This was a bad decision, as this is just a larger scale version of the “should free speech let you yell FIRE in a crowded theater that isn’t on fire” public safety question.
Free speech needs to have limits when it comes to public safety. The scientific community, including medical science, has effectively DOUBLED the average human lifespan and greatly increased quality of life for that lifespan in the course of a couple centuries. Their community’s consensus findings and recommendations should be above reproach. They have more than earned their bona fides. They have given mankind greater miracles than any imaginary deity we’ve ever invented and worshipped in our thousands of years of recorded history.
Letting idiots shout “do the opposite of what modern medicine says!,” lacking any credible evidence, much less the extraordinary evidence their extraordinary claims would require, during a major pandemic is just as destructive as the fire analogy but on a massively larger scale.
A lot of admittedly unintelligent people, but people nonetheless, are dead because of malicious conspiracy idiots that were literally ready to die on the “don’t tell me what to do, ‘experts’” hill and wanted to convince gullible idiots to unknowingly join them in their suicide by duuuuhhhh.
Take a minute to go and familiarize yourself with the history of the lobotomy, then you can tell me the scientific community is above reproach.
Speaking as someone who is part of that community, bunk science gets through all the time. Especially when politics enters the fray.
Do you have any idea how many criticisms from within the healthcare and medical research fields were censored so that people like you would believe there was only one true opinion? Of course you don’t, because you probably got all of your news on the matter from a sanitized downstream source.
Think for yourself. There were convoluting factors in the way the covid vaccines were developed that left questions of long term side effects completely unanswered and up in the air. If you don’t understand why this vaccine was a special case to be concerned about, that’s okay, I don’t expect you to understand as a layman. But actual medical doctors were being censored off of social media and in professional environments for voicing legitimate concerns. If you’re okay with that, I think you’re making a tribal argument, not an intellectually honest one.
Oh just stop with this nonsense. Your statement about “convoluting factors” demonstrates your complete and total ignorance of the strength and weight and sheer amount of evidence behind mRNA technology available at this point. Antivaxx talking points rely on these fundamental misunderstandings and ignorance, lmfao at your attempt to condescend to lay people in this way when you clearly don’t even know how RCTs are run or fundamentally work. There are actually decades of research behind this stuff at this point, this misinformation is tired and old. And so easily disproven by listening to people who understand the science, who work with the science, who have engaged with the evidence. And to pre-emptively rebuttal against the appeal to authority you might be chomping at the bit to make- being a pioneer a few decades ago in the field means nothing if you haven’t kept abreast to new discoveries, innovations, and evidence. I can just see you being “part of the community” as a lab manager or something, a pencil pusher at best, nothing more and certainly not someone with the training to understand the statements you’re making.
The fun part of this whole issue is that since SCOTUS has recently established people can bring forward made-up cases based on “what ifs” for violating fundamental rights and causing harm, someone in the US could plausibly sue people like you for the potential harm you may cause, because we’re talking not just about a mountain of biological and medical research, but an overwhelming amount of epidemiological data as well. Literal population-level bodies of evidence concerning how much harms views like yours have caused. Fun, eh?
Medical doctors who didn’t follow the evidence deserved to be spoken over and shut down by their peers. If you fail in your fundamental understanding of what your job is, the basic science behind medicine, you shouldn’t be practicing anymore.
And if we’re talking about comparisons to things like lobotomy, again, and I’ll say it slow for you so you can follow closely- The. Strength. Of. The. Evidence. Matters. When the evidence that lobotomy is incredibly harmful and not treating the issues it was purported to treat in any way became overwhelming, guess what? The standards changed. When the evidence is overwhelming yet you still cling to conspiracies, you deserve to be shut down, no one owes you a platform for your deceit and lies and misinformation.
What, you don’t think a self-professed “former therapist” is an expert on infectious disease and vaccine development??? 😂
I do have to agree that the medical and scientific community’s consensus shouldn’t be “beyond reproach”, but only because the scientific method requires being open to new evidence that shows past theories to be flawed. (Key word evidence.)
Alas, a common tactic for spreading misinformation can be summed up as “a mosquito doesn’t care if the window is only open by an inch or all the way, it’ll fly inside regardless.”
This was a bad decision, as this is just a larger scale version of the “should free speech let you yell FIRE in a crowded theater that isn’t on fire” public safety question.
Free speech needs to have limits when it comes to public safety. The scientific community, including medical science, has effectively DOUBLED the average human lifespan and greatly increased quality of life for that lifespan in the course of a couple centuries. Their community’s consensus findings and recommendations should be above reproach. They have more than earned their bona fides. They have given mankind greater miracles than any imaginary deity we’ve ever invented and worshipped in our thousands of years of recorded history.
Letting idiots shout “do the opposite of what modern medicine says!,” lacking any credible evidence, much less the extraordinary evidence their extraordinary claims would require, during a major pandemic is just as destructive as the fire analogy but on a massively larger scale.
A lot of admittedly unintelligent people, but people nonetheless, are dead because of malicious conspiracy idiots that were literally ready to die on the “don’t tell me what to do, ‘experts’” hill and wanted to convince gullible idiots to unknowingly join them in their suicide by duuuuhhhh.
Take a minute to go and familiarize yourself with the history of the lobotomy, then you can tell me the scientific community is above reproach.
Speaking as someone who is part of that community, bunk science gets through all the time. Especially when politics enters the fray.
Do you have any idea how many criticisms from within the healthcare and medical research fields were censored so that people like you would believe there was only one true opinion? Of course you don’t, because you probably got all of your news on the matter from a sanitized downstream source.
Think for yourself. There were convoluting factors in the way the covid vaccines were developed that left questions of long term side effects completely unanswered and up in the air. If you don’t understand why this vaccine was a special case to be concerned about, that’s okay, I don’t expect you to understand as a layman. But actual medical doctors were being censored off of social media and in professional environments for voicing legitimate concerns. If you’re okay with that, I think you’re making a tribal argument, not an intellectually honest one.
Oh just stop with this nonsense. Your statement about “convoluting factors” demonstrates your complete and total ignorance of the strength and weight and sheer amount of evidence behind mRNA technology available at this point. Antivaxx talking points rely on these fundamental misunderstandings and ignorance, lmfao at your attempt to condescend to lay people in this way when you clearly don’t even know how RCTs are run or fundamentally work. There are actually decades of research behind this stuff at this point, this misinformation is tired and old. And so easily disproven by listening to people who understand the science, who work with the science, who have engaged with the evidence. And to pre-emptively rebuttal against the appeal to authority you might be chomping at the bit to make- being a pioneer a few decades ago in the field means nothing if you haven’t kept abreast to new discoveries, innovations, and evidence. I can just see you being “part of the community” as a lab manager or something, a pencil pusher at best, nothing more and certainly not someone with the training to understand the statements you’re making.
The fun part of this whole issue is that since SCOTUS has recently established people can bring forward made-up cases based on “what ifs” for violating fundamental rights and causing harm, someone in the US could plausibly sue people like you for the potential harm you may cause, because we’re talking not just about a mountain of biological and medical research, but an overwhelming amount of epidemiological data as well. Literal population-level bodies of evidence concerning how much harms views like yours have caused. Fun, eh?
Medical doctors who didn’t follow the evidence deserved to be spoken over and shut down by their peers. If you fail in your fundamental understanding of what your job is, the basic science behind medicine, you shouldn’t be practicing anymore.
And if we’re talking about comparisons to things like lobotomy, again, and I’ll say it slow for you so you can follow closely- The. Strength. Of. The. Evidence. Matters. When the evidence that lobotomy is incredibly harmful and not treating the issues it was purported to treat in any way became overwhelming, guess what? The standards changed. When the evidence is overwhelming yet you still cling to conspiracies, you deserve to be shut down, no one owes you a platform for your deceit and lies and misinformation.
What, you don’t think a self-professed “former therapist” is an expert on infectious disease and vaccine development??? 😂
I do have to agree that the medical and scientific community’s consensus shouldn’t be “beyond reproach”, but only because the scientific method requires being open to new evidence that shows past theories to be flawed. (Key word evidence.)
Alas, a common tactic for spreading misinformation can be summed up as “a mosquito doesn’t care if the window is only open by an inch or all the way, it’ll fly inside regardless.”
omg I COMPLETELY missed the user name and didn’t recognize who it was 🤣🤣🤣 thank you bahaha. I like you, Lemmy friend