Yes, he did drop out, but only after a Twitterstorm a week ago criticizing him, and he's still upset that he was forced to withdraw.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I believe they could. But they must do it as the pretense for the speech. I.e. if the conference asked him to be the opposition. I don’t think it’s good to act like you’re a friend of the group then try to change minds. They need to identify as a staunch vaccine supporter.
-
Then that becomes a "debate," and I consider it almost always a bad idea to do public debates with antivax cranks, particularly on their home ground.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I am not in doubt: vaccine researchers should welcome opportunities to speak at conferences, where many attendees have a critical attitude towards vaccines. It is at least as interesting and probably more fruitful than to preach for the choir.
-
i think you'd need to: Avoid spontaneous Q&A which give lots of opportunity to selective 'interpretation'. Work from prepared notes which you release at same time so that no "gotcha" youtube videos appear after the fact. If believe vaccines do more good than harm, say it first.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's a tricky one. A reason for going 1) can address directly those who would not normally read a pro-vax position. For not going 1) they aren't listening 2) false balance. If going need to be prepared to nth degree to avoid traps.
-
I think those traps are so incredibly difficult to avoid as to be, for all practical purposes, impossible to dodge, except under very rare circumstances. It would take an incredibly talented
#scicomm person AND more than of bit of luck, and even then it would most likely fail. - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
If the title of your talk is: "How Mandatory Vaccination Violates Medical Ethics" ? I don't think it's a good look...pic.twitter.com/kFD5hnxoaW
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
An
#antivax conference? No. In short, attendees are very likely to be fully down the anti-public health rabbit hole. Addressing genuine vaccine hesitancy (as opposed to mendacious antivax) can be far better done in other less-biased open-minded public forums.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The organization is called "Physicians for Informed Consent", not "Physicians Against Vaccines". Your efforts seem bent on conflating those two stances. .
-
Perhaps he is, and he should conflate the two, while he is conflating, they're deflating the definition of Informed Consent, in antivax terminology it means to be informed with a bunch of false evidence with little scientific backing and what is backed, is cherry picked data.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.