[Subjectivity in the reading of scientific articles]

With the examples of historical incoherencies in the diagnosis and treatment of myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolism, the author shows that it is not easy to be an objective reader of "good" scientific articles. Our neuropsychological mechanisms do not facilitate an "intelligent" attitude without the aid of affectivity. An unwanted thymotic component places the reader in an ambiguous position with respect to authority and reality. Though one can never know too much, it is difficult, alone, to maintain an intelligent curiosity. Some financial interests may awaken it. During his career, the physician has to navigate between two slightly contradictory necessities: changing his attitude with respect to new information, and according credence to his personal experience.