Discussion about this post

User's avatar
KaiKai's avatar

This is one of the best posts put out by sensible medicine. It addresses what I refer to as the informed consent void. During this pandemic the vast majority of people have gotten their information and based decisions on what they have read or heard in the MSM. When journalists misinterpret, over interpret or under interpret a study that information influences readers. That includes overemphasis of public health messaging that is not based upon data. An example of this is the vaccination campaign, that was moved out of the offices of doctors, essentially excluding them from the informed consent processes by establishing mass vaccination centers. That left the public to seek information on their own from MSM sources as well as some others. The accuracy or inaccuracies of these sources took the place of professional informed consent. What we see now is the result of a narrative of politicized and inaccurate informed consent.

Journalists play an important role in our society but to do that they must be accurate. Thank you for this. I wonder if a journalist will contact you for a statement...

Expand full comment
Ted's avatar

Many thanks for this article, Doctors.

With one informative essay, you provide guidance to reporters and, at the same time, to their readership.

The general public is in dire need of this sort of guidance. Those consuming medical research journalism, must learn to "mentally edit out" appeals to emotion and ask intelligent questions.

Without that critical feedback loop, journalistic rigor devolves into a form of intellectual rigor mortis.

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts