The thing I find most fascinating about the endless CVD (Coordinated Disclosure) vs Full Disclosure debate is that both sides are essentially right. Their arguments are sound, data and precedent on their side. The main difference is which outcome you're trying to optimize for.
Then I don't follow, your argument. My point is that it's a doctors job to explain the treatment options to you, not to just do whatever they think is best. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing?
-
-
I'm saying that your analogy is trying to frame CVD as a discussion between a doctor and a patient, when the closer analogy is between an Epidemiologist and a large, vulnerable population.
-
Ughh, fine
. Should epidemiologists be allowed to make arbitrary rules, without any input from other stakeholders and without explanation? - 12 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.