4 ms·
It is time for unqualified people to be sued for bad medical advice
- consumer451 5y agoInteresting take which I’d never considered before.
- chiefalchemist 5y agoA better solution? We teach and encourage critical thinking, the difference between news / journalism and editorial, as well as some basic principles of data / statistics (e.g., the difference between causation and correlation). The media lacks understanding of all of these, do we sue them? True story: Recently I was visiting my (80+ yr old) parents. They we watching The View. At one point, one of the hosts said (as they were talking about the pandemic) "If you're unvax'ed and get covid you're probably going to die." Now obviously probably is subjective and ambiguous. But even if you said it was 1 in 5, that's simply not true. It's hyperbole. Or in my book, nonsense and/or bullshit. But it's "traditional media" so it gets a free pass? Do we sue news outlets for not actually providing news (i.e.,it's often editorial). Using the courts is fine. But those with the most to lose will naturally be the biggest target. On the other hand, basic critical thinking skills will have across the board benefits. But maybe that's not what the powers that be want? Ignorant and confused is much easier to handle, yes?
- polski-g 5y agoSure. As long as we can sue "qualified" people for giving bad medical advice.
- andi999 5y agoWaiting for it, all 'drink 6-8 cups of water per day' people should go to jail for not understanding the original paper and giving out bad advice.
- consumer451 5y agoThat’s quite a hyperbolic theoretical example you have there. Could we look at this as compared to giving out financial advice? We seem to have laws about that which are enforced somewhat rationally. Is medical advice somehow different in a way which I had not considered?