What would it take to convince you that a drug or treatment is far worse than the disease it is intended to alleviate?

Question

As an example, say the AMA decided that bleeding with leeches would cure shingles, but to work, you would have to lose enough blood to endanger your life. Say they launched a massive PR campaign to popularize it, ordered doctors to promote it, bribed politicians to encourage it, paid the mainstream media to push it, and social media to silence anyone against it.

Answer 1

I do not need to think twice if they are the best treatments for a particular disease, which is considered terminal. Why? Because I am in the medical field and can tell which one is good or not for my body.

Answer 2

It would take a significant amount of evidence for me to be convinced that a drug or treatment is far worse than the disease it is intended to alleviate. This evidence could include data from clinical trials, reports from medical professionals, and accounts from those who have experienced the treatment. Additionally, it would be important to consider the potential risks of the treatment, as well as the potential benefits.

Answer 3

Say they launched a massive PR campaign to popularize it, ordered doctors to promote it, bribed politicians to encourage it, paid the mainstream media to push it, and social media to silence anyone against it.

Answer 4

This evidence could include data from clinical trials, reports from medical professionals, and accounts from those who have experienced the treatment. Additionally, it would be important to consider the potential risks of the treatment, as well as the potential benefits