@barefootstache Not to be "that guy", but there are certainly instances in which trained medical professionals do not take patient concerns seriously, which leads to situations of informed, scientifically minded individuals taking their health into their own hands and succeeding.
E.g. my wife had fibromyalgia at a very early age. It runs in her family; all her female immediate family members have it. Many doctors dismissed their pain as young children as depression, when in fact, they had every symptom including the tender-points which are practically used for confirmation of diagnosis. Years later, I (a biochemist at the time) found a hidden gem of an article that showed a strong link between non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (a currently under-researched physiological condition) and fibromyalgia. My wife and her mother are both feeling substantially better now after adopting a gluten free diet, and don't suffer with brain fog, confusion, pain, ataxia, etc.
So while I didn't pioneer the study myself, I did find something that is widely unknown by primary care physicians, which may help impact the lives of others with fibromyalgia. I understand this comic is pointed at all the COVID deniers etc. but let's not discount the potential benefit of (even untrained) individuals actually reading into scientific literature.
@johnabs there is nothing wrong with doing your own research and I would highly recommend it to everyone. Though if you choose to share your opinion, make sure you are well sourced with high quality articles and are open to have your opinion be questioned.
I have seen more than enough anecdotal opinions be shared as factual with very little if any high quality sources. And usually the sources that meet this standard were not fully understood, because either they just took the information from the header, abstract, or conclusion. Most of the other sources create a crawler trap, which is just a pain to navigate, thereby diving deeper into the anecdotal waters.
Thus if you think you found information (as the comic suggests) that the top scientist and doctors have missed, then write up an article and let it be judged.
@barefootstache I'm glad we agree on allowing and encouraging people to do their own research, but I think you may have misunderstood the crux of my statement (or I am misunderstanding your last point).
My primary concern is with the fact that many (primarily primary care) physicians do not continue reading medical literature after leaving medical school (and who can blame them to be honest, they're incredibly over-worked). Additionally, the article I mentioned in my first post was a peer reviewed study in a medical journal, so it wasn't missed by scientists, but doctors.
It's the science to doctor disconnect that I was primarily trying to hone in on here, which I think can be remedied by helping patients advocate for themselves by bringing peer-reviewed literature to their primary care physician to get their opinion. Hopefully this should aid in reducing the amount of money and hours wasted on ineffectual treatments that may prolong patient suffering. Fortunately in my wife's case, the necessary intervention didn't require medical supervision/inaccessible pharmaceuticals. However, when these become barriers, having a doctor on your side who will take a look at literature you believe may be relevant to your condition (if it has yet eluded diagnosis) may be a patient's best or only chance to get adequate treatment.
@johnabs my last point was referring to the comic as it states "top scientists and doctors". Since as you now pointed out "primary care physicians", I would assume that these sets are disjointed due to your statement that they don't continue reading medical literature, which assumes that top doctors do the opposite.
I understand your concern and do like your suggestion regarding patients bringing up potential papers that could help with their medical condition(s).
Sadly there will always be a disconnect between research and industry unless you are one of the fortunate individuals who gets to experience both realms.
I am hoping for the future, if it doesn't exist already, that there will be a way to standardize research results from studies in such a fashion that you could throw a data set onto it and get a definite result. This would immensely reduce the time needed to first get a medical prognosis and thereby one could start treatment earlier.
So if we take your example of the patient bringing peer reviewed literature to their doctor. Then the doctor could just type in the DOI and get an almost instant response (of course this should still be second guessed by the physician).