This article is amazing! I am also struck when reading Gawande that in many ways, his writing is like Gladwell's: interesting anecdote, statement of principle,

This article is amazing! I am also struck when reading Gawande that in many ways, his writing is like Gladwell's: interesting anecdote, statement of principle, seemingly unrelated anecdote, full description of principle. However, given these same elements, I feel much more convinced by Gawande than by Gladwell. The latter's principles never really seem to follow from the anecdotes quoted; there's a logical gap, or he seems to be misinterpreting the research, or he's found a corner-case, or he's just grasping for straws. Yet, I can't really figure out why I don't feel the same way about Gawande. Perhaps because he writes mostly about medicine, and as a (former?) doctor, he lends more credibility? Whereas Gladwell writes about more everyday and varied things, in which he is obviously not an expert?