[flagged]
British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
11–20 of 33 posts
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#12[flagged]
Definitely a good heuristic for deciding whether to support a particular piece of legislation, one which will surely never come a cropper in spectacular fashion.
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#13This argument is bad faith - there is a hugely important public health imperative for doctors not to peddle quackery. COVID disinformation led to a staggering loss of life, and no doctor should be permitted to participate.
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#14Can you trust anything? This article is odd.
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#15I think the government have enough (just right) power thru public funding.
Giving them extra power to mandate doctor what to do is not right.
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#16Didn't know what Orthomolecular Medicine means. Sorry, but that adds a cup of scepticism to the text and requires more reference tracking that I can afford. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomolecular_medicine
To add further skepticism, "Brian Peckford, former Premier of Newfoundland, disagrees. He is the last surviving member of the group that drew up Canada's Charter of Rights." is a massive red flag.
1. Chretien was much more instrumental to the authorship of the Charter, and is checks CBC as he's kind of old still alive.
2. That "qualification" is meaningless. It's trying to imply Canadian constitutionalism has original intent, which it doesn't (we use a living document philosophy). So a non-applicable appeal to authority.
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#17Why on earth this is flagged?
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#18Base your statements in repeatable, peer reviewed scientific fact and no one gets hurt.
“peer reviewed scientific fact”
What’s that, precisely?
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#19Base your statements in repeatable, peer reviewed scientific fact and no one gets hurt.
Why would you want to disenfranchise sociology and psychology?
Re: British Columbia's New Powers to Silence Dissenting Physicians
#20This argument is bad faith - there is a hugely important public health imperative for doctors not to peddle quackery. COVID disinformation led to a staggering loss of life, and no doctor should be permitted to participate.
What "disinformation which led to staggering loss of life" do you have in mind, specifically? The vast majority of high risk groups for SARS-CoV-2 were fully vaccinated very soon after vaccines were made available, so (assuming their protective benefits were actually all they have been cracked up to be) there couldn't have been some huge impact of "disinformation" there. There also couldn't have been a "staggering" additional loss of life in the less vaccinated lower risk groups because COVID wasn't a particularly lethal threat to them in the first place. And the vaccines had marginal-to-zero ability to reduce infection so any question of lost herd immunity is out the window. Is there something else I'm not thinking of that you have in mind?