3 ms·

Folks you need to realize the difference between 'material discussion' within the scientific community etc. and 'drug populism' i.e. people making stuff up on T

Folks you need to realize the difference between 'material discussion' within the scientific community etc. and 'drug populism' i.e. people making stuff up on Twitter and that information flowing to millions. Nobody is 'smearing' the drug or even the people talking abot it. They're saying 'stop telling the public about it because it's not approved yet and potentially dangerous'. Whatever Donald Trump says - people believe. And they will go out in droves, self diagnose, self medicate, demand doctors prescribe them the 'cure' (when the doctor knows they shouldn't) etc.. And the amount of stupid conspiratorial memes that come up are pretty shocking. I avoid FB fro this reason and TikTok had a bunch of that for a bit, but I think they've shut down Ivermectin talk. I quite like Joe Rogan, but he's not a doctor, and neither is his partner in goofydom Brett Weinstein, they have zero medical credibility on the issue, they should straight up not be talking about the drug. If there is some kind of coverup, or there's hard evidence and the FDA is refusing to look at it, or if someone in Big Pharma bribed someone else ... then that's a story, but this is not that. Oxford has just launched a trial for Ivermectin, and there are others. When the results come in, and if it works and is safe, then CNN et. al. will talk about it and parameterize it appropriately. We'll all hear about it pretty quickly. The CDC can't stop Joe Rogan from talking about it and the haven't tried, but they can say 'STFU' until we have done the actual science, which is reasonable.

pumpkinandspice 5y ago
> I quite like Joe Rogan, but he's not a doctor, and neither is his partner in goofydom Brett Weinstein, they have zero medical credibility on the issue, they should straight up not be talking about the drug. By this logic, this applies to every single person that aren’t doctors who shouldn’t be talking about the vaccine or the drugs. This includes data scientists and politicians. I’ve watched Dr. Pierre Kory’s full interview with Brett and seems clips of his testimony in front of the senate. He is extremely credible and should have a voice in this as a COVID-19 critical care doctor and who has done meta analysis of the drug (https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Ivermectin-in-the-prophylaxis-and-treatment-of-COVID-19.pdf https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/F...). I think people like Joe and Brett help amplify voices of people like Dr. Pierre Kory similar to politicians who amplifies Dr. Fauci
- jollybean 5y ago
  So I think you might be misunderstanding my point a bit. Scientists and Doctors should be talking about it in scientific forums and communities. Politicians should be reiterating the 'current consensus'. People shouldn't be talking about it in public / tabloid forums because the information is vague, misrepresented and will be taken entirely out of context. I totally support people taking contrarian positions. I think we should probably assign people towards being 'The Devil's Advocate'. The issue is not 'freedom of expression and open dialogue' - it's one of 'crude populism and misinformation'. It's about how information is propagated, and how people react to it.
lawnchair_larry 5y ago
This is such a weird and uninformed take. For one thing, nobody discussing it is believing anything from Donald Trump or Joe Rogan. Neither have anything to do with the discussion at all. Just like the lab leak hypothesis - which Bret was also a year early on, while folks like you were still dismissing it out of hand because of some error in your own perception that this investigation was related to Trump. Also, Weinstein is in fact a doctor and a scientist, and so was his guest, Robert Malone, who invented mRNA vaccination. And Bret has been correct far more than Fauci, and earlier than Fauci, if we are keeping score.

pumpkinandspice 5y ago

> I quite like Joe Rogan, but he's not a doctor, and neither is his partner in goofydom Brett Weinstein, they have zero medical credibility on the issue, they should straight up not be talking about the drug. By this logic, this applies to every single person that aren’t doctors who shouldn’t be talking about the vaccine or the drugs. This includes data scientists and politicians. I’ve watched Dr. Pierre Kory’s full interview with Brett and seems clips of his testimony in front of the senate. He is extremely credible and should have a voice in this as a COVID-19 critical care doctor and who has done meta analysis of the drug (https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Ivermectin-in-the-prophylaxis-and-treatment-of-COVID-19.pdf https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/F...). I think people like Joe and Brett help amplify voices of people like Dr. Pierre Kory similar to politicians who amplifies Dr. Fauci

jollybean 5y ago
So I think you might be misunderstanding my point a bit. Scientists and Doctors should be talking about it in scientific forums and communities. Politicians should be reiterating the 'current consensus'. People shouldn't be talking about it in public / tabloid forums because the information is vague, misrepresented and will be taken entirely out of context. I totally support people taking contrarian positions. I think we should probably assign people towards being 'The Devil's Advocate'. The issue is not 'freedom of expression and open dialogue' - it's one of 'crude populism and misinformation'. It's about how information is propagated, and how people react to it.

lawnchair_larry 5y ago

This is such a weird and uninformed take. For one thing, nobody discussing it is believing anything from Donald Trump or Joe Rogan. Neither have anything to do with the discussion at all. Just like the lab leak hypothesis - which Bret was also a year early on, while folks like you were still dismissing it out of hand because of some error in your own perception that this investigation was related to Trump. Also, Weinstein is in fact a doctor and a scientist, and so was his guest, Robert Malone, who invented mRNA vaccination. And Bret has been correct far more than Fauci, and earlier than Fauci, if we are keeping score.