Submitted by: P McMillan
WSJ --- Doctors for Progressive Conformity The AMA wants to police the speech of dissenting members.
Pelosi blocking COVID-19 origins investigation with 'Soviet-style cover-up': Scalise
JustTheNews.com
House Minority Whip Steve Scalise is charging that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is standing in the way of a full investigation into the origins of COVID-19 in China.
"Pelosi won't do it," the Louisiana lawmaker said Friday. "When we're in the majority we will do it, and we will hold China accountable. They are covering for China right now. It's a Soviet-style cover-up. We're going to keep calling them out on it."
When asked for comment on Scalise’s remarks, Pelosi's office referred Just the News to the House Intelligence Committee, which is conducting an investigation into the origins of COVID.
Texas is an exploratory test. If Texans accept this 'smart thermostat' manipulation, then it will be implemented nationwide. IOW, 'If they can make it there, they can make it ANYWHERE'!
------------------------------
'The AMA seems to want to enforce ideological conformity in its ranks, including on social media. Delegates also voted to encourage social-media platforms to “crack down on medical misinformation,” including by “altering underlying network dynamics or redesigning platform algorithms.”
Social-media platforms have been removing content by doctors who disagree with the progressive lockdown consensus or who suggest that the virus may have leaked from a Chinese lab. Many doctors say their videos recommending early treatment with repurposed antiviral drugs have been censored, including one from a Senate hearing.
Social-media censorship suppressed debate on important issues during the pandemic, and the AMA wants to extend the information control to other health subjects. The new AMA policy would ostensibly encourage Facebook, YouTube and others to remove posts by doctors who question progressive orthodoxy on race and identity politics.
None of these new AMA policy positions will help patients or physicians, and they risk eroding public trust in the medical profession. Whatever happened to “first, do no harm”?'
Doctors for Progressive Conformity The AMA wants to police the speech of dissenting members.
WSJ.com
The American Medical Association is a lobby of doctors that’s supposed to promote policies that improve public health and medicine. But it seems to be evolving into another arm of progressive politics, like the teachers unions. See the AMA’s policy-making meeting this week.
Delegates spent much of the time discussing systemic racism in health care and adopted guidelines for workplaces to establish training requirements for explicit and implicit bias and microaggressions. AMA trustee Willarda Edwards called systemic racism “the most serious barrier to the advancement of health equity and appropriate medical care.”
Many doctors would disagree with that statement. But the AMA seems to want to enforce ideological conformity in its ranks, including on social media. Delegates also voted to encourage social-media platforms to “crack down on medical misinformation,” including by “altering underlying network dynamics or redesigning platform algorithms.”
Social-media platforms have been removing content by doctors who disagree with the progressive lockdown consensus or who suggest that the virus may have leaked from a Chinese lab. Many doctors say their videos recommending early treatment with repurposed antiviral drugs have been censored, including one from a Senate hearing.
Social-media censorship suppressed debate on important issues during the pandemic, and the AMA wants to extend the information control to other health subjects. The new AMA policy would ostensibly encourage Facebook, YouTube and others to remove posts by doctors who question progressive orthodoxy on race and identity politics.
AMA delegates also voted to endorse an intellectual property waiver that progressives have been pushing for Covid vaccines at the World Trade Organization. President Biden endorsed it last month. But even European leaders say it won’t increase global vaccine supply and will set a dangerous precedent that will retard innovation in new medicines.
None of these new AMA policy positions will help patients or physicians, and they risk eroding public trust in the medical profession. Whatever happened to “first, do no harm”?
No comments:
Post a Comment