HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

tmeasday

no profile record

comments

tmeasday
·14 lat temu·discuss
You're right; I'm sorry, I should have given you the benefit of the doubt and parsed the sentence that way.

It is interesting about the 'bias' of doctors towards their own experience. I guess my point is that statistically this kind of 'bias' towards the most common syndromes is a net positive for society; it's an allocation of resources thing--we don't have so many doctors that we can afford them all to be running off on weird tangents investigating possible rare diseases that aren't there...

Again, sucks if you do happen to be the one in X thousand that has the rare disease. Am I being too utilitarian?

Regarding tone: apologies; I agree it was an overly flippant comment. It was more a reaction to some of the other doctor bashing that was going on in this thread that fails to see the woods for the trees. I see now that that wasn't your intention...
tmeasday
·14 lat temu·discuss
Doctors are never going to be perfect; if you ask me following such a heuristic is probably going to work pretty well almost all of the time. As long as the doctor isn't a dick about it (with a god complex) and is willing to accept that they may be wrong..

In reference to my first comment: Mis-diagnosing "cool, rare diseases" as the flu by definition can only happen very rarely. Coupled with the fact that people are often mis-diagnosed with rare stuff, means that your original statement that "it is far more common..." is obviously untrue.

It must be frustrating if you are the person with the rare disease. But "not looking for zebras" serves the other 99.9% of people quite well..
tmeasday
·14 lat temu·discuss
I'm pretty sure that's, by definition, untrue. Unless people are never mis-diagnosed with rare conditions, which is patently false.