Posted on Dec 25, 2021
Pressure builds against doctors peddling false virus claims | AP News
2.97K
19
5
6
6
0
Conspiracy Theories
Coronavirus COVID19
Healthcare
Health
Physician
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 3
7
7
0
It's about time. If "first, do no harm" is a part of heir oath, they are certainly breaking it.
(7)
(0)
1
1
0
Irony is some of the anti-vaxxers who become hospitalized demand unproven medications.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Can we start with Anthony Fauci, please?
I have no problem with this, in theory. But we better make sure that it *was* misinformation, that the doctor *knew* it was misinformation, and that the doctor intentionally spread it.
Remember how the lab leak was misinformation, and then it wasn't?
Remember how Ivermectin was a bad idea until some studies showed it actually helped. And after that it somehow became a HORRIBLE idea?
Remember how it was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, therefore the vaccine was important, and forget any risks or the fact that we have no long term data? And remember how the current variant completely ignores vax status, and maybeven actually THRIVE in the vaccinated population?
Many of these doctors are not peddling misinformation. They are peddling DIFFERENT information which counters the narrative. And some of them are proving to be right. If doctor A reads study 1 that says Ivermectin isn't a wonder drug, but appears to be useful in treatment, and Doctor B reads study 2 that days Ivermectin is useless, neither is peddling misinformation. They are working with the knowledge they have. Now if Doctor C reads BOTH studies, and says don't worry about ivermectin, what you REALLY need is arsenic.... Now that may be a problem.
I have no problem with this, in theory. But we better make sure that it *was* misinformation, that the doctor *knew* it was misinformation, and that the doctor intentionally spread it.
Remember how the lab leak was misinformation, and then it wasn't?
Remember how Ivermectin was a bad idea until some studies showed it actually helped. And after that it somehow became a HORRIBLE idea?
Remember how it was a pandemic of the unvaccinated, therefore the vaccine was important, and forget any risks or the fact that we have no long term data? And remember how the current variant completely ignores vax status, and maybeven actually THRIVE in the vaccinated population?
Many of these doctors are not peddling misinformation. They are peddling DIFFERENT information which counters the narrative. And some of them are proving to be right. If doctor A reads study 1 that says Ivermectin isn't a wonder drug, but appears to be useful in treatment, and Doctor B reads study 2 that days Ivermectin is useless, neither is peddling misinformation. They are working with the knowledge they have. Now if Doctor C reads BOTH studies, and says don't worry about ivermectin, what you REALLY need is arsenic.... Now that may be a problem.
(1)
(0)
COL (Join to see)
I’d like to cheat something up for those of you not as familiar with the nuances of living in a free society where everyone, deserving or not, good or bad, can achieve some degree of success
So the subtleties of science are, as I’m sure you are aware, if you have no morals but are smart enough to pass the tests and surround yourself with other low to no morals then you can be a “doctor”. You can even publish crap that has zero scientific validity because it’s published in the “national enquirers” of so called scientific journals
So with that said, there was never, ever to date valid demonstration of the benefits of HCQ or ivermectin published in any legitimate peer reviewed journal Period.
So yes if youre of the decrepit immoral class of doctor who violates professional ethics and puts your political or religious or personal biases as your point of view then you’ll claim “science” because you found a bogus article that was published in a trash journal.
Faux is imo just an old man who is not savvy enough to shut the f up or state his information is based on todays knowledge and may change tomorrow. If he had started every press meeting with that he might have saved face, but he didn’t
Also no one in my academic and research circles has or will ever view the words from Fauci as gospel We seek direct info from academic and peer reviewed journals oftentimes before he announces it to the press Not sure why people like to follow these random men as their savior and prophet. But I digress
So the subtleties of science are, as I’m sure you are aware, if you have no morals but are smart enough to pass the tests and surround yourself with other low to no morals then you can be a “doctor”. You can even publish crap that has zero scientific validity because it’s published in the “national enquirers” of so called scientific journals
So with that said, there was never, ever to date valid demonstration of the benefits of HCQ or ivermectin published in any legitimate peer reviewed journal Period.
So yes if youre of the decrepit immoral class of doctor who violates professional ethics and puts your political or religious or personal biases as your point of view then you’ll claim “science” because you found a bogus article that was published in a trash journal.
Faux is imo just an old man who is not savvy enough to shut the f up or state his information is based on todays knowledge and may change tomorrow. If he had started every press meeting with that he might have saved face, but he didn’t
Also no one in my academic and research circles has or will ever view the words from Fauci as gospel We seek direct info from academic and peer reviewed journals oftentimes before he announces it to the press Not sure why people like to follow these random men as their savior and prophet. But I digress
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google