>>11340590Some of the cases are more ambiguous than others, doesnt mean it's not worth studying with the goal of learning more.
Surgery used to be pretty useless in the past too until good techniques and knowledge was obtained on how to best accomplish it. Even so, there are stil some surgerical techniques that are pretty futile as they are now. If everyone had your attitude, we'd never be where we are now with surgery as a speciality, let alone medicine as a field.
>you're not going in depth so I'm going to call strawmanI refuse to go in depth because you seem to lack any knowledge on the subject and are likely a premed if not some straight up lay person like most of the shitposters in this site.
The current way of doing things is often wasteful, but neurology as a speciality is not one of the reasons. There are just enough neurology programs that take just as much residents as there needs to be. We could always use more researchers in neurology and neuroscience in general but this is another matter.
>Yes, this is part of knowing and doing your job at a level above what a machine following a simple script can.Yes, which does not all exclude the use of any specialists.
Generalists(medicine, general surgery, pediatrics,) as well as other specialists simply to do have the time to manage every case, especially when they dont have the expertise in that particular subject. This mean, knowledge as well as skills. Again, their time can be better used on other things of they are knowledge and can actually do. I said this earlier.
You just dont understand the volume of information and people practitioners have to sort through in a day. Again, I'm not surprised.
Things would be even less efficient and even more costly in the long run if not for specialists. What holds everyone one back is stupid administrative protocols that hospitals set up, not the existence of any specialties themselves.
Of course, there are cases of people consulting inappropriately
