> Certainly the default position should be that medical professionals know what they are talking about
In general I agree with you. When you're faced with a large amount of literature from many doctors and specialists in the field you should be able to assume that someone has done the research, and that most of the medical profession agree.
It'd be great if more people could read and understand research. But we're stuck with sub-optimal reporting, and people struggling to understand what is really meant by "50% reduction in risk" or "20 times less likely to die".
Having said all that: Here's an off topic rant.
There are very many examples of doctors not using scientific method but relying on their "expertise".[1]
This has caused significant harm to many people.
Doctors tend not to talk about stuff that is obvious nonsense, and a lot of their interventions sound plausible. But that's the sneaky danger! We know woo is woo, and if people want to fund research into it good luck to them. But for things that sound plausible? That's exactly when we need good research, because common sense and expertise is fallible.
This isn't from doctors trying to deceive people. It's from good clinicians who are not aware of their limits.
[1] A great example is "Arthroscopic Knee Surgery No Better Than Placebo Surgery", from about 2000.
In general I agree with you. When you're faced with a large amount of literature from many doctors and specialists in the field you should be able to assume that someone has done the research, and that most of the medical profession agree.
It'd be great if more people could read and understand research. But we're stuck with sub-optimal reporting, and people struggling to understand what is really meant by "50% reduction in risk" or "20 times less likely to die".
Having said all that: Here's an off topic rant.
There are very many examples of doctors not using scientific method but relying on their "expertise".[1]
This has caused significant harm to many people.
Doctors tend not to talk about stuff that is obvious nonsense, and a lot of their interventions sound plausible. But that's the sneaky danger! We know woo is woo, and if people want to fund research into it good luck to them. But for things that sound plausible? That's exactly when we need good research, because common sense and expertise is fallible.
This isn't from doctors trying to deceive people. It's from good clinicians who are not aware of their limits.
[1] A great example is "Arthroscopic Knee Surgery No Better Than Placebo Surgery", from about 2000.