"I have done my own research"

[MareofBeasttown]

Didn't want to put this in the coronavirus board because it's got so weird there. But just wanted to ask if I am the only one who does not do my own research in areas that I have no expertise in? I take expert advice and trust it will be fine.

I consulted my GP to ask if I should take the vaccine since I have no hope of understanding all the science behind the vaccine. Then I took it.
I go to lawyers if I have legal problems.
I have a financial consultant to help me with investments.

I am not saying none of these are ever wrong.DD had an illness that was not picked up by the family doctor, so I got a second and third opinion. But it was still better treated by a doctor than it would have been by Googling and trying to decipher medical journals on my own.

Am I just a lazy sheep?

No you aren't. I agree with you. I "do my own research" by consulting experts in the appropriate field, not by consulting google.

Yes, precisely. I'm going to take my advice from a consensus of experts, rather than someone who saw a video (or even fifty videos) confirming their view on YouTube!

Right? My dad was a doctor as well, so I perhaps don't have the mistrust of the medical establishment that many do. He had no patience for Googlers.

I think the problem is if somebody doesn't trust that source of expertise to give them factual advice then that will be why they are reluctant to do that.

For example my mum would absolutely go to a doctor if she had a broken arm, but for anything like a vaccine or menopause treatment etc she is very suspicious and inclined not to trust the guidance from health professionals.

I have experienced this a bit - GPs often give poor breastfeeding advice due to lack of training, they may also be inexperienced in the field of mental health and for example I have ADHD, in the adult adhd community you'll find lots of stories of people being fobbed off by GPs, which is incorrect because when they have actually got to a specialist they have found that what the GP told them is explicitly wrong.

I don't know whether really a GP is in the right position to advise personally on vaccines, although I suppose they would have seen any vaccine reactions plus covid complications in your age group, and know your medical history so could advise based on that.

I do think it's reasonable if you don't know whether to have a vaccine to ask for medical advice or just go along with the generic advice, I think that will be the right choice for most people and I don't think it's lazy at all, it makes perfect sense.

I am also not against people weighing up the options and deciding it isn't worth it for them. Although the problem is there is a lot of misleading information out there.

As a microbiologist it infuriates me when the AV brigade pipe up with “do your research!”. I’ve been told I need to do my research many times when discussing things online and it’s hard not to respond with “I mean I’ve got a PhD and at least 15 years at a lab bench under my belt and manage my own research group but sure I’ll get googling!”

I think its a problem to have so much information and opinion at our finger tips, plus we tend to overestimate our own intelligence!

I think what you're saying is practical and fair, but there has been alot of push back and mistrust against organisations, institutions and experts in general.

Depends I think on your level of education and understanding of medical matters. My dh wouldn't do his own research or if he did it would come from Google. I'm a pharmacist so have a better understanding of medicines and how they work than most doctors. I would respect a fellow healthcare professionals opinion and advice but would still do my own research if I felt that I needed more information.

So how do you all go about "consulting experts"?

In my little corner of rural Wales, I don't think there are many epidemiologists or experts on immunology whose offices I can just pop into, so I'll have to get my information from a variety of sources: news sites, gov websites and other reputable online sources, and sourcing these will, indeed, involve Googling.

I think an issue of trust is absolutely bang on the money.

As a defrocked academic, the phrase "do my own research" makes me twitch as it usually means "I looked up stuff on Google in a random way".

I do my own research all the time. Have complete control over my life. It's quite lovely.

It's great we live in a time when people are able to do their own research and become their own advocates. I would not trust any medical professional who wasn't all for patients becoming their own advocates for their health and becoming more informed about their conditions.

I'm glad my GP actually encourages me to research my own issues... I would hope others have similar experience.

I do think it's reasonable if you don't know whether to have a vaccine to ask for medical advice or just go along with the generic advice, I think that will be the right choice for most people and I don't think it's lazy at all, it makes perfect sense.

Yes, I am 49, with no allergies or history of clotting, so in effect I just went along with the generic advice. If I had a medical condition, I would consult a specialist.

I do agree GPs might not be great in the field of breastfeeding and such. I just wanted to say that I find it honestly very hard and a waste of time to plough through tons of data and videos and do my own research on Covid, when I have a huge number of experts doing that for me.

I think a lot of people do their research by reading reputable sources and consulting people who are experts in their field. Most of these people would never say "I've done my research" in an indignant way. They're just being normal adults.

On certain topics, usually ones linked to conspiracies or groups who have an intense dislike of experts, the people yelling "I've done my research" usually use it to mean they've watched some YouTube videos, someone shared a blog in a Facebook group and some doctor somewhere said something that proves their view is right even if it flies in the face of most other evidence.

@AlfonsoTheMango

As a defrocked academic, the phrase "do my own research" makes me twitch as it usually means "I looked up stuff on Google in a random way".

How often do academics disagree? You already know the answer.. more often than they agree.. yet we can't argue with them? So which professional do we listen to? Just the first one we talk to? What if the next one disagrees do we now believe them or the first one? Or do we find another one to be the tie breaker? At what point are we allowed an opinion? Or is that never allowed?

I do my own research on some issue, but I go to reputable sources - academic papers, qualified commentators etc. I also consider the possible motives of those pushing for a particular approach, especially when money or a particular ideology are involved.

So, for example, when my dog damaged her cruciate ligament, I read various papers and reports on-line on the pros and cons of surgery before deciding against the very expensive surgery which the vet was clearly pushing for. I was able to express my reasons for the low-cost approach I was choosing and vet grudgingly agreed.

Similarly, when it was first suggested that my DS might be autistic. I was a student at the time and was able to borrow books on the subject from uni library and do my own reading.

‘Research’ which consists of on-line echo chambers and spurious opinions of those with no relevant qualifications or expertise? Nope!

@LittleDidSheKnow - in Wales do you have a local Public Health team?

They will be your local experts, who will actually know alot more than a random bod in London as they know far more about local transit routes, high risk groups, schools, outbreaks.

I don't think anyone is popping in anywhere at the moment tho!

See I think doctors really ought to have patience for googlers. Being able to put this kind of thing into context and reassure patients / justify your original diagnosis or advice with evidence or reasoning should be a skill that doctors have. I appreciate its a more recent thing, but isn't it good if patients are interested in and want to find out more about their own health and potential conditions?

I can see it might be annoying if somebody comes in with a huge list of rare ailments that they almost definitely don't have (but in that case, perhaps a referral for health anxiety is useful?!) I don't think doctors should want to be the gatekeepers of all medical advice. Being dismissed by doctors when you're sure there is a problem is a sure fire way to lose trust at a time when it's really important to have that trust. A doctor should have the skills to say yes, there is a risk of blood clots but let me compare it to the risk of blood clots from the pill, or a long haul flight, or pregnancy, or surgery, or even corona virus. They should be able to tell you how blood clots can be identified and treated. And leave that patient feeling that they have more information than when they went in. They might still not choose the vaccine, but they will have more context to the info they had before. Not leave them feeling like the doctor has fobbed them off or disbelieved them. Where will they go next time they have a concern? Not the doctor who didn't listen to them. Probably towards the antivax quacks who are desperate to sell them a homeopathy treatment or special diet instead.

People do ask advice from untrained people all the time though.

I think it’s said by the people who also ‘do my own risk assessment’ which always translates (to me) to ‘well I want to do x so I will’

I think you need to know the agenda behind the advice personally. No the fake conspiracy agenda, but the bigger picture of living in a capitalist society.

My children fall in to the vulnerable group and as such we locked down before the UK officially did. I also didn't rush them back after half term in October.

The priority of the government is maintaining the economy and civil cooperation of the masses, keeping the NHS afloat to prevent civil unrest. The priority is not my individual children, that is my priority.

I did my own research before consenting to life-changing surgery because I wasn't going to agree to permanently mutilate my body and permanently change the rest of my life on the instruction of someone else without fully understanding the proposal and what questions to ask the medical team.

Moving away from paternalism and "just do what the doctor says" is a good thing.

@Ohshitiveturnedintomymother

I think it’s said by the people who also ‘do my own risk assessment’ which always translates (to me) to ‘well I want to do x so I will’

I think the issue is no one is able to get personalized advice regarding this so people are forced to do their own risk assessment... It's a one size fits all approach even though the data doesn't support a one size fits all approach.

Im assuming that most people don't know how to research or critically assess information in a structured and systematic way from reputable sources - but people on this thread do! So I can see why any professional would be wary of engagement, particularly with random on the Internet.

But let's face it the likes of Andrew Wakefield have alot to answer for as well, it's not as if experts and trusted sources are squeaky clean.

@lilyofthewasteland

I did my own research before consenting to life-changing surgery because I wasn't going to agree to permanently mutilate my body and permanently change the rest of my life on the instruction of someone else without fully understanding the proposal and what questions to ask the medical team.

Moving away from paternalism and "just do what the doctor says" is a good thing.

Doctors can be negligent.. they can miss things, they can misunderstood something. They can also be led to the wrong conclusion but consulting a particular source of information that isn't impartial enough. Someone had to graduate bottom of their class.. someone had to barely scrape through.

I think it depends a bit on the thing to be researched. I agree I would take always professional expertise about some random google search.

But you can find out more on line if done properly. So for example how a vaccine is developed and approved is public knowledge and well explained by people who actually know this stuff. There are credible sources to explain why the Covid vaccines were able to be approved quickly (and it's actually interesting reading about the finances and processes for all vaccine development - so much is about simple funding issues, not the medical research).

Take some of the theories about the virus being leaked from a Chinese lab (whether deliberately or accidentally). There are credible, impartial professional researchers out there explaining why that is unlikely, and interesting reading about the research into bat viruses in parts of China and why animal to human transmission. is a far more likely explanation.

So if you are a geek like me with time on your hands you can source this stuff.

The problem is too many people go into a google rabbit hole, find the crazy stuff and don't have a clue how to check credibility.

It also doesn't help that there has been a growing anti-intellectual movement, fuelled by politicians and powerful interest groups. who do not WANT an educated informed population holding them to account. This has led to the undermining of trust in experts and statistics and a move to rely on 'lived experience', whether that's your own or unreliable networks (e.g. my uncle's brother friend says......).