It has always amazed me that at our meetings very intelligent colleagues can have strong opposing opinions and disagree with one another. We have all witnessed debates concerning antecolic or retrocolic Roux limb placement, circular vs. linear vs. handsewn anastomoses, the best procedure for the diabetic patient, single- or two-staged procedures for the high-risk patient, and even which venue would be best to host the next annual meeting. In most cases, there is no right or wrong opinion, hi fact, in most cases, both opinions can be correct yet opposite, and the "combatants" can both often find published articles to support their arguments. What are young clinicians to do in order to decide which opinions to adopt in their practices when both are correct? Is it a good thing or a bad thing for us to have such discourse in our ranks? The more I ponder this predicament, the more I believe that it is, in fact, quite healthy and usually good. I believe that differences of opinion make one think harder. When someone disagrees with my opinions, I find it causes me to revisit my thought process and reassess how I came to such opinions. This will ultimately lead me to feel even stronger that my opinion is the "more" correct one or I might even determine that my opinion was in fact the "less" correct one and I will change to the other side. I believe that such self-assessment and the ability to change opinions, beliefs, or practice styles make me a better physician, surgeon, and person.
展开▼
