A patient's right to advocate for their health.

The right of a patient to be an active participant in their healthcare decisions is fundamental.

Over time, many patients, especially those with chronic or multiple conditions, gather significant insights into their own health.

As a senior patient with multiple confirmed medical conditions, I've come to appreciate the importance of advocating for my own health. Over the years, I've asserted my right to accept or decline diagnoses, treatments, or prescriptions. I've observed that sometimes proposed diagnoses don't match the symptoms I feel. Various reasons can account for this: doctors might not take the time to dive deep into a patient's history, they might not be adequately informed about specific conditions, or they might hastily base their recommendations on preliminary findings that lack proper peer review. At times, they even resort to age-old remedies featured in health magazines, despite lacking concrete evidence of their efficacy.

Having navigated this medical landscape, I've developed a sense of caution towards scientists who make grand claims in the public domain, heralding potential cures without offering clear evidence or markers. This skepticism led me to directly engage with four such individuals, seeking clarity and challenging the robustness of their findings. What I found striking was that, following these interactions, all communication from their end stopped. The once-frequent emails, messages, and updates vanished, leaving a silence that I can't help but find both intriguing and unsettling.

In the realm of scientific discovery, caution and discernment are paramount. A credible scientist should be able and willing to present tangible evidence, discuss methodologies in detail, and elucidate specific markers or metrics underpinning their research. When faced with silence or evasion, one can't help but speculate:

Their Research Wasn't Solid: Perhaps they identified shortcomings or errors in their research upon closer examination.

They're Busy: Granted, the world of research is demanding, encompassing everything from in-depth studies to teaching and conference participation. This could lead to lapses in communication, though it shouldn't be a persistent issue.

Preference for Formal Channels: They might opt to share their findings through recognized research publications or at scholarly conferences, rather than personal communication.

Avoidance: Feeling cornered or exposed by probing questions, they might choose evasion over confrontation.

Regardless of their motivations, it is paramount for individuals to remain informed, vigilant, and critical. Blind acceptance can be perilous. In the vast, intricate world of science and medicine, second opinions are invaluable, and the principles of collaboration and peer review reign supreme.

I encourage to continue to trust your instincts, keep your inquisitive spirit alive, and always demand evidence and clarity. In this age, where information and misinformation coexist, your discerning approach is not just commendable but also vital for your well-being.