Trying to define "acceptable risk"

Last month, we wrote about a paper in the Journal of General Internal Medicine that examined how individuals' opinions regarding vaccination vary based on the role the person is asked to assume (i.e., as a patient, a parent, a physician, or a public health director). See our full post: "Study asks, 'Would you take a risky flu vaccine?'" here.

A piece in today's New York Times discusses the study as part of a broader look at the definition of 'acceptable risk' and the challenges physicians face in attempting to discuss accurately the risks and benefits of treatment options. It's an incredibly complex topic to tackle in a 750-word story, but the Times provides a useful introduction to an important issue.