tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6399730406480392183.post4953926969927808232..comments2024-03-27T11:18:34.222-03:00Comments on Viable Opposition: The Medical Profession, Vaccine Dissent and the Cancel CultureA Political Junkiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03342345936277964422noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6399730406480392183.post-65859531958190137362021-06-30T16:02:01.677-03:002021-06-30T16:02:01.677-03:00FWIW, i find the spirit of debate in the scientifi...FWIW, i find the spirit of debate in the scientific community has not fundamentally changed except for the politicization component, which goes along the gradual polarization in society.<br /><br />Covid-19 was only a trigger, not a cause, IMHO.<br /><br />For the vaccines, a few weeks ago, i had an argument with another online participant elsewhere (intelligent) and his point was that 'they' (meaning the decision makers) lacked courage by not releasing the vaccines much earlier, especially for the older and at-risk populations. And now, you indicate that it's much too early! An argument could be made that China handled the virus much better using a more authoritarian brand of policy. i still prefer to live in a place where (messy) discussions can still happen. :)<br /><br />If the Covid-19 question interests you (i guess it does), i suggest reading Micheal Lewis' The Premonition. You will like the critical tone concerning the CDC. You may need an open mind to integrate the rest into your thinking. In the book, there is this physician who got interested in public health (and eventually the coronavirus) and who had to deal with, at some point, with an MD doing controversial stem cell therapies and who, after a difficult journey, was found to be responsible for a viral spread within his clientele due to negligence. His defense was that he simply wanted to help his patients with his 'alternative'. In many years of peer review assessments, at times, remedial actions had to be taken but i never met an MD who admitted deliberate harm (except at times and in a muffled way (and perhaps sincerely) in order to negotiate for a lighter penalty.<br /><br />But yes science and dogma don't mix well but that's nothing new.Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792779708580094262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6399730406480392183.post-26770384252323534772021-06-30T10:35:15.986-03:002021-06-30T10:35:15.986-03:00You are right, that is a thorny issue. It used to...You are right, that is a thorny issue. It used to be that in the scientific community (and I include the medical community), there was open debate and, while both sides may not agree with each other, at least dissent against the prevailing narrative was not "cancelled".<br /><br />In my lifetime, I cannot recall such a divisive issue as the COVID-19 pandemic and the use of novel vaccines that have not even finished Phase 3 testing before being unleashed on the public. In this case, the biggest issue is the link between Big Pharma and the media and those who are funding both (Bill Gates being a prime example).<br /><br />If MDs are deliberately harming their patients, that is one thing. If they are merely disagreeing with the prevailing practice, that is another. Think of the issue of smoking - back in the 1950s and 1960s, many physicians saw nothing wrong with cigarettes and didn't discourage their patients from continuing to smoke. We now know that this was wrong on so many levels.<br /><br />As for what I would do if I was put in charge of the medical profession, I can't really say but I do feel that the current approach is completely unscientific.<br /><br />Thanks for your thoughtful comment.A Political Junkiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03342345936277964422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6399730406480392183.post-57012716911012212272021-06-28T08:25:35.152-03:002021-06-28T08:25:35.152-03:00That was interesting. Thanks.
Within the medical f...That was interesting. Thanks.<br />Within the medical field and outside of tribal/political considerations, dealing with opposing schools of thought and alternative options can be a challenge.<br />One of the questions is what to do with MDs who say or whose practice is nonsense. Censorship is obviously not the answer but disseminating nonsense with the potential to magnify dis- or mis-information is also a concern.<br />What would you do if you were put in charge by peers for accountability of your profession and you learn that some MDs' practices are harming patients?<br />Please don't censor my comment (as has been done before) :)Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792779708580094262noreply@blogger.com