What you are missing is how real expertise is defined. It isn't by how one is labelled.
-
-
Replying to @stuartf100 @balbecdaze and
You don't think that four decades as a public health expert, including some of the most influential work in smoking prevention, counts as expertise? Certainly an interesting perspective
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Zero internet for ~36 hrs so missed the 'fun' His expertise lies in mounting successful PR and media manipulation. He has been a commentator since circa 2005 with 0 research undertaken since then afaik. Advancing 'hobby-horse' policies eg cold turkey c/w anything else
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alan_Beard1 @GidMK and
Alan Beard Retweeted BakerB
Just a recent example from earlier, far from unique, are these the actions of a dispassionate researcher or those of an oafish activist with an axe to grind? SC does not qualify as an expert whatsoever in smoking cessationhttps://twitter.com/bakerbee1/status/1007387943105728513 …
Alan Beard added,
BakerB @bakerbee1The death-inducing anti-harm reduction propaganda factory keeps pumping with unrealistic chemical bath cell studies for@SimonChapman6 to bolster public support for less options for smokers in Australia https://twitter.com/SimonChapman6/status/1007377779212496896 …#AusAntiTHRCabal#AusTHRBackwater#QuitOrDie pic.twitter.com/K0a3fSB80Z1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
See, things like this annoy me. By any objective measure (qualifications, publications, titles, area of work, etc etc etc) he absolutely is an expert in smoking cessation. His most recent article was, I believe, published recently in the BMJ
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @Alan_Beard1 and
Being an expert does not make anyone correct. But by making your argument against him that he is a "boorish oaf" with no expertise, you are simply coming across as a) wrong and b) biased
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @Alan_Beard1 and
There's always at least one qualified person who disagrees with any opinion - there are climate scientists who think the earth is cooling, wrong though they are - but belittling them as fradulent charlatans does nothing but make you seem weirdly biased
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think if you examined this far more closely you would find the majority of scientists/medics engaged with practical smoking cessation c/w theoretical,would strongly disagree with SC on his stubborn refusal to accept that RRP exist + can benefit smokers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Sure. But most of them don't paint him as a fraud in an attempt to discredit him He can be both an expert AND wrong, you see
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
You used the words charlatan, fraud etc .......not myself. I disputed your contention that he is an expert in smoking cessation, whereas I stated he is a commentator making disparaging comments towards researchers actually engaged in the field unlike himself.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Your specific words were "oafish commentator with an axe to grind" and said that his expertise lies in mounting successful PR campaigns. I'm not sure how else to read that, to be honest
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.