In this age of misinformation, where we seem to have become disdainful of genuine experts, no armor will protect us from folly more effectively than a healthy dose of disbelief.
Many supposedly legitimate medical societies are still using the phrase “sex assigned at birth.” Others here have pointed out the Covid debacle where so many patients lost trust, and who can blame them. I lost trust too. I work in primary care, I make recommendations, but I don’t expect anyone to just trust my advice. Sometimes they do without researching. Sometimes they want to make a different decision, and that’s fine. This is a good article about different biases, thank you.
Great read. We live in the age of addiction. Anxiety about our health is very addictive. It’s no better or worse than any addiction. Other than the fact that it’s very very socially acceptable. Everyone judges the overweight or the drunk in the gutter but no one judges the anxiety addict. Even worse, the anxiety addict becomes an influencer. It’s OK. It’s OK. There’s a 12 step program for it. As always, a very grateful reader of sensible medicine and friend of Bill W.
My first thought was "How in the world does he have 50 minutes to spend with a patient explaining GLP-1s?". Then I got to the end and saw he works in direct primary care. This has nothing to do with the article (which is excellent, btw). It's just more of a sad comment on the current state of primary care.
The question that you are asking, Alex, is asking is implicitly, “what is wrong with my patient’s thinking that she is trusting an internet source more than me?” The question I might consider is “how can I improve our relationship so that I know what her answer would be to that question?”
I think a communication has three components: a sender, a reciever, and a message. All three have to be doing a good job for communication to work. At least that's how I think about it. I couldn't agree with you more that the thinking traps you've described are appealing and dangerous, but I can't fix other people's thinking and I can alter the way I communicate.
Thank you for giving me food for thought this morning.
Ok, so how about the new Moderna mRNA flu vaccine? The Danish vaccine schedule vs the American one? AND now the Western Health Alliance in WA, OR, CA differing with CDC now. Any flu vaccine for people in their say 30’s? (I have allowed the old version just to prove we are not anti vaxxers, but NOT DOING IT ANYMORE DUE TO MRNA). OR a statin for a person 36 years old because the cholesterol was high, (I had to intervene on behalf of my disabled son and informed the doctor that he is 36! ) And Dr Mandrola had a discussion regarding that very topic, of general physicians not running their numbers through the ASCVD. Who to trust? It’s a jungle out there! 😳
COVID was an eye opener for me. Previously I pretty much believed what my doctors told me. However, when it became clear that most doctors appear to not understand statistics or confounders, I significantly dialed back my a priori acceptance of their expertise.
You are 100% correct that much the medical information on the Internet is garbage and/or could be wrongly applied.
When I see my doctor, I try to organize all of the information about my situation so that I can crisply and clearly explain why I am there. My goal is to help my doctor help me by being prepared to provide as much relevant information as succinctly as possible.
Thank you for the article, I think you provide solid advice on how to assess resources and consider bias.
I think COVID revealed what can happen when we put all of our faith into “experts”. I agree that there are a lot of unreliable resources out there, but I’m uncomfortable with the idea of not encouraging patients to look at outside resources.
I wish we all were more fluent in statistics, risk assessment, and critical appraisal.
Many supposedly legitimate medical societies are still using the phrase “sex assigned at birth.” Others here have pointed out the Covid debacle where so many patients lost trust, and who can blame them. I lost trust too. I work in primary care, I make recommendations, but I don’t expect anyone to just trust my advice. Sometimes they do without researching. Sometimes they want to make a different decision, and that’s fine. This is a good article about different biases, thank you.
Great article :)
Great read. We live in the age of addiction. Anxiety about our health is very addictive. It’s no better or worse than any addiction. Other than the fact that it’s very very socially acceptable. Everyone judges the overweight or the drunk in the gutter but no one judges the anxiety addict. Even worse, the anxiety addict becomes an influencer. It’s OK. It’s OK. There’s a 12 step program for it. As always, a very grateful reader of sensible medicine and friend of Bill W.
My first thought was "How in the world does he have 50 minutes to spend with a patient explaining GLP-1s?". Then I got to the end and saw he works in direct primary care. This has nothing to do with the article (which is excellent, btw). It's just more of a sad comment on the current state of primary care.
Carry on....
The question that you are asking, Alex, is asking is implicitly, “what is wrong with my patient’s thinking that she is trusting an internet source more than me?” The question I might consider is “how can I improve our relationship so that I know what her answer would be to that question?”
I think a communication has three components: a sender, a reciever, and a message. All three have to be doing a good job for communication to work. At least that's how I think about it. I couldn't agree with you more that the thinking traps you've described are appealing and dangerous, but I can't fix other people's thinking and I can alter the way I communicate.
Thank you for giving me food for thought this morning.
Ok, so how about the new Moderna mRNA flu vaccine? The Danish vaccine schedule vs the American one? AND now the Western Health Alliance in WA, OR, CA differing with CDC now. Any flu vaccine for people in their say 30’s? (I have allowed the old version just to prove we are not anti vaxxers, but NOT DOING IT ANYMORE DUE TO MRNA). OR a statin for a person 36 years old because the cholesterol was high, (I had to intervene on behalf of my disabled son and informed the doctor that he is 36! ) And Dr Mandrola had a discussion regarding that very topic, of general physicians not running their numbers through the ASCVD. Who to trust? It’s a jungle out there! 😳
COVID was an eye opener for me. Previously I pretty much believed what my doctors told me. However, when it became clear that most doctors appear to not understand statistics or confounders, I significantly dialed back my a priori acceptance of their expertise.
You are 100% correct that much the medical information on the Internet is garbage and/or could be wrongly applied.
When I see my doctor, I try to organize all of the information about my situation so that I can crisply and clearly explain why I am there. My goal is to help my doctor help me by being prepared to provide as much relevant information as succinctly as possible.
Thank you for the article, I think you provide solid advice on how to assess resources and consider bias.
I think COVID revealed what can happen when we put all of our faith into “experts”. I agree that there are a lot of unreliable resources out there, but I’m uncomfortable with the idea of not encouraging patients to look at outside resources.
I wish we all were more fluent in statistics, risk assessment, and critical appraisal.