I too have stopped taking it consistently and only take it if I have a cold, which I almost never do. It's worth stepping back and considering the general guideline that it is best to wait about 5 years after a compound/drug is released before making a judgment on it's risk/reward. I think people sometimes just apply that to "drugs" but it could apply to just about anything. In the case of MB, Chris Masterjohn raised some interesting concerns about whether it is really beneficial for a person who is already healthy, and I have heard of clinicians raising concerns that it decreases bifido bacteria and may negatively impact gut bacteria.
Regarding the wait and see guidelines, VIOXX was the poster child for this and we have seen this in real time too with recent things such as GLP-1 agonists. As Dr. Kendrick noted as an example, if a group of people started smoking, it would take about 5 years for the problems to start to be really apparent, and due to the fat-loss affects of nicotine, it could look beneficial early on. I think AmidwesternDoctor on Substack recommends 7 years (who by way is IMO essential reading...the amount and quality of what he puts out is incredible) but the bottom line is that it takes a while for the totality of an intervention to really become clear, and taking some new compound, especially one that is highly impactful, is not a great idea unless someone is faced with absolutely no alternative, which very few of us are.
