Neil deGrasse Tyson invoked the concept of a scientific consensus while supporting vaccines in his debate with Del Bigtree. Why was his statement about how “individual scientists don’t matter” compared to scientific consensus so triggering to antivaxxers? Why do antivaxxers reject the very concept of a scientific consensus and promote a hyper-individualistic view of how science should be conducted?
Search: “censorship quality control”
We found 43 results for your search.
The veterinary deworming drug ivermectin has become the new hydroxychloroquine in that it is being promoted as a highly effective treatment against COVID-19—and by many of the same people who previously promoted HCQ—despite evidence that is, at best very weak and at worst completely negative. Unfortunately, with the publication of two new and biased reviews, the “HCQ vibe” about ivermectin is stronger than ever.
Share this:
Projection is a common defense mechanism used by those spreading health misinformation and disinformation. Last week Dr. Asseem Malhotra published part 2 of a plan to cure “the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine”. Unsurprisingly, it was chock full of antivaccine misinformation. It’s a real “I know you are, but what am I?” exercise in disinformation.
Share this:
Recently, two COVID-19 antivax quacks, Drs. Paul Marik and Pierre Kory of the COVID-19 quack group FLCCC, announced that the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) had informed them that their board certifications were in jeopardy, which they promptly used to portray themselves as “persecuted.” What’s going on?
Share this:
Cranks love to cry “Persecution!” So it’s no surprise that GBD authors are striking back against critics with that narrative. Again.
