I think that some may find this piece at UnHerd by Vinay Prasad helpful. Here’s its opening passage:
Last week, a group of scientists, doctors, and academics published an open letter calling on Spotify “to take action against the mass-misinformation events which continue to occur on its platformâ€. Specifically, they were objecting to two recent episodes of Joe Rogan’s podcast, in which he interviewed the prominent vaccine sceptics Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Robert Malone. “By allowing the propagation of false and societally harmful assertions,†the letter claimed, “Spotify is enabling its hosted media to damage public trust in scientific research.â€
I am an associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics, as well as a practising physician, and I firmly believe that it would be a mistake to censor Rogan under the guise of combating “misinformationâ€.
Rogan is not a scientist, and, like everyone else, he has his biases. But he is open-minded, sceptical, and his podcast is an important forum for debate and dialogue. It is not enough, moreover, to simply dismiss Malone and McCullough as conspiracy theorists. They are controversial and polarising figures, but they do have real credentials. Malone is a physician who has worked in molecular biology and drug development for decades, while McCullough was, until recently, an academic cardiologist and researcher.
It strikes me as a pretty fair-minded treatment.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10418589/Most-270-signed-anti-Joe-Rogan-letter-demanding-Spotify-action-not-actually-doctors.html
Of the 270 people signing that letter about 87 of them were actually medical doctors. The rest held an array of jobs, including an “influencer,†who promoted the vaccines. In the meantime an earlier declaration was signed by 16,000 doctors and scientists from around the world, including Dr. Malone, who made so many waves on that sensational Rogan podcast (heard by supposedly 50 million listeners).
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/england-ends-all-covid-passports-mask-mandates-work-restrictions
When is the above going to happen here in the U.S.?
https://unherd.com/thepost/israeli-vaccine-chief-we-have-made-mistakes/
From your last link:
That is a part of the equation that I have mentioned but don’t hear discussed much. I agree with him that vaccination is a personal choice but it is a personal choice that comes with responsibilities. What I think we’re seeing is making the choice but being unwilling to take the responsibility.
The responsibility goes beyond eschewing hospital treatment to self-quarantine for the duration.
Dave, I believe treatment options should be a matter of personal choice and not forced or mandated. This includes antivirals that physicians should feel free to prescribe (without harassment or threats of losing their license), along with pharmacies who freely fill those doctor-prescribed prescriptions. As for self quarantining myself – I’ve always done that, even with colds, the flu etc.
The biggie for me is the availability of the meds I would want to take should I come down with COVID. It’s become a non-starter at hospitals, who primarily push remdisivir, or engaging in a black market type purchase for an antiviral such as ivermectin.
I wonder if anyone here has ever listened to an interview given with either Dr Malone or McCullough, where they detail and document what concerns them about these vaccines?
In a debate between a scientist who believes the math is flat and one who thinks the earth is round, the flat earth scientist will undoubtedly say some things that are true. Myocarditis can happen. In fact we have vaccinated enough people now and followed them to have an idea about severity. The author is wrong in his attempt to be fair to both sides. The huge majority of cases are very mild not requiring any or much in the way of treatment. This also ignores the long term cardiac issues and other problems after covid like diabetes. So if your only concern is avoiding myocarditis you should not get vaccinated. If your concern is overall health including all known complications you get vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7102e2.htm
The problem is that the flat earth scientists, just like these two people, end up having to lie to support their claims. Nearly everyone did in fact try HCQ. We all stopped it both because we saw it did not work and the literature studying it showed the same. The same is largely true for Ivermectin though there ought to be another one or two large multi-center trials to be sure.
Whether or not we should censor guys like this is a normative judgment. I generally favor free speech so would not, but it is private organizations doing it so that is their right. I honestly dont know if it harms more people for them to spread their lies or have more people believe them because they are being censored. I have listened to Malone. As I said he makes a few correct points, a lot of liars do that. (Some of the best liars do it I think.) I dont know how he lives with himself as he has to know he is wrong. (He is not a practicing physician so I guess there is the tiniest chance he doesnt know we all tried his drugs but he would have to willingly avoid knowing that.)
Dave- jan wont answer that question. No anti vaxxer will. What really happens, stop by one of my ICUs, is that these guys take their ivermectin, HCQ, supplements or whatever and when they dont work they go to the hospital. At the hospital the people they have all claimed are quacks and refusing to order the correct medicines then go ahead and treat them and most of the time we save their lives. (McCullough is a cardiologist. Dont especially care what he says.)
Steve
steve: So if your only concern is avoiding myocarditis you should not get vaccinated.
If you want to avoid myocarditis, you should get vaccinated. The rate of myocarditis after vaccination is about the same as the background rate of myocarditis, 1 to 10 per 100,000, especially prevalent in otherwise healthy, young males. People who acquire COVID-19 have a much higher risk of myocarditis of about 150 per 100,000.
Jan: This includes antivirals that physicians should feel free to prescribe (without harassment or threats of losing their license)
So, doctors should be able to prescribe any sort of quack medicine? No professional standards whatsoever?
Dave Schuler: It is not enough, moreover, to simply dismiss Malone and McCullough as conspiracy theorists.
Their views have been dismissed by their scientific peers. There are scientists who reject evolution. There are scientists who reject anthropogenic global warming. But, as scientists, it is their responsibility to develop the evidence necessary to convince their scientific peers.
That doesn’t necessarily mean they are wrong, but people have a right to complain about them being given such a large platform to disseminate their contrary views.
The quote is not from me but from the author of the article who, as it happens, is also one of their scientific peers.
The core issue here is deplatforming.
While I can understand that self-righteous people want to censor ideas that they are hostile to, the problem is that they are not the self-appointed gods of truth. And some of us like to hear arguments and ideas that we fundamentally disagree with and, for me at least, hearing those arguments is necessary to validate and calibrate my own views and improve my own arguments against ideas that I think are bad and wrong.
The willful desire to create a cognitive bubble is, therefore, ultimately self-defeating. Plus there is this thing called “the internet” which makes suppressing ideas and arguments impossible.
â€While I can understand that self-righteous people want to censor ideas that they are hostile to, the problem is that they are not the self-appointed gods of truth. And some of us like to hear arguments and ideas that we fundamentally disagree with and, for me at least, hearing those arguments is necessary to validate and calibrate my own views and improve my own arguments against ideas that I think are bad and wrong.â€
I couldn’t agree more with the above statement!
“While I can understand that self-righteous people want to censor ideas that they are hostile to, the problem is that they are not the self-appointed gods of truth.”
Its not just being self-righteous when someone is wrong and lying. We did in fact try HCQ AND we did good large scale studies showing it does not work. There is no other side to the argument. this is very much the same as a flat earther scientist debating a real scientist. There is no valid debate.
Zachriel- But you also have to factor in the risk of actually getting covid plus the fact that you deliberately causing the risk to yourself. The numbers still favor vaccination but when it comes to evaluating risk people always over value complications from treatment. I have done this with pts many, many times. We can do this which will help you survive this treatment and there will be a 20% less chance you will die. However, there is a 0.5% chance the treatment itself will kill you. Nearly always people choose not to have the treatment because of the tiny chance it will harm them vs the big advantage of the therapy.
Steve
Steve
Andy: Plus there is this thing called “the internet†which makes suppressing ideas and arguments impossible.
As far as that is true makes deplatforming that much less of a problem.
“Plus there is this thing called “the internet†which makes suppressing ideas and arguments impossible.”
I believe this take is at least 5, maybe 10 years out of date.
Considering the “internet” is reliant on only a few companies (AWS, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple) — and a few financial platforms (Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, the big banks), coordinated action by these actors can deplatform any idea / anyone from the internet — and they have already done that (the point is not whether the deplatforming is justified or not).