If you still aren’t convinced why Prasad has become dangerous in the age of COVID @gorskon @MDaware @MarkHoofnagle @MarkELindsay @Merz and many other wonderful accounts have explained and I’m sure will explain again, why Vinny isn’t harmless in ‘presenting alternative views’
-
-
Replying to @shmoopythescie1 @BenMazer and
I still don’t see inherent ‘danger’ in discussing this idea. He is not lying. I mean more arguments can be made on both sides. Like, since it seems that masking and social distancing is reducing the flu burden, should we do this forever?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TomOsinski22 @shmoopythescie1 and
Or, at what point does the psychological costs of masking and social distancing override the costs of reducing illness? Does being vaccinated create pressure that may select for mutant stains? He is making an argument. Argue back. Bring in new evidence or holes in the evidence.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TomOsinski22 @shmoopythescie1 and
It has as much or more to do with the way that he argues as the idea for which is arguing, especially in a public forum where there are so many looking to twist the words of physicians for political gain.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PrasFrancis @shmoopythescie1 and
So if this is such a big problem, how big of a problem is it? What should be done about his posts?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TomOsinski22 @shmoopythescie1 and
I'm not sure how to define the scale of it. But
#medtwitter should at the very least not amplify him and ideally would push back on him for his overconfident sensationalism.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @PrasFrancis @shmoopythescie1 and
That is my point. He probably gets more attention by everyone going crazy over his statements. Which just feeds into his shtick. He is not doing anything that he should be ‘cancelled’ for. He is just annoying sometimes and should be ignored.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @TomOsinski22 @PrasFrancis and
It’s just upsetting he is so often a go-to for journalists and others because this crass overconfidence is not a good look for the profession. I realize the journalists select for that, they don’t like statements with uncertainty or complexity or even humility - itself a sign.
3 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @TomOsinski22 and
I was a speaker at the Trottier Symposium in Montreal in 2010 and participated in a panel discussion on scicomm. I remember of the panelists explaining how the way to succeed as a TV pundit is to express absolute certainty in your views. No nuance, and NEVER admit error.
4 replies 3 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
What a terrible way to build public trust. Weird how Tony Fauci breaks all those rules and is currently the most respected science communicator in government.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
He only gets away with it by virtue of the position he holds in government, which makes him a go-to figure for the press. The rest compete for airtime and interviews.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
Sounds like we need to create more go-to figures for the press, then, who don't have to be forcefully misleading to get airtime.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.