[grp000]

Doctors aren't infallible, and most are probably not reading research papers. That's aside from the fact that psychiatric drugs aren't even that well understood by how they actually work. If you understand basic stats and read white papers on drug efficacy that are looking for correlations with your personal attributes, that's probably really useful info to know, and much more in depth research than your doctor will be doing for you.

That's not to even mention the disgusting influence that the drug industry has on psychiatry. My own doctor prescribed Cymbalta to me for mild anxiety and told me it was completely safe and effective, which it was not. Their (doctor's) basis for prescribing those meds was based on their own experience with a small sample of patients, and I imagine what the drug company told them/gave their own first party literature for. Had I actually looked into studies, I would have seen that the risk was nontrivial, there are bad actors motivated by greed, the mechanism of action is not known, and that there are doctors with limited time and effort per patient.

[Strom]

It's funny isn't it. Nobody goes around threads screaming DON'T LISTEN TO POLITICAL ADVICE, go talk to your local POLITICAL PROFESSIONAL. Yet it is not that different. The best local politicians will obviously have amazing insight. On the flip side, just like with local politicans, most local medical professionals will just be following flow charts that they vaguely remember and won't actually give you any personalized or up-to-date insight.

[TameAntelope]

So you think, "Don't take medical advice from strangers on the Internet" (what I said) is equivalent to, "Don't obtain any second opinions or question you doctor" (what you seem to think I said)?

[grp000]

That's not what you said at all.

What you have down is this: "so we're at a point in the Internet where random people feel confident enough to tell others to disregard professional medical advice in favor of their own "research""

Which is in response to a post saying that they disagree with another parent who says that none of these anecdotal experiences or advice given by other posters should be read.

Regardless, I think it's important for people to trust their own judgement, and weigh anecdotal experiences and advice from regular people, with the understanding that all advice comes from a certain context.

That being said, after the fact of having such a bad personal experience and afterwards seeing that actual academic literature shows such a big rift with what I was told by a licensed professional with many years of experience, I have to advocate, especially in the field of psychiatry, to make one's own best judgement, regardless of whether a doctor agrees or not, and only give them the authority of what they can logically provide as an argument for why you should follow a certain treatment.

[TameAntelope]

You're playing with people's lives when you give them medical advice without being qualified to do so.

If you trust a stranger's anecdotes on the Internet over your doctor (or even your own massively undereducated and biased interpretation of the situation), you are a fool, full stop. Unfortunately, sometimes the very disease you have causes you to make foolish decisions.

The only sane answer here is to get help from another medical professional. Any other option is exceedingly stupid.

[grp000]

You didn't even read what I wrote: "Regardless, I think it's important for people to trust their own judgement, and weigh anecdotal experiences and advice from regular people, with the understanding that all advice comes from a certain context."

[TameAntelope]

Yes, that advice is both wrong and wildly irresponsible to give.

[selcuka]

Not OP. Fair point, but also "people with the same medication" is not the same as "strangers on the Internet".

[TameAntelope]

Yes they are. It's a potentially fatal mistake to think otherwise.

[selcuka]

By your logic an anonymous alcoholics meeting is the same as "getting addiction advice from random strangers".