Misleading Virus Video, Pushed By the Trumps, Spreads Online (nytimes.com) 566
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times: In a video posted Monday online, a group of people calling themselves "America's Frontline Doctors" and wearing white medical coats spoke against the backdrop of the Supreme Court in Washington, sharing misleading claims about the virus, including that hydroxychloroquine was an effective coronavirus treatment and that masks did not slow the spread of the virus. [...] The members of the group behind Monday's video say they are physicians treating patients infected with the coronavirus. But it was unclear where many of them practice medicine or how many patients they had actually seen. As early as May, anti-Obamacare conservative activists called the Tea Party Patriots Action reportedly worked with some of them to advocate loosening states' restrictions on elective surgeries and nonemergency care. On July 15, the group registered a website called "America's Frontline Doctors," domain registration records show. One of the first copies of the video that appeared on Monday was posted to the Tea Party Patriots' YouTube channel, alongside other videos featuring the members of "America's Frontline Doctors."
The video did not appear to be anything special. But within six hours, President Trump and his son Donald Trump Jr. had tweeted versions of it, and the right-wing news site Breitbart had shared it. It went viral, shared largely through Facebook groups dedicated to anti-vaccination movements and conspiracy theories such as QAnon, racking up tens of millions of views. Multiple versions of the video were uploaded to YouTube, and links were shared through Twitter. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter worked feverishly to remove it, but by the time they had, the video had already become the latest example of misinformation about the virus that has spread widely. That was because the video had been designed specifically to appeal to internet conspiracists and conservatives eager to see the economy reopen, with a setting and characters to lend authenticity. It showed that even as social media companies have sped up response time to remove dangerous virus misinformation within hours of its posting, people have continued to find new ways around the platforms' safeguards. [...] At least one version of the video, viewed by The Times on Facebook, was watched over 16 million times.
The video did not appear to be anything special. But within six hours, President Trump and his son Donald Trump Jr. had tweeted versions of it, and the right-wing news site Breitbart had shared it. It went viral, shared largely through Facebook groups dedicated to anti-vaccination movements and conspiracy theories such as QAnon, racking up tens of millions of views. Multiple versions of the video were uploaded to YouTube, and links were shared through Twitter. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter worked feverishly to remove it, but by the time they had, the video had already become the latest example of misinformation about the virus that has spread widely. That was because the video had been designed specifically to appeal to internet conspiracists and conservatives eager to see the economy reopen, with a setting and characters to lend authenticity. It showed that even as social media companies have sped up response time to remove dangerous virus misinformation within hours of its posting, people have continued to find new ways around the platforms' safeguards. [...] At least one version of the video, viewed by The Times on Facebook, was watched over 16 million times.
Video is here (Score:5, Informative)
You can still watch it here: https://banned.video/watch?id=... [banned.video]
Re:Video is here (Score:5, Interesting)
"Dr. Stella Immanuel" .. here is some info about her from Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne... [dailymail.co.uk]:
* She has claimed that gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are in fact caused by people having sex in their dreams with demons and witches.
* She has given sermons attacking progressive values and promoting conspiracy theories including ‘the gay agenda, secular humanism, Illuminati and the demonic New World Order.’
* She uses 'alien DNA' as a cure.
* Blames witchcraft for illness.
* Immanuel warned that the Disney Channel show Hannah Montana was a gateway to evil, because its character had an ‘alter ego.’
* She has claimed that schools teach children to meditate so they can ‘meet with demons.’
* She also urges that ‘children need to be whipped’.
This is who the president thinks is credible?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If there is anything in this world less credible than a YouTube video, it's the Daily Fail.
Re:Video is here (Score:5, Informative)
If there is anything in this world less credible than a YouTube video, it's the Daily Fail.
This seems to be her facebook https://www.facebook.com/drste... [facebook.com] she has also published a few books available at amazon https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Stel... [amazon.com] all her websites seems to be gone since a few months so links to archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20... [archive.org] https://web.archive.org/web/20... [archive.org] I'd say the craziness checks out.
Re:Video is here (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Video is here (Score:5, Informative)
You're completely right, the Daily Fail is not a reputable publication and shouldn't be trusted for anything. However, there were a wide variety of articles from a number of different publications discussing this video and by extension, Dr. Immanuel's background. It's not just a made-up Daily Fail article, she actually believes these things and I think that severely diminishes her credibility as a doctor.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Please attack the content, not the site on which it was posted.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I wouldn't be so sure that her idea of "seeing positive results" would be the same as your or mine, she may consider a dead patient preferable to a live one who's having demon-sex dreams. Papa Doc claimed universal success in all his "treatments", but that doesn't mean he was telling the truth, either. I guess my point is that she's not worth wasting time on because you can't trust her honesty or her reliability. My wife has seen videos on YouTube of people making extravagant claims about curing COVID19
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
Every study on Hydroxychloroquine has been flawed in one way or another.
Every study is flawed, except the ones in favor of it, huh?
I'll give you a hint here. Every study, on every topic, is flawed in some way. You can always find some (often unintentional) bias in the random sampling, some way controls weren't properly maintained, ways blinding wasn't perfect, ways other variables affect it. But if you are careful in your research you can minimize these risks and statistically rule them out. In this aspect, every HCQ study I've looked at has some flaws, but the flaws in the ones that favored HCQ seemed to be way more significant.
Re:All Flawed (Score:4, Insightful)
No, the studies aren't flawed. The reporting on science is.
HCQ helps for specific instances - early onset COVID and as a prophylactic. Plenty of studies show that
HCQ doesn't help for other instances - doesn't work for COVID-19 symptoms and not a COVID-19 cure
HCQ is harmful in other instances - if you're on the ventilator, your body doesn't need the additional stress of processing a substance
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Informative)
It's not all that hard. https://www.henryford.com/news... [henryford.com] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Neither of those studies is about the use of HCQ as a prophylactic, which was half of your claim. The second is one of the two original small sample size, non-randomized, observational studies that started this whole HCQ thing, and which larger and better-constructed studies have repeatedly failed to replicate. The first one is more recent, and has a larger sample size, but has the same fundamental problem of being non-randomized and observational, in addition to other problems, including the fact that patients receiving HCQ were much more likely to be given steroids, which has proven to be effective in proper trials, than patients who were not.
So... apparently it's not so easy to find studies that show significant benefit and don't have extreme flaws in methodology? Or do you have some others that are proper randomized, double-blind, controlled studies?
This is not true (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is not true (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump looks and acts like someone that is willing to "gamble" on conclusions.
He's a businessman, first and foremost. (Not arguing whether he's a good one or a bad one.) Business is all about calculated risk and decisions based on imperfect information. Sometimes you just don't have the luxury of time to get all the information, or even enough information, before you make a decision. You make a decision on the current best information you have, and your gut feel. A good businessperson is smart enough to know when they don't have enough information and, more importantly, know when to keep their mouth shut.
The point that I'm trying to get at is that he's a businessman, trying to translate businessman acumen to running a country. Some of those skills translate well, some don't. The problem with gambling on conclusions is that in business generally the worst that happens is the business goes down the shitter and people lose jobs and money. When it comes to pandemics, gambling on a gut feel instead of information gets people killed. My biggest complaint on Trump during this whole thing was his insistence on being front-and-center at all times. A good leader knows when they are in over their head. They know that they should put someone smarter than them out front, and then shut the hell up.
Re:This is not true (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump is not a businessman. He is a criminal con man and money launderer for organized crime. As a businessman earlier in his life, he was an abject failure.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Epic? Absurd. I suspect the DNC and the RNC are in a bidding war right now with the voting machine manufacturers, both of them bidding to **LOSE** this election because no one wants to have to clean up this clusterfuck.
Re:This is not true (Score:5, Informative)
As a businessman earlier in his life, he was an abject failure.
Define failure. He seems to live a pretty good life. He's got his name on a bunch of buildings.
His father did all of that, using Donald as a flashy front man. The first business venture that was truly his own was the Atlantic city casinos, which failed, even though his father broke laws (and was caught and prosecuted) trying to rescue him.
He bought a supermodel wife.
With money banks gave him, desperate to prop up his image and keep the world from recognizing the failure he really was, and thereby making it impossible for them to ever recoup the billions they'd lent him before they figured out he was an empty suit. Seriously, for many years his lenders gave him a $450K per month personal living allowance so he could maintain his flashy lifestyle and convince his other creditors not to demand payment in full.
I'm not defending the man's business practices, legality, morality, or anything of that nature but he sure seems to be winning the game of capitalism.
No, he utterly lost that game as well. If he had put the half billion dollars his dad gave him into an S&P index fund he'd be worth about $19B today (less a few hundred million siphoned off for his lifestyle). We don't know what his actual net worth is, of course, but the best estimates put it around $3B... and many suspect that it may be much lower than that, perhaps even negative given the immense sums he's known to have borrowed.
Re:This is not true (Score:5, Insightful)
My biggest complaint on Trump during this whole thing was his insistence on being front-and-center at all times.
You should keep in mind that this is the only thing he knows how to do. He's never had any real competence at anything other than bluster and self-aggrandizement, and throughout most of his life those skills and his dad's money were enough to allow him to fake competence. He never learned how to admit, even to himself, that he couldn't do anything and everything, and he learned early in life that admitting any lack of competence to anyone else betrayed weakness which they'd take advantage of or, even worse, ridicule him for.
The bottom line is that he's completely incapable of deferring to experts. This not only makes him unsuitable to be president during the pandemic, it makes him completely unsuitable to be president at all. The job of president of the United States is one that requires such an incredible breadth and depth of expertise that no single human, no matter how smart or accomplished, can possibly do it. The president must rely heavily on experts. That doesn't mean the president has no decisions to make, on the contrary, the most important decisions are about tradeoffs between one thing and another, so the president must rely on experts to present him with the options and possible consequences, then choose between them. But Trump is emotionally and intellectually unable to absorb expert information, and deeply believes that he must convince the world that he is the true expert, regardless of the cost. This is how he will approach every issue, every crisis, because it's all he's got.
Re: (Score:3)
Do scientist keep on trying that one chemical trying to make it work, so they can make talking heads right?
I don't expect scientists from all around the world are so targeted to just prove Trump wrong. Trump does sometimes gets something right and in general, when that happens there is an acknowledgement that he was right. However I expect it is just a case that Hydroxychloroquine is just too dangerous, as the recommended doses may do too little.
The thing about the scientific method, is it is a process th
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do you say that. I work with doctors, and they have a real conservative streak in them. I expect many would be Republican if it weren't for the past 20 years of the GOP being the Stupid and Proud to be Stupid Party.
Then the Evangelicals started to push their agenda, which started with just Anti-abortion, than pushed further into Stopping to Teach Evolution, Denying Climate Change, to today, where they just don't care what the experts says, but just follow their guts, and dismiss any experts. And now today, by ignoring all the experts we have a pandemic, that the rest of the world mostly got under control, that the United States is still floundering on trying to get a grasp on.
Doctors are actually conservative, but they are also trained in medicine, including understanding viruses and scientific methodologies to work out a solution. I help provide these Doctors with Information for them to do their job. Looking at the raw data myself, those "liberal" doctors are not lying, to back their political stance. They are following the data that is provided. Me as the guy who help provide the data, I am morally obliged to give them the most accurate data possible despite my political leanings. As well I not high enough to get away with it if I get caught, as they are others (some with different political leanings) are providing data as well, and are challenged to explain any dependency. If found if that I was making up the data I would get fired, and even arrested. On the flip side I am at a high enough position to debate and not do any unethical job to my superiors without repercussions.
I have invested interest to say Covid-19 numbers are low or zero. As we can allow more traffic to the hospital. However ethically and legally I cannot do that because I need to give them the truth.
The doctors use this data and makes decisions, beyond their political bias. Many are very conservative, but will say that Trump is wrong, because they have seen the data, and know different.
Re: All Flawed (Score:4, Interesting)
And heartbeat matters how?
No brain, no person. Brain is last trimester. I can show you the MRIs if you like if how it develops.
A heartbeat is the most basic part of the autonomous nervous system, not much more than a biological 555 timer. Sorry, but nobody is going to call a 555 timer a person.
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
Tell this to any liberal and they vehemently deny it until they're blue in the face that this isn't a "real" heartbeat and that it's not a "real" baby worthy of any human rights until the second it has been born.
Source: https://www.whattoexpect.com/p... [whattoexpect.com]
The liberals I know have no problem acknowledging when a heartbeat begins. The problem is that deciding when biological tissue becomes a human life is inherently arbitrary and subjective. There's nothing magical about a heartbeat, just as there's nothing magical about having passed through a vagina. Saying that a fertilized egg is somehow more worthy of protection than it was when it was just a sperm and an egg in the general vicinity of one another is also arbitrary and absurd - the potential to become an independent human is no different in either case.
Ultimately, if you want to be a pro-life hardliner, I respect that - we all have to draw our arbitrary moral lines somewhere, after all. I just don't think that most anti-abortion people are actually pro-life, or that they really believe abortion is murder. Exhibit A - the most effective way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is to make contraceptives freely and conveniently available. International comparisons and targeted studies about providing condoms to teenagers have shown that these policies substantially decrease unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions.
So, if you really, truly believe that abortion is murder, and you really, truly want to lower the numbers of abortions, you should be pragmatic and support providing sex education and free contraceptives to anybody who wants them. After all, the cost is quite low, and if we are literally preventing the murders of innocent babies, isn't it worth doing?
Most "pro-life" people I know are even more opposed to these policies than they are to abortion, though - which shows me that they don't actually believe that babies are being murdered.
Re:All Flawed (Score:4, Interesting)
not really.
For the same reason I can say and do one single thing and be subsequently labeled for being something else entirely. It's part of the whole "pavlovian" program that if a white person says the n word they are automatically a racist when just saying the word does not make you a racist by any meaningful degree. The word is an insult, and uttering an insult means nothing meaningful to a persons actual background.
Likewise here... if I immediately agree with the results of a particular study, then everyone else that also agrees will also assume a great many other things about me that would make them identify with me even more even though that is not reality either.
So if I say... I don't disbelieve in "Global Warming" a person on the right thinks I am on the left, but a person on the left thinks I might be a denier. You see... it does not matter that I am just "not convinced" with the data presented... it's a problem I am not convinced or convinced in the first place, because everyone has a bias that believes... once their threshold for proof/disproof has been crossed so must everyone else follow that same threshold or they get labeled and immediately.
There are Left/Right/Democrats/Republicans that literally think and believe many of the same things but they are not allowed to let it show because of this baloney stigma.
So... no... people do not see themselves in mirrors... they see a facade instead!
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, sometimes someone is just wrong, it isn't political is is that they are just wrong.
Decimal 1 + 1 = 2
Saying it equal 7 is wrong. It isn't because I hate the guy that said 1+1=7 but it is just the fact that it is wrong.
I grew up in a conservative household, I considered myself conservative for most of my adult life. However I am certain that the Earth is Round, Global Warming is real and is caused by humans, Evolution is a thing, and putting on a mask and keeping a safe distance from a person is a good way to protect yourself and others from an airborne pathogen. This shouldn't be a political motive, it is just what the science says.
Re:All Flawed (Score:4, Insightful)
Sometimes the wrong is harmless. Sometimes it is not. Saying that it's safe to plug in your 115V electric razor into 230V so you can have a faster shave is both wrong and harmful. Sharing that as a lifehack on social media is the sort of thing that will get it banned. Similarly, saying that HCQ is the cure for covid-19 and that we can all take off our masks now is both wrong and harmful should anyone be stupid enough to believe these quacks, and as such social media sites have been banning this video.
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh shut the fuck up with this whiny martyr bullshit. God you fucking conservative snowflakes make me sick. We're supposed to care about your feelings but you don't give a shit about anyone else.
YOU are the reason you can't have nice things. Your fucking orange fuhrer is not planning on leaving when he loses. And you don't care, as long as you "win."
You absolute toe-eyed cabbages freaked the fuck out when Obama wore a tan suit, or ate the wrong mustard. But God forbid anyone should criticize Trump for shitting on the constitution or allowing Russia to kill our solders. Fuck you anti-American freedom hating fascist shit heads.
The problem isn't the left. The problem is authoritarian assholes who don't believe in the rule of law, the constitution, or the rights of their fellow citizens. You think otherwise? Prove it.
At this point, the burden of proof is on you to show that you are not a fascist. Prove you still believe in actual American ideals. You assholes no longer get any benefit of the doubt, and that's on you and the company you keep.
Re: All Flawed (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet you won't apply that same logic to the Republicans, who say everything you claim to oppose, only a thousand times worse than one or two left-wingers.
If you're in the Republican side when the shooting starts, it's because you're not centrist. Centrists carve their own side, you are merely reacting. Reactionaries are not centrist.
Besides, the shooting already started, with right-wing militias gunning down peaceful protestors in the recent marches.
But I can't exclude 'Butch Cassidy' McVeigh slaughtering children for amusement. Brevick's inspiration.
And you chose sides, long before anyone on Slashdot posted anything.
Re: (Score:3)
The points you say are true, but it can be turned around very easily. Let me demonstrate:
Not all conservatives think the world is flat, but the vast majority of flat-earthers identify as conservative.
Not all conservatives are climate change deniers, but the vast majority of climate-change deniers identify as conservative.
Not all conservatives think evolution is wrong, but the vast majority of evolution deniers identify as conservative.
Not all conservatives refuse to wear masks or refuse to keep a safe dist
THAT is the problem (Score:5, Interesting)
That is the problem; conservatives are allowing a loud minority to speak for their entire group. Why aren't the conservatives who believe in science and medicine standing up to the loud minority who don't?
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
The "science shouldn't stand in the way" quote was taken out of context
This is always the excuse for every insane thing this administration says. I'll admit that, early on, I even bought it. When the administration keeps saying insane things over and over again though, it starts to wear a little thin.
There's a saying that, "if someone says they want to kill you, take them seriously." I think that applies here. I'm going to take the administration at face value here. They literally prefer ignoring the science to not having kids' butts in school.
As for this video, I'm not going to listen to the opinions of someone who thinks that "demon sex" is a serious, real life, problem.
Re: (Score:3)
As for this video, I'm not going to listen to the opinions of someone who thinks that "demon sex" is a serious, real life, problem.
Don't forget alien DNA!
Of course, now that this quackery is being removed from social media, there are indignant rumblings in Trumpland that "doctors are being silenced." Which is rich because they're the ones that have been silencing [cnn.com] the [nbcnews.com] doctors. [cnbc.com]
Re:All Flawed (Score:4, Interesting)
This is solid evidence out in the open that Trump is indeed relying on fringe conspiracy theories to form his political opinions, as he backed this video (despite the obvious red alert that Breitbart and its fake news machine were behind it) and still backs it even after the news about the demon sperm became a trending topic. The group says what Trump wants to hear and so he believes them. Meanwhile he claims he's still friendly with Fauci although behind the scenes there is a far-right push still to discredit and mock Fauci.
Science, truth, reality, all seem to have an anti Trump bias.
Re: All Flawed (Score:5, Funny)
I wish demon sex was a problem. At least I'd get some.
Re:All Flawed (Score:4, Informative)
The "science shouldn't stand in the way" quote was taken out of context
Simply read the exerpted statement in its fuller context [commondreams.org] to decide for yourself whether removing it from that context substantially changes its meaning. Here is Kalegh MacEnany's full statement on the topic:
The president has said unmistakably that he wants schools to open. And I was just in the Oval [Office] talking to him about that. And when he says open, he means open in full — kids being able to attend each and every day at their school. The science should not stand in the way of this.
And as Dr. Scott Atlas said — I thought this was a good quote — Of course, we can [do it]. Everyone else in theWestern world, our peer nations are doing it. We are the outlier here.
The science is very clear on this, that — you know, for instance, you look at the JAMA Pediatrics study of 46 pediatric hospitals in North America that said the risk of critical illness from COVID is far less for children than that of seasonal flu. The science is on our side here, and we encourage for localities and states to just simply follow the science, open our schools.
It’s very damaging to our children: There is a lack of reporting of abuse, there’s mental depressions that are not addressed, suicidal ideations that are not addressed when students are not in school. Our schools are extremely important, they’re essential, and they must reopen.
and from the parent post:
...[taken out of context] is always the excuse for every insane thing this administration says...
That is an inane sophistry meant to mislead the easily befuddled, a group which apparently dominates comment moderation here.
That some people resort to misleading rhetorical tactics to win over opinion suggests that the facts are not on their side.
Re:All Flawed (Score:5, Interesting)
They normally prescribe for off label use when approved by the FDA (or whoever sets rules in other countries). Doctors deciding this on their own without notifying the patient that this is happening or informing them of the potential hazards is a problem. Remember, we got into the opioid epidemic by too many doctors over prescribing and giving patients exactly what they ask for.
Re:All Flawed-NOT (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Holy shit, that website is the YouTube of conspiracy theories.
I thought YouTube was the YouTube of conspiracy theories.
Explain to me why people believe that (Score:3)
Why do people more readily believe harebrained bullshit than evidence based facts? Even religiosity cannot explain that sufficiently.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably because the doctors in the video are Medical Doctors from major American Universities. Same reason people believe Sanjay Gupta. These are the "experts" you guys always talk about. You can watch the video here if you like: https://banned.video/watch?id=... [banned.video]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Seems someone doesn't want others to watch it and decide for themselves. Hence the moderation.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to 2020. As an aside: I think the people in the video are wrong. I just think it is scary that a few tech companies can erase things from the Internet.
They can? That's why no one saw this video, you can't find it now and there have been no links to it in the comments on this story. Damn you, Tech Companies! How dare you hide this from me?
Re: Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Interesting)
Huh? Arrests donâ(TM)t require warrants. Violating normal privacy is what requires warrants
Yes they do. Ever heard of an 'arrest warrant'? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] The other reason for arrest is probable cause, and a bunch of thugs in combat fatigues without ID, dragging citizens off into an unmarked car to be interrogated for hours in secret jails is not constitutional. No badges, no papers no due process, just kidnappings. Some of the people who were kidnapped were just standing around doing nothing in particular. Standing around doing nothing in particular does not constitute probable cause to believe they were involved in a crime. That leaves us with the only alternative reason to snatch somebody off the streets which is an arrest warrant but even then you need to present papers and and law enforcement credentials. Combat fatigues and a little Velcro strip that says 'Police' on it is not enough.
Re: (Score:3)
Probably because the doctors in the video are Medical Doctors from major American Universities. Same reason people believe Sanjay Gupta. These are the "experts" you guys always talk about. You can watch the video here if you like: https://banned.video/watch?id=... [banned.video]
All I see are people standing in white coats talking. No names, no credentials posted. Plenty of popups directing people to the infowars store, though.
Re: Explain to me why people believe that (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Insightful)
"If those doctors really are doctors, they are quacks"
Now there is some logic. Classic.
You're looking for the No True Scotsman fallacy. But that isn't applicable here. It's not a fallacy to say that no true vegetarian would eat a steak. It's perfectly fine to be skeptical and question orthodoxy. It's perfectly fine to say that the value of hydroxychloroquine in combating COVID 19 hasn't been completely determined yet. It's fine to say that it needs more study or that it should be investigated more as a potential treatment. It is NOT fine to say that it will cure the disease without strong evidence of that. If you do that, you are violating the fundamental principles of medical research. You are violating what it means to be a doctor. You are a quack. No fallacy involved.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, most of them are Doctors. But lets take a look at the leading one, Stella Immanuel.
First, she is not from a medical university. She runs a small clinic right next to the church that she runs. She also believes that various gynecological issues such as fibroid tumors and cysts happen after having dream sex with demons and witches. She claims alien dna is used in current medicine, and that a vaccine is in the works to prevent people from believe in Jesus / being religious.
She also threatened Facebook with server crashes and that it would go down in the name of Jesus.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/... [thedailybeast.com]
The group (America's Frontline Doctors) is also backed by the Tea Party Patriots.
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
The groups website was also just created a couple weeks ago:
Domain Name: AMERICASFRONTLINEDOCTORS.COM
Registry Domain ID: 2546369396_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.tucows.com
Registrar URL: http://www.tucows.com/ [tucows.com]
Updated Date: 2020-07-16T01:27:54Z
Creation Date: 2020-07-16T01:27:49Z
I'll let others decide if this is enough to place some of these doctors into the same category as other experts.
Credentials (Score:5, Informative)
The panel of doctors that were banned
Simone Gold, MD - Emergency Medicine Specialist in Los Angeles, CA and has over 31 years of experience in the medical field. She graduated from Rosalind Franklin University Of Medicine Science/The Chicago Medical School medical school in 1989. She is affiliated with Centinela Hospital Medical Center.
Dr. Bob Hamilton - pediatrician from Santa Monica, California. Medical School UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA. Internship UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA. Residency UCLA Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.
Dr. Stella Emmaneul - primary care doctor in Houston, Tx. Went to medical school in West Africa, Nigeria. Has practiced in Louisiana and now resides in Texas where she has treated more than 350 Covid patients.
Dr. Dan Erickson, DO - Emergency Medicine Specialist in Bakersfield, CA and has over 16 years of experience in the medical field. He graduated from Western Univ Of Health Sciences/College Of Osteopathic Medicine Of The Pacific, Western University Of Health Sciences medical school in 2004. (While both degrees mean your doctor is a licensed physician, their training differs slightly, and each has a unique perspective on care. “An M.D. follows an allopathic medical training path, whereas a D.O. follows osteopathic,”)
Dr. James Todaro, MD - a Ophthalmology Specialist received his medical degree from Columbia University, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons in NY, and completed his surgical training with four additional years of residency in ophthalmology.
Dr. Joe Ladapo MD, PhD - Physician at UCLA and clinical researcher. Internal Medicine, American Board of Internal Medicine, 2011. Residency Internal Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr-East Campus, 2009-2011. Internship Internal Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr-East Campus, 2008-2009. Degree Harvard Medical School, MD, 2008 Harvard University Grad. School of Arts, Sciences, PhD, 2008.
Re:Credentials (Score:5, Informative)
Here's some more details on those that appeared in the video:
https://gizmodo.com/who-are-am... [gizmodo.com]
Re:Credentials (Score:4, Insightful)
Paediatricians, Ophthalmologists, and non-practising doctors ... Where are the Epidemiologists ?
Re:Credentials (Score:5, Informative)
So, we have Simone Gold M.D./J.D. who is a doctor/lawyer/republican speechwriter who is no longer affiliated with Centinela Hospital Medical Center.
Bob Hamilton M.D. who is a pediatrician/missionary/author appears to be something of a self-promoter. Thinks that children are basically immune to Covid-19 and also that they can't spread it to adults.
Stella Emmaneul M.D. who is a doctor/minister who has a private practice in the same stripmall as "firepower ministry" which she runs and preaches at. She believes that certain health issues are caused by astral sex with demons and witches in dreams. She thinks that the government is infested with reptiloids and that it's important for children to be whipped. She believes that Jesus will take personal revenge against social media companies on her behalf. She thinks it's appropriate for parents to stop loving their transgendered children, etc. etc. etc.
Dan Erickson, D.O. who is an Osteopath Doctor who previously made waves when he did a news conference with his partner on a similar theme about how coronavirus fears are overblown. Osteopathy is a belief system that all illnesses can be cured by joint manipulation and skull massage. Technically Osteopaths are supposed to get actual modern medical training and are considered to be real doctors, but the qualification definitely has roots in outright quackery.
James Todaro M.D. who is an Ophthalmologist/Blogger
Joe Ladapo M.D. who is a doctor/frequent editorialist.
Overall, it seems to be a mixed bag. Definitely some real quacks in there along with some people who are definitely putting politics over public health. Those members who might be reasonable are drowned out by the ones that are clearly quacks.
Re: (Score:3)
And when the evidence changed, so did Fauci's stance. That is a good thing. Only a politician sticks by their mistakes for fear of being labeled a waffler.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Funny)
Sure, most of them are Doctors. But lets take a look at the leading one, Stella Immanuel.
First, she is not from a medical university. She runs a small clinic right next to the church that she runs. She also believes that various gynecological issues such as fibroid tumors and cysts happen after having dream sex with demons and witches. She claims alien dna is used in current medicine, and that a vaccine is in the works to prevent people from believe in Jesus / being religious.
How do I donate to that last effort?
Re: (Score:3)
A vaccine can cure the belief in god?
Guess the omnipotence of that guy is severely overrated when he can be cured with a flu shot.
Doctors can be wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's not the point. The point is to move the goal post. We're taking about this instead of how Trump's incompetence and malice are in track to kill 230,000 Americans by election day. Mission accomplished.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Insightful)
Its almost as if we should have some kind of profession whose job it is to dig up facts like this, verify them with multiple sources, and write down what they found out so that others can read it without having to dig up the facts and find multiple sources themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Let that come out in the wash. For now this is the Streisand Effect. Somebody says you are not permitted to watch it, so...
We'll leave social media giants censoring under threat from legislators in both parties via changes to section 230, or breakup, as a discussion for another day. Hopefully not too long.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, I skipped 2 Girls 1 Cup, and I'm skipping this total nonsense.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Interesting)
The explanation I have come up with after being puzzled for a long time by this utterly stupid behavior is that many people seem to think that really believing something changes reality. Hence they chose to believe what they want to be true and then feel they have fixed the problem. In actual reality, they are just creating a filter-bubble and do not see reality anymore (at least for a time). What still gets through, they just deny, because they have no understanding what a "fact" actually is. One reason for that is that they misuse that term routinely themselves and see it as malleable, just as they see reality as malleable.
The same approach is also a favorite of climate-change deniers, anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, etc.: If Science comes up with things you do not like, just ignore them or classify them as "opinions".
Yes, that is utterly dysfunctional. But look at how well humanity does in general on things and it makes a lot of sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do people more readily believe harebrained bullshit than evidence based facts? Even religiosity cannot explain that sufficiently.
Because they want to.
Humans don't (generally) like feeling out of control, and prolonged periods of danger are really stressful. Finding any shred of evidence that says you can stop feeling bad is a powerful motivation.
Also, there's a feeling of superiority that comes from being in a correct minority. Notice conspiracy theorists are usually kind of slow individuals? They're not able to feel smart for being smart, so they find solace in theories that tell them they're smart.
It all comes back to the fact that people believe - and do - what they want to, whenever possible.
Re:Explain to me why people believe that (Score:4, Informative)
I wonder that myself: https://c19study.com/ [c19study.com]
Re: (Score:3)
And now let's compare the graph of the countries that use chloroquine with some other countries in Europe that don't. Whoopsie, same graph.
If you pick and choose the graphs that fit your narrative, you will be able to prove anything. From the efficiency of chloroquine to 5G causing covid.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is the rock-solid *behavioral* foundation of bullshitting: while you can shape someone's emotions by feeding him facts, it's more efficient to reprogram his beliefs by feeding him attitudes.
This is particularly effective if you can can employ high status spokesmen. Everyone *knows* that athletes endorse products because they're paid to, but endorsements are highly effective at shaping consumer beliefs.
That's why fact checking bullshit doesn't work: bullshit works even when people know it's bullshit. P
Isn't this a crime? (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't there some law against the President of the United States personally disseminating information that will result in direct harm to the citizens he is supposed to be protecting? Doesn't he have a duty to protect the population, or at least not actively try to harm them for his own political benefit?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't matter. Trump has proven that he cannot be punished for his crimes while sitting. He has his very own AG and DoJ...
Did I hurt your feelings, little red snowflake? (Score:2)
The red must come from anal bleeding.
Mod this down too, I'd hate to see you use your mod points on someone who can't afford to lose the karma.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess would be that no individual completely lacking in personal integrity or honor was ever expected to fill that role. Turns out that expectation was wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Politicians actively harm you for their own political benefit all the time. Every time a politician threatens price controls on new medicine (as opposed to other methods to make everyone have access) they harm you by slowing medical development just as surely as if they put price controls on new video games would to video games or telling Apple they could only charge $50 for new iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
No more than there is a law against hyperventilating on the internet about a comparatively minor illness as if it is the black plague.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't there some law against the President of the United States personally disseminating information that will result in direct harm to the citizens he is supposed to be protecting? Doesn't he have a duty to protect the population, or at least not actively try to harm them for his own political benefit?
I'm not a lawyer but I would think there'd be some sort of fraud involved. There's no way Trump hasn't been presented the facts. In his position to willfully ignore the facts is misrepresentation of the facts.
This isn't like a movie where a soldier has a hunch based on years of experience and countermands his superior officers' orders and saves the day. This is a CEO whose engineers have informed them clearly that the product does not function as designed and will result in customer harm, and declares
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
He's defending the federal buildings around the US that AnfiFa and BLM are actively attacking because that helps George Floyd or something.
But you attack Orange Man Bad for protecting the US for that.
But that's ok - because the CDC only lied at the beginning about the masks being ineffective. This time it's the truth and they wouldn't lie to you again so we must all wear them to be SAFE!
Re: (Score:2)
No, it would be a crime if the President didn't say something.
Fact of the Matter is the world was gung ho over the Drug till Trump said something about it. Then cause Orange man bad syndrome, it was suddenly gona kill you if you take it. Even though its been in use over 50 years.
By your Logic Every Democrat holding any office local, state or Federal should be in jail.
Re:Isn't this a crime? (Score:5, Insightful)
Fact of the Matter is the world was gung ho over the Drug till Trump said something about it.
Uh, no.
A doctor in France with a history of fabricated studies came out with a study showing it worked in 3 patients. "the world" responded with "that's interesting, we'll look at it more closely". Further studies showed no benefit, and the expected increased mortality from heart problems caused by high doses of it.
At which the rest of the world said, "this doesn't work".
At which point you, Trump's fans and everyone else looking to miracle their way out of the pandemic said the evil deep state doctors are suppressing it to hurt Trump.
Re:Isn't this a crime? (Score:4, Informative)
Do you get to decide science things?
Earth being round, for example, is not a matter of personal decision, like which kind of music I enjoy most. Earth being round is a scientific fact. Music preferences are personal.
Re:Isn't this a crime? (Score:4, Informative)
Is there some law against letting people view what they want and deciding for themselves?
There are many such laws. For instance, you don't get to watch snuff films and decide for yourself if they're cool. You don't get to watch tobacco companies telling you how awesome smoking is and that all those cancer studies are just false news. You don't get teachers telling kids in schools that the holocaust didn't happen and let them decide for themselves.
Then there's the question of why a company needs to allow a dangerous video that is brought to their attention to remain. Sure, there might be plenty of content they aren't aware of due to bulk and obscurity. But once something is brought to their attention, why does the right of the poster outweigh the right of the platform to remove that post? This isn't about refusing to serve a certain type of person at a restaurant. This is about false, fraudulent, misleading, dangerous material. This is about refusing to employ a school bus driver who repeatedly tells kids that looking both ways before crossing the street is stupid, and playing with matches is fun.
There's also the question of how average citizens are supposed to "decide for themselves" when a person who is supposed to be informed and trustworthy is spreading an almost uninterrupted stream of attractive lies for four years. This isn't some random person FakedMoonLandingR2D2Luvr who's endorsing this material. It's a guy who has a human puppy dog following him with nuclear launch codes all day. A guy who is supposed to be taking in expert advisor information and distilling it into what the populace needs to hear. And what he's endorsing isn't even a balanced "look, some doctors say X and some say Y, and the truth is probably somewhere in between but I personally think it's more X than Y." He doesn't acknowledge the earned wisdom of a planet worth of countries and repeated predictions that match math time and time again.
Decide for themselves? Really? You're talking about the demographic that elected the guy. People who have disqualified themselves, effectively.
Finally, I'd like to point out that while your post may not intentionally follow the pattern of "but muh freedum", but it does. It's 2020 and a pandemic. Useless points of constitutional nitpicking are hazardous right now. Stop it. If this video is suppressed, zero harm will be done and massive benefit will follow. Act accordingly.
Re: (Score:3)
There are many such laws. For instance, you don't get to watch snuff films and decide for yourself if they're cool. You don't get to watch tobacco companies telling you how awesome smoking is and that all those cancer studies are just false news. You don't get teachers telling kids in schools that the holocaust didn't happen and let them decide for themselves.
At least in the United States there is no legal restriction against watching a snuff film. They are all fake, and if a real one were to surface it could/would be seized as evidence in the murder investigation. But the people who'd viewed it would not be in legal jeapordy unless they were party to the murder conspiracy.
There are videos right now on YouTube stating that smoking doesn't cause cancer, and comments and blog posts and all that.
Outside of a few countries with holocaust specific laws it is pe
No, just ignorant (Score:2)
Medical professionals (Score:5, Funny)
"But it was unclear where many of them practice medicine or how many patients they had actually seen."
They are apparently the top of the medical professionals, this doctor is even the main authority about having sex with demons.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Thanks Big Tech (Score:2)
I would not want to commit wrong think!
In addition to scrubbing the video you managed to take down their website too!
Now, what else can we delete from the internet in order to protect people!
Yet another reason for social media to not censor (Score:2)
Facebook, YouTube and Twitter worked feverishly to remove it, but by the time they had, the video had already become the latest example of misinformation about the virus that has spread widely.
Good to know. I'll add "The Streisand effect" as yet another reason for social media to not try to censor comments.
Really, the spreading of misinformation isn't a root cause of problems in the US. It is a symptom. Censoring misinformation, even if it was successful in the short term, will just teach people that they can trust social media for news because the big corporations will either censor or label misinformation. That's not the right direction. Instead, educate people.
Censorship is the issue here (Score:5, Insightful)
Conservative checking in. Pay attention
I watched the video, and the first thing I wanted to do was fact check it. Not with your typical hit squad sites like PolitiFact, but by going back to find the source. Finding out who these people are, what are their credentials to be making their claims, what is this Frontline Doctors organization, whether I can verify their claims, etc. It is exceedingly difficult, you really have to do some digging - and that friends IS THE PROBLEM. This is the information age, but far too much information is controlled and manipulated well before reaching us.
The content of their message is indeed sketchy, and no I most certainly am not taking their word for it. None of us should, with any source. There's so much conflicting information, so many retractions after the fact, so much emotion and fruitless bickering. It's exceedingly difficult to make an educated decision when the information is difficult or effectively impossible to trust. Maybe that's the point.
We all should be skeptical of everything we see, read, and hear, and we all need to be talking to each other. Trusting the message we're (collectively, left and right) being fed is leading somewhere we do not want to go.
Legality of this? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you watch the video they put their credentials on the screen:
No, they don't. Only the web address to the infowars store.
Re:Legality of this? (Score:4, Informative)
You wanna talk CRAZY? (Score:2)
"The president is pushing the coronavirus theories of a Houston doctor who also says sexual visitations by demons and alien DNA are at the root of Americans’ common health concerns."
https://www.thedailybeast.com/... [thedailybeast.com]
Misleading Screed Pushed by NYT Posted to SlashDot (Score:2, Insightful)
The video had some people in the medical profession expressing their views, and people found it interesting. Maybe those people are correct, and maybe they aren't.
Social Media sites like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook are places for sharing interesting content. There weren't threats of violence or anything like that.
Making this out to be a problem, and using some sort of guilt-by-association to discredit it, is as misleading as the video may have been.
Re: (Score:3)
The video had some people in the medical profession expressing their views,
It has people in white lab coats sharing opinions. There's no information presented that they are, in fact, medical doctors possessing medical degrees from accredited medical schools.
Re:Misleading Screed Pushed by NYT Posted to Slash (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Social Media sites like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook are places for sharing interesting content. There weren't threats of violence or anything like that.
What's the difference between threats of violence and disseminating information which you know will cause people to behave in ways that kill people?
Answer: The former might never come to anything, the latter causes deaths
I watched the video (Score:3)
I watched a good part of the video (could not finish it). I am all for there being a dialogue between people with expertise in the subject, BUT:
- That Dr (I assume she is one - you may doubt one) is not speaking like a scientist at all. Even when she is saying "sciency sounding" things, she definitely comes off as a politician to me. I do not want to listen to any politicians.
- While there are several promising treatments, the one that has had the most serious peer-reviewed studies is hydroxychloroquine. Wh
Can we stop with the "All opinions are valid" B.S? (Score:3)
Enough debating with bad actors. These are shills trying to force the economy back open before it's safe so the Republican party can win an election. They're violating their Hippocratic oath. They need to be called out in the plainest terms.
And Twitter is blocking it just as fast as they can because it's fu
Morons (Score:4, Insightful)
It's almost like people don't understand the Streisand Effect in 2020.
This was a video I believe sponsored by Breitbart (the MSNBC of the right) wherein some people - as BBC puts it with a gentle pre-spin - "calling themselves doctors" were talking about chloroquinine or something like that.
Of course this was publicized by the Right as "livestream of doctors talking about treatments for covid was cut by facebook!"
The FACT is that when this hit at the beginning, we knew very little about it (Thanks China! And that shitty band of nearly-worthless time-serving bureaucrats at WHO!). Some things were asserted, some things were speculated, some things were tried, and a lot of guesses were made. We were trying to figure shit out. That's what happens when there's an emergency and you don't know what to do - you hypothesize and test. Even today there is a lot of chaos in the reportage, and the huge majority of us are not qualified to make large scale decisions (nor, honestly, are we asked to).
I think it's factually irrefutable that there is a general consensus of opinion on some things, with a fair error-bar of dispute - even among experts - on others. There's still a lot we don't know. And, as the saying goes, half of all doctors are below average.
At some point - like everything in 2020 - the narratives diverged into politics.
You can say it was an irresponsible president advocating the use of an untested medication (at least from the quote I heard, he /didn't actually advocate/ using it, he advocated 'checking into it' or somesuch).
Or, you can say it was an innocent speculation (but I think even a moron would understand that EVERYTHING a president says is impactful; they - if they're responsible - can't just blather about the same goofy shit the rest of us speculate on day-to-day because their words resonate).
Social media, smelling the prevailing winds, has now "taken sides" actively blocking discussions they don't like...you know, to "protect" us from misinformation. Even if you agree with Twitter, Facebook, Instagram that this is a terrible president that we all hope is replaced by someone more competent, THAT HAS TO BE TROUBLING. Sure, capitalistic free-market wise these are their platforms; they are conceivably entitled to manage traffic on them as they will.
But the modern era is replete with examples of businesses and products which have been deemed ubiquitous in serving a public need, and thus regarded with a different set of rules. Rules that prohibit them from, say, refusing service based on a person's sexual preferences or skin color.
I think it's been historically proved that the ONLY enduring antidote to stupid speech is MORE SPEECH. This censorship (which is clearly politically motivated, despite the "who, me?" protestations) simply feeds into an aggrieved, victim narrative that's going to have results 180 degrees different from what they think they're accomplishing.
Re: (Score:3)
Hey GOP: Your 'hero' is trying to get you killed! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Must be a global conspiracy to discredit the Trumps, right?
Re:Liberals at work again (Score:4, Interesting)
Go ask any Japanese, or Chinese, or Indian geneticists or intelligence researcher and of course they'll tell you there are obvious and measurable differences
The difference is those evil white western scientists did further research and found there were many flaws in their methodology.
For example, if you put a black person through a shitty, under-funded school system and then give them a written test, they will do worse on that test than a white person who goes through a well-funded and well-run school system. That doesn't mean they are any less intelligent, it means they were put through a shitty, under-funded school system.
The evil white western scientists controlled for those variables, such as giving the test to white students who also went through shitty, under-funded school systems. And found no statistically-significant difference.
Also, how the hell does this racist bullshit get +3 insightful on Slashdot?
Re:Liberals at work again (Score:5, Insightful)
Liberals cannot have scientific evidence of a group of doctors appealing
"a group of doctors appealing" is not "scientific evidence".
This is why conservatives are going after regulation of social media companies - censorship based on political bias is evil.
So just to be clear, "censorship based on political bias is evil", but you're in favor of "conservatives [...] going after regulation of social media companies"?
BTW, down-voting because you don't agree with the statement rather than on the substance of the argument is also censorship.
The substance of your argument is hypocrisy.
Re:Liberals at work again (Score:5, Insightful)
Aren't those regulations for preventing censorship?
No. They're for preventing functional moderation, in order to either drive sites out of existence, or to force them to provide a soapbox for those who would use them to mislead others.
That would remove your hypocrisy argument.
Lucky for my argument the answer was no, then.
Re:Misinformation? (Score:4)
Another point: Yahoo News has become even more partisan that usual lately, and the reaction to it was very apparent in the comment section. My unscientific analysis is that somewhere around 70%-80% of the commenters were calling bullshit on just about every political story they posted.
The just got rid of their comment section, and the story selection has trended even more partisan.