicken.

PebblesRox 5y ago
For anyone else who isn't familiar with the Pig and Chicken story: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig
wildmanx 5y ago
The English language has a serious deficiency in the term "research". You can do "research" by spending your days in a lab, formulating hypotheses, doing experiments, reading related academic work, drawing conclusions, publishing their findings. You can do "research" by googling, reading blog posts and wikipedia articles, watching Youtube videos, following telegram links and possibly reading a popular-science book. These two things are very different activities and produce very different bodies of knowledge. "Do your own research!" is a common sentiment in Covid skeptic circles. It doesn't mean being in a lab. It means following links in your Google bubble. That doesn't necessarily produce useful knowledge. Properly trained researchers are aware of things like confirmation bias, selection bias, recollection bias. The "I did my own research crowd" is not and suffers seriously from it. Using the term with the doctor is blurring the line between both versions. They don't stand in the lab and "do their own research", but they are more educated in the medical field than the common patient and have context.
- 5y ago