![]() There is no mortal who can credibly claim to unerringly distinguish true scientific and medical information from misinformation. He wrote in a Twitter post: “The attempt to regulate medical speech violates civil liberties, harms science, and will ultimately harm patients.” Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford School of Medicine and author of the Great Barrington Declaration, says the new law will have a “chilling” effect on free speech. It now advocates for taking personal responsibility and for everyone to decide for themselves “which prevention behaviours to use and when (at all times or at specific times), based on their own risk for severe illness and that of members of their household, their risk tolerance, and setting-specific factors.”īefore this, the Lancet published an article noting the futility of vaccine mandates in they stated: “The demonstration of COVID-19 breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated health-care workers (HCW) in Israel, who in turn may transmit this infection to their patients, requires a reassessment of compulsory vaccination policies leading to the job dismissal of unvaccinated HCW in the USA.”ĭr. Centre for Diseases Prevention and Control ( CDC) backflipped on “the science,” stating that “COVID-19 prevention recommendations no longer differentiate based on a person’s vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur.” Remember when the “consensus” was that thalidomide was a proven treatment for pregnant women’s morning sickness, only for their children to be born without limbs? ![]() Last month, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a bill that threatens doctors with suspension or disqualification from practice if they contradict the “scientific consensus” on COVID-19 and disseminate “ misinformation.”Īs we know, the words “scientific” and “consensus” should never be used together.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |