American Doctors Address Covid-19 Misinformation

amother

Cobalt

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 3:52 pm

this dr. said there is no risk using it in the protocol as advised prescribed etc

HE IS A TOP DR

I will listen to him over some media rag or politician any day

if you don't want to then use another dr. Still a free country last time I checked.

browser

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:00 pm

southernbubby wrote:

That's a different form of censorship from a government not allowing the printing or sale of the Tanach because they don't like it.
Facebook is owned by shareholders but it has a board that decides what the platform will allow. The government cannot force it to provide anything other than what the company has contracted with advertisers. It can close today if it wants.
If I log on to Fox news, I expect different info than what I find on CNN and Breitbart isn't the NYT and it doesn't have to be. To me it's no different than saying that imamother practices censorship because it doesn't offer information from the Reform movement.
Facebook owes the public nothing and it owes the shareholders s right to try to make a profit.

I think this is confusion.
Blurring the lines between right and wrong

southernbubby

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:07 pm

amother [ Cobalt ] wrote:

The problem may be in getting a pharmacy to dispense it for Corona virus and in conjunction with the other two medications.

browser

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:12 pm

southernbubby wrote:

No it isn't. It's freedom of the press. Why does a liberal website owe conservative views a platform or vice versa?

Having to conform to a certain political view on my private page is called communism.
You know we can justify anything with our minds.

southernbubby

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:17 pm

amother [ Cobalt ] wrote:

Well then Id say thats quite a problem and disturbing precedent wouldn't you say?

While I hope to avoid coronavirus, I think that these drugs should be legal to use under medical supervision. If and until, however, that it becomes standard protocol, it's up to the patients to find doctors and pharmacies that will cooperate.

southernbubby

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:20 pm

browser wrote:

Having to conform to a certain political view on my private page is called communism.
You know we can justify anything with our minds.

It's not your website. They give you free access to a page on their website. What gives anyone the right to call it their private page?

avrahamama

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:21 pm

southernbubby wrote:

Cooperate with what?

With the state and withhold potentially life savings therapeutics?

That's so scary. I hope we can all avoid it. But I was hoping that if I do cvs catch it. I'd have all potential resources at my disposal.

When the state imposes themselves in such ways we are left dirty wire hangers and aquarium chemicals. Hashem Yirachem.

SixOfWands

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:25 pm

browser wrote:

Having to conform to a certain political view on my private page is called communism.
You know we can justify anything with our minds.

Do you know what communism is?

Hint: a private entity removing content that it deems dangerous from its own platform is not communism.

amother

Cobalt

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 4:28 pm

I know a lot of people who are making sure they have doctors who will prescribe this and whatever their dr feels is necessary and has seen help and knows helps rather than following some weird ban or political trend. Lots of people are making sure they have a personal kesher with their dr and are not relying upon some stranger in a clinic who may follow some standard protocol rather than what has been shown to work and a personal dr who will go the extra mile and who has shown success with his or her patients. A dr. who will really fight to get them what they need.
Hopefully no one will need anything and will stay healthy.
Still best to be as prepared as possible.

gold21

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 5:23 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I don't do social media other than imamother but I do get news from both RW and LW sites. Almost nobody gives unbiased news. That's freedom of the press. Censorship would be the government dictating what the sites can say.

And here, I refer to one of my favorite movies, the Newsies.

In absence of fair media coverage, disseminate information yourself.

"...... That's the power of the press, Joe."

Last edited by gold21 on Wed, Jul 29 2020, 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in total

gold21

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 5:24 pm

southernbubby wrote:

But why does any private enterprise have to allow content that they are opposed to? If you have a Facebook page and someone posts content that you find objectionable, you have a right to delete the post. Of course, it's a form of censorship but nearly everyone with a Facebook page does it occasionally.
To me it's frightening that we can't get straight medical information because it's either RW or LW.

You can get accurate information. Look over the studies yourself. You don't need an outlet to filter information for you. You seem fully capable of analyzing data on your own, from our interactions here on Imamother. No need for it to be spoon fed by biased media outlets.

SixOfWands

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 5:49 pm

amother [ Cobalt ] wrote:

It is excellent advice to find a doctor who will fight to give you the best medical treatment, rather than to select a treatment protocol because a politician or actor or influencer recommended it.

Dexamethasone, remdisivir and SNG001 all look promising so far. So does Fenofibrate (Tricor).

But find a doctor you can trust.

amother

Cobalt

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 5:54 pm

Yes! My dr was very ill with covid until he got his dr to prescribe HCQ and B"H had an immediate turn around recovery.
Whatever works best at the time if they were ill is what someone should want! what their trusted dr prescribes!
I would think this is obvious.

gold21

Wed, Jul 29 2020, 5:56 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Agreed, and I would support all of the above as therepeautics. I haven't actually studied any of them other than remsdesvir, which seems quite promising! Have you studied them?

I would also add that in the reverse, a medication shouldn't be denied to you because a certain politician spoke out in support of it.

I think what we both agree on is that medical care isn't political. It's data-driven, along with a healthy sprinkling of anecdotal/ observational reports backing that up.

ora_43

Fri, Jul 31 2020, 3:14 am

gold21 wrote:

You drew some sort of parallel between false medical information and how-to videos on bomb-production. Provided that the medications in discussion are only available by prescription, how exactly are they more of a threat than DIY bomb tutorials, unless they are DIY on how to make your own medications? Scratching Head

in which case, I would agree that such videos pose a danger. Simply disseminating medical information isn't risky, and is protected by the first amendment right of freedom of speech.

But it's not information. That's the whole point. It's lies. It's a deliberate attempt, often (not always, but often) by hostile foreign agents, to feed Americans misinformation.

Tell me this - if it has zero effect, why do you think people are investing so much effort in doing it?

It's not at all clear that the first amendment applies to platforms like Facebook. And again, if it does, we don't get to choose between racist content and false medical content; racism is protected under the First Amendment as well.

ora_43

Fri, Jul 31 2020, 3:19 am

#BestBubby wrote:

2. America is based on Free Speech. ALL SOCIETIES THAT CENSORED WERE MASS MURDERERS - ALL OF THEM!

This is so wildly inaccurate that I don't even know where to start.

Read up a little on the history of First Amendment controversies in the United States. It is not in any way true that America has never censored information, let alone that it's never happened in any free society.

Quote:

3. Is there a lot of false medical information on the internet? Yes! But in a FREE SOCIETY,
WE THE PEOPLE, get to read EVERYTHING and make our own decisions - even if they are wrong. Anything less is slavery. The government is not our daddy or master to decide what information we are allowed to see.

You get to read things, yes. But do you get to demand that Facebook or YouTube give you a platform?

I'll say it again: you can't pick and choose. If you get to demand that Facebook host anti-vax propaganda, you don't get to complain when gay activists shut down bakeries that refuse to bake a gay-wedding-themed cake. Either we can require businesses to give service even when that means supporting a view they vehemently disagree with, or we can't.

One law for everyone, regardless of their political views, is a far more fundamental principle in American law than is the freedom to say literally anything, anywhere, at any time. (which has rarely if ever existed)

dietcokeaddict

Fri, Jul 31 2020, 4:07 am

southernbubby wrote:

No it isn't. It's freedom of the press. Why does a liberal website owe conservative views a platform or vice versa?

Because it’s not a news website. It’s branded as a NEUTRAL PLATFORM.

The issue with social media platforms choosing what and how to censor is complicated. In a nutshell, they want the protection against liability for their content which is afforded to neutral platforms, but the freedom to censor as they please, like a publisher. Hence the problem. And the hypocrisy.

This link explains it well: https://www.theamericanconserv.....-230/