[hnwh]

I suffer from a cross disciplinary illness, in which very few doctors have experience (because it doesn't fit into one of the major well defined specialties). You can't imagine how happy it makes me when a doctor tells me "I have to go look that up", as opposed to.. no.. there's nothing to worry about, you're just imagining that, or whatever

[codex]

Absolutely. Doctors are particularly egoistic and don't deal well with long-tail problems. But that doesn't make yours the best doctor; the best doctor wrote the original material. Willingness to research the answer just makes your doctor an effective doctor, because they ultimately deliver the correct answer.

[rcxdude]

No single doctor wrote the original material. The doctor who wrote the original material for one area may be completely useless outside his area and ineffective at looking them up.

[hnwh]

I agree... but the "best" doctor is also 5k miles away from me, and out of my immediately budget, since insurance doesn't cover it.. so.. I'll settle for "effective"

[abraininavat]

the best doctor wrote the original material

I agree with everything else in your comment, but that doesn't make sense. How do you arrive at that conclusion?

[codex]

I am, admittedly, handwaving here. "Best" is so subjective that's hard to define, so I define it as "the ones who move the field forward with original work." In other contexts it could mean something completely different.

[abraininavat]

I see. Well I'd differentiate between a researcher and a clinician. The best researcher may not be the doctor you want diagnosing and treating you.