4 ms·

> There is a school of thought in medicine among some doctors (at least in Central and Northern Europe) that many patients know what’s wrong with them and one c

> There is a school of thought in medicine among some doctors (at least in Central and Northern Europe) that many patients know what’s wrong with them and one can go a long way toward a diagnosis by listening to and trusting a patient. Tests are used to confirm the diagnosis if possible, but they are well-known to be less reliable than the patients’ own experience (pains and other symptoms, for example). As an ex-medic myself, I strongly believe this is a more correct way to practice medicine What evidence do you have to "strongly believe" this? It's quite something, to state that the patient does a better job diagnosing himself than the doctor does. In that case, there should be some evidence to that effect, to show that this is indeed the case? Otherwise, saying "I strongly believe" or "school of thought" is just a way of saying "I have a hunch". > There is nothing worse than a distrusting doctor who dismisses the patients symptoms to instead blindly and arrogantly applies a schematic based on assumptions that our testing and examinations have very good specificity What on earth are you talking about? Medical diagnoses are made using a variety of sources of information, including of course symptoms! What do you mean exactly "dismisses symptoms to arrogantly apply a testing scheme"? Maybe I'm misunderstanding.

clnq 4y ago
Yes, possibly misunderstanding or perhaps I did not communicate clearly enough. My position is not extreme and speaks of the relative minority of medics who suffer from medical arrogance. > to state that the patient does a better job diagnosing himself than the doctor does This is not what I stated. I stated that listening to and trusting the patient helps arrive at a diagnosis more reliably than only doing tests. Sometimes it can even help arrive at a diagnosis more reliably than doing tests (for example, fungal infections can be seen or felt by patients more reliably than their cultures grow in the lab, and most doctors diagnose without a culture test). > Medical diagnoses are made using a variety of sources of information, including of course symptoms! Yes, but too often the diagnoses are made following algorithms or guidelines that don't suit many patients. A doctor is often required to follow the algorithms (and perhaps for a good reason), but should also know when they are not applicable to an individual patient. My position is not extreme, although it's not mainstream either. There is a large body of research talking about medical arrogance specifically manifesting as doctors ignoring the patients. Likewise, many people in the field (at least in some regions like the UK) have experience dealing with colleagues who swear by algorithms (or worse — their own ideas) and are skeptical of patients who don't fit within them. This seems to be much less common in other regions. My family works in the medical field in Central Europe where, in my opinion, very few medics have issues with medical arrogance. I cannot comment on the US where I assume a good number of readers of this text are from, although academic literature indicates it's a global problem.

clnq 4y ago

Yes, possibly misunderstanding or perhaps I did not communicate clearly enough. My position is not extreme and speaks of the relative minority of medics who suffer from medical arrogance. > to state that the patient does a better job diagnosing himself than the doctor does This is not what I stated. I stated that listening to and trusting the patient helps arrive at a diagnosis more reliably than only doing tests. Sometimes it can even help arrive at a diagnosis more reliably than doing tests (for example, fungal infections can be seen or felt by patients more reliably than their cultures grow in the lab, and most doctors diagnose without a culture test). > Medical diagnoses are made using a variety of sources of information, including of course symptoms! Yes, but too often the diagnoses are made following algorithms or guidelines that don't suit many patients. A doctor is often required to follow the algorithms (and perhaps for a good reason), but should also know when they are not applicable to an individual patient. My position is not extreme, although it's not mainstream either. There is a large body of research talking about medical arrogance specifically manifesting as doctors ignoring the patients. Likewise, many people in the field (at least in some regions like the UK) have experience dealing with colleagues who swear by algorithms (or worse — their own ideas) and are skeptical of patients who don't fit within them. This seems to be much less common in other regions. My family works in the medical field in Central Europe where, in my opinion, very few medics have issues with medical arrogance. I cannot comment on the US where I assume a good number of readers of this text are from, although academic literature indicates it's a global problem.