What do you think and how would you comment the differences between the information and contents available in valid and reliable sources, books and etc. and the comments and quotations of experts and specialized persons contained by a specific filed.
For example, all the valid sources for women health read aloud that the duration of bleeding in a woman’s period lasts between 2 to 7 days and it’s considered mundane, but just the others day a lady doctor said that between 2 to 4 days is middle-of-the-road and more than this duration is abnormal.
And it’s not only in robustness issue but I found this discrepancy in sciences like physics and etc.

So what do you think and how would you comment? Which on we should lounge our trust in? books and encyclopedias or experts?
Answers:    We are not clones! We are individuals and as individuals we are all very different. My cycle be excellent, 3 days no problem and seems I have breezed through and now menopausal, no problem. Yet my Sister, she be fainting as a teenager, had to purloin time off work when she was on her period, after had two children and while she is six years old than me, has not reach menopause. The best the Books can state is what they consider to be the 'norm' taking X amount of females and the shortest, longest and plumping for the middle ground.
I have a serious health problem that for many years be left undiagnosed, or wrongly diagnosed. So I eventually got my hands on adjectives my blood tests, three years worth, one test every 3 months, placed them on a spreadsheet and then red the results alongside a Student Text Book on Arthritis. I noted that my white cell count should be between 8-11%, but within 3 years mine was ticking over at 15%, no matter how I felt? Yet according to the certificate book the white cell count should increase when the arthritis flared, say hit 15% and then when in remission, return to below 11%, but mine have never been below 11%? So I took the book to my Doctor and showed him the spread sheet stating the Text book was wrong. He picked up the telephone and the subsequent day I had a appointment with a Hematologist? The article book was right, but my blood was wrong! So I saw the Heamatologist, left loads of blood and returned contained by two weeks. I no sooner opened the door when the Heamatologist said 'You blood is normal!' Therefore I did a U-Turn and just as I go to open the door to leave, the Consultant Heamatologist said 'Before you leave can we hold some extra samples of your blood?' Now you do not have to be intelligent to ask a simple question: if my blood is typical, why do you want extra samples? The letter back to my Doctor stated 'I be given a verbal report and as you can see her blood is not normal'. Liar, Liar pants on fire, because if they have received a verbal report, they would not have asked for extra samples! Therefore, study is the just way you will find the truth. However, it is not easy, you spend a lot of time contained by putting all the medical jargon into simple terms and putting the pieces of the jigsaw together. As my Doctor presently admits 'You know more about it than me'. Oh yes and the Heamatologist has since be struck off!
So if you are willing to put the study in, you will know yourself and you can trust yourself and not books, Doctors, encyclopedias. Best of Luck

---

I involve some medical direction.?

Thats a amazingly good question to answer and I commend you for asking it. Too many ancestors take information but do not question the source it comes from.

There is a "hierarchy" of evidence in medical literature. At the bottom rung is commentary, expert judgment, case studies and anecdotal evidence. At the higher end are things such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. Unfortunately, too several people take stock in anecdotal evidence and nouns...you see this being used in advertisements adjectives the time and people fall prey to it "I tried this vitamin and I feel great!"

However, adjectives have some value. Anecdotal evidence and expert opinion are the reason on which we form other questions and studies.

This doctor may have a valid point if she can back it up by prospective studies ie, a study that looks at women who own had cycles that last beyond 2-4 days and looks at the rate of disorders in those women versus the rate of disorders surrounded by those within 2-4. Even then, association is not always a clear stripe. Otherwise, expert opinion is subject to personal bias.

Books and encyclopedias on the other hand, may use a variety of scources. Hopefully, they are flawless ones, but the information found in encylopedias is rarely up to date.

Rather, the most reliable places to reivew information is in medical journal...up to date information. However, one must always be aware of the strengths and limitations of a study. Even studies that may provide strong "evidence" for something may be poorly done and, therefore, become invalid.

I would ask this doctor for her source(s).

---

Why does my d¨¦colletage hurt!?