>>>>>>Is that their only stated reason? FWIW I know quite a few medical doctors reluctant to take one or other of the vaccine options after researching carefully.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>John, just to clarify, are you saying that you know some medical doctors who are reluctant to take "one" of the specific vaccines? (i.e. J&J, versus Pfizer/Moderna)
>>>>>
>>>>>(That one, I can understand, if one of them specifically has a lower effective rate, higher rate of serious side-effects, etc.)
>>>>
>>>>Medical doctors are not scientists. They have a basic understanding of science.
>>>>
>>>>Relying on practicing physicians for scientific advice is like relying on your very competent plumber for metallurgy advice.
>>>>
>>>>Hank
>>>
>>>The problem is that we get sick and rely on science to keep us alive.
>>>MD's have positioned themselves as the sole conveyors of science.
>>>George Washington followed their advice and he bled to death.
>>>On the other hand I'm a walking example of what a good MD can do.
>>>Mine has pulled me out of some pretty scary situations.
>>>Even so, I apply a hefty dose of skepticism to whatever she recommends.
>>>It has to make sense to me, and she's willing to keep explaining till it does - or doesn't.
>>>The trick is to keep looking till you find a good one.
>>>
>>>Skepticism and common sense are always good friends.
>>
>>Medical science is not an exact science -- something people often forget (or don't want to know. :)
>
>What is if you consider Quantum uncertainties and Heisenberg principle ?
>There are wide areas where results are so stable you can call it an "exact science": physics calculated for Newtonian POV and speeds or in medicine a human head separated from the body will result in both decaying soon if not frozen.
>
>There is data, data cleaning and statistics - and there are people playing lotteries or going into casino without an angle to cheat as "they feel they can beat the odds"...

The point I'm making is that treatments for the same diagnoses effect people differently and it's pretty much impossible to know how all treatments will effect all people.
Google appears to be developing an algorithm to do so -- and I've actually done something similar to this myself by using the result codes. Person has Diag code, then gets treatment code, then gets result codes. Sooo..the more data you have - then the better chances of looking at the positive result codes for a particular diag code to come up with best treatment code. Kinda slick cause it gets smarter as time goes by :) --- but again it's never going to be exact. It gets smarter as you can narrow down by age, other conditions, weight..etc -- but you're not going to get them all you just can't yet.