3 ms·
> Does a physician have a globally optimal understanding? I’m far more inclined to trust a trained physician than a random HN commenter whose first four citati
by PragmaticPulp 4y ago
> Does a physician have a globally optimal understanding?
I’m far more inclined to trust a trained physician than a random HN commenter whose first four citations are just random ultrasound device manufacturer websites. The parent comment makes bold claims and tries to overwhelm the reader with non sequitur citations, but it’s clear they don’t actually understand the subject matter.
- adventured 4y agoWhile I agree with your premise, how the hell do we know the parent is a trained physician? This is an anonymous forum. Without a long, elaborate history on HN or public credentials, to be of meaningful value in terms of trust (in the context we're discussing) the reply needs to bring a lot more to the conversation than a one line statement and claim of being a doctor. Maybe they are a doctor, great: they can add a lot more to the counter reply if so, information that they are in theory particularly equipped to discuss.
- DanBC 4y ago> While I agree with your premise, how the hell do we know the parent is a trained physician? We don't know, but it doesn't matter. We can go to websites like the BMJ and see trained physicians and researchers saying the same thing across a range of different articles. We can go to research organisations like NICE, or Cochrane, or the UK National Screening Committee to see doctors and researchers saying the same thing. For mass screening, the harm often outweighs the benefits.