There are, of course, a few doctors who reject the very idea that mere scientific evidence should be able to tell them what to do. But in general, most doctors

There are, of course, a few doctors who reject the very idea that mere scientific evidence should be able to tell them what to do. But in general, most doctors want to provide the best care they can for their patients, and that includes scientific evidence. However, it's extremely common for doctors to prescribe medicine off-label, before the full level three trials have completed for that use (which can take a decade). There is often compelling evidence a medicine is effective (in the Bayesian sense) far before there is official "Evidence" which counts for "Evidence Based Medicine". The very fact that it's called "Evidence Based Medicine" should set off alarm bells. Being against it sounds like being against science in medicine, which would just be stupid. In fact, it's code for "restrict public care facilities from being able to offer a full range of medical benefits to conserve money".