I just saw a headline on National Geographic offering "information" about the princess's "preventive chemotherapy," which of course is sheer speculation as described above. NG used to be one of my favorites, but it also seems to have abandoned all standards of journalism lately. I believe it fired all its professional staff writers last year.
It's tricky though: doctors talking about cancer or some cancer therapies is fine, while doctors talking about person X's cancer or therapies is indeed not fine. But it's us too: we need to relentlessly mock anyone who has a morbid interest in celebrities' health.
People want clicks. Doctors are no exception plus they think when they chime in they are considered a person who knows what they are talking about bc after all they are a doctor. It's about ego. Sabrinalabow.substack.com
I have always had an issue with discussing publicly known people (celebrities, politicians, etc.). They should be allowed to live their life the way they want and deal with things on their own. We had this a few times during CoVid. People partly freaked out when Tom Hanks got CoVid very early on, believing something terrible is going to happen to him. Many people who got CoVid who were anti-lockdown or other mandates were often celebrated and hope they die.
We see that in this case as well as other patients of various diseases.
OTOH, specifying the type of cancer would stop most speculation. Same with Charles and his cancer discovered in "another area". It is just natural human curiosity to want more information. Same for the cause of death of famous people. Speculating on treatments without even knowing which cancer is not a good look, but that's where we are with social media. Don't expect it to get better.
Not sure why I still subscribe to Medscape… but I was super grossed out that I found out about Kate Middleton’s cancer from a “breaking news” email from Medscape and not from the usual gossip website suspects. 🤮
Agree. But I do think under the circumstances of the vast amounts of adverse events, we should be told if she was given the mRNA gene therapy shot. That is very important for the vigilent monitoring of public health impacts.
Agree. However, I think it's interesting that the royals doctored a photo and then, initially, lied about it. What does that mean? Who knows? Clearly idle speculation.
I just saw a headline on National Geographic offering "information" about the princess's "preventive chemotherapy," which of course is sheer speculation as described above. NG used to be one of my favorites, but it also seems to have abandoned all standards of journalism lately. I believe it fired all its professional staff writers last year.
It's tricky though: doctors talking about cancer or some cancer therapies is fine, while doctors talking about person X's cancer or therapies is indeed not fine. But it's us too: we need to relentlessly mock anyone who has a morbid interest in celebrities' health.
Thanks for your great insights Dr. Prasad, as usual. Always informative and right-on-the-mark. Look forward to your next offering.
Couldn't agree with you more on this- well said.
People want clicks. Doctors are no exception plus they think when they chime in they are considered a person who knows what they are talking about bc after all they are a doctor. It's about ego. Sabrinalabow.substack.com
I have always had an issue with discussing publicly known people (celebrities, politicians, etc.). They should be allowed to live their life the way they want and deal with things on their own. We had this a few times during CoVid. People partly freaked out when Tom Hanks got CoVid very early on, believing something terrible is going to happen to him. Many people who got CoVid who were anti-lockdown or other mandates were often celebrated and hope they die.
We see that in this case as well as other patients of various diseases.
You are so right, yet again. Keep up the great work!
OTOH, specifying the type of cancer would stop most speculation. Same with Charles and his cancer discovered in "another area". It is just natural human curiosity to want more information. Same for the cause of death of famous people. Speculating on treatments without even knowing which cancer is not a good look, but that's where we are with social media. Don't expect it to get better.
"because I'm not incompetent" I love it and agree 1000% ♥️
SO true! Too many narcissists in medicine (& elsewhere).
Amen!
Thank you for saying this. I have been appalled at some of the statements some doctors have been making.
Not sure why I still subscribe to Medscape… but I was super grossed out that I found out about Kate Middleton’s cancer from a “breaking news” email from Medscape and not from the usual gossip website suspects. 🤮
Agree. But I do think under the circumstances of the vast amounts of adverse events, we should be told if she was given the mRNA gene therapy shot. That is very important for the vigilent monitoring of public health impacts.
Agree. However, I think it's interesting that the royals doctored a photo and then, initially, lied about it. What does that mean? Who knows? Clearly idle speculation.
Far worse would be a medical doctor
hell bent on assuming what little he has
been told by the medical authorities
to be true.
A sickness all its own.