[justsee]

The situation is much worse than you outline, from a scientific perspective, and even well-meaning doctors aren't an antidote due to systemic distortions.

Ben Goldacre, a UK physician and medical researcher, captures it really well in the opening two paragraphs of his book 'Bad Pharma':

> Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analysed using techniques which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that favour the manufacturer. When trials throw up results that companies don't like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug's true effects. Regulators see most of the trial data, but only from early on in a drug's life, and even then they don't give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government. This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted fashion.

> In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps, colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies – often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups. And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies, without disclosure. Sometimes whole academic journals are even owned outright by one drug company. Aside from all this, for several of the most important and enduring problems in medicine, we have no idea what the best treatment is, because it's not in anyone's financial interest to conduct any trials at all.

His book, which lobbed a grenade into the heart of the pseudo-scientific state of 'modern medicine', has resulted in more energy being put into trying to move to science-based medicine with things like https://opentrials.net/, but I don't closely observe that industry, so perhaps someone else within the sector could speak to how far the idea of publicly available trial data has gone in 2019.

[javadocmd]

I would argue that even the ideal medical system would likely produce the same outcomes experienced by the author of the parent post. In our present stage of scientific and technological advancement, the following might as well be a Law of Nature: even the best of drugs will have varying effects on various people in varying circumstances.

But yes, there are plenty of inadequacies in our healthcare industry (speaking from the US), but that's a much, much broader discussion.