[nabla9]

Thank you for sharing your personal experience. Unfortunately sharing personal stories like this in the internet is the source of much grief for three reasons:

1) There is no way to quantify how likely this is from personal stories. If your experience is 1 in 100 event, you are doing more harm sharing it than not sharing it if 1 in 10 becomes too suspicious to follow diagnosis.

2) We really don't know. Either things happened as people say, or they doctor shopped until received a misdiagnosis and mismedication they wanted.

3) Readers can't use your example in their personal life because they are different. They may read what you said and go doctor shopping and googling until they are misdiagnosed and mismedicated.

You should not blindly trust doctors, and get second opinion of things seem wrong, but sharing medical stories in the internet is misses the information needed for it to be usable.

[NhanH]

So “lived experience” matters until it is against the dogma.

Sharing personal story likes this is the reason the internet being a wonderful place. It should always be recommended as long as it is truthful, and doesn’t involve explicit agenda of spamming out other experience or information.

[nabla9]

That's not what I said.

> It should always be recommended as long as it is truthful,

That's the point. You never know.

[NhanH]

Your argument makes no sense unless you are claiming the GP is lying.

The sharer should always be truthful. But also the reader should assume things might not be as it seems, trying to verify it on their own. But that is different than recommending everyone to not share anything.

There are two separate recommendations to be made: one for the writer, and one for the reader.

[dennis_jeeves1]

So indirectly what you're saying is protect the masses from 'misinformation'. The masses are too stupid to think for themselves, correct?