WTF, @jeopardy? This is in a way almost worse than the first deal. So now, on the one hand, you have a man with a history of misogyny hosting part of the time. On the other hand, you have an antivaxxer and supplement hawker @missmayim hosting the rest.🙄🤦🏻♂️ washingtonpost.com/arts-entertain…
What's a @jeopardy fan to do. Alex Trebek must be doing backflips in his grave right now.
I mean, @jeopardy: Do you remember all the times Alex Trebek made nasty comments about pregnant models or fired them? I don't either. Ditto the times he promoted antivaccine misinformation and hawked bogus "brain health" supplements.
I keep wondering how @Jeopardy could have made worse picks, and the only way I can think of is if the producers had picked @DrOz to be the permanent host.
Oh, and WTF, @washingtonpost editors and @EmilyYahr? How is it that you didn't notice @missmayim's history of promoting antivaccine pseudoscience and, more recently, using her neuroscience PhD to hawk bogus "brain health" supplements? That's a huge lapse.
And, because apparently there are those who fell for Bialik's claim that she is not antivax based on a video she made last fall, here's the perfect antidote of a rebuttal.
I should have included that video in the thread to preempt the "But last year she denied being antivax and said she'd get the #CovidVaccine" retorts that I knew would be coming.🙄
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
in 2010 I was invited by @joeschwarcz to speak about cancer quackery at the Trottier Symposium in Montreal, with @bengoldacre, @michaelshermer, and James Randi. It was a huge honor to me. 2/
The night before the symposium, there was a roundtable discussion with a lot more guests than just the main speakers. 3/
Note the weasel wording/buzz words (“not opposed to #covidvaccines IN GENERAL”) that gives away the game. FLCCC is *clearly* antivax. It’s quite obvious from this statement. If this statement were the only thing I knew about FLCCC, I’d say, “Yep, they’re *definitely* antivax.” 1/
So is this shtick about how “some of us are vaccinated.” Antivax mom groups used to say the same thing prepandemic. Antivax pediatricians would say, “Many of my patients are vaccinated.” 2/
Indeed, taking a “neutral” stance on #CovidVaccine like this while spreading fear of the vaccine based on pseudoscience, bad science, and conspiracy theories is a CLASSIC antivax ploy. I am not fooled. No one should be fooled. 3/
Amazing how many people have credulously fallen for @missmayim's attempt to memory hole her previous antivaccine stylings by doing a video last fall saying she'd get #CovidVaccine and then bragging about how she got it when she finally did. Actually, no, it's not amazing.
In any event, Bialik hasn't really changed, at least not much. She still spews antivax talking points but has just decided that she thinks #CovidVaccine is OK because of how bad #COVID19 is.
For a reminder, this is the sort of antivax nonsense she was spewing in 2012. What she says in the video in the previous Tweet is not materially much different, if different at all, just "kinder, gentler" and more canny. respectfulinsolence.com/2012/02/21/say…
Back in the early days of my blog, I had a recurring shtick in which I’d go on and on and on about feeling the need to put a paper bag over my head whenever a fellow surgeon wrote embarrassing pseudoscience. 2/
Back in those days, it was mostly surgeons spewing evolution denial (a.k.a.) creationist nonsense. (A certain frequently offending neurosurgeon comes to mind.) 3/
Having unwillingly undergone a five week intensive exposure to "gender critical" arguments, I've concluded that a disturbing number of them boil down to taking "Ew, trans people ick me out" and cranking that feeling up to, "Trans people are an abomination against nature/God/etc."
Look, there are scientific controversies surrounding the treatment of trans adolescents, but a dispassionate, science-based discussion of how best to medically and surgically treat trans teens is not what the GC movement is about.
Moreover, science denialism is less about how "settled" a given scientific/medical issue is and more about the types of misleading arguments and conspiracy theories deployed against that issue.
Some very basic points: 1. You should know that the Nuremberg Code ONLY applies to human subjects research. You should ALSO know that, after phase 3 trials with 10s of thousands of subjects and hundreds of millions of doses, #CovidVaccine is NOT human subjects research anymore.
2. Calling #CovidVaccine "experimental" is a conflation of a legal definition of "investigational," in which @US_FDA requires that designation on any drug not yet given a full FDA approval. Scientifically, it's just not true any more.
3. The Nuremberg Code is nearly 75 yrs old and mainly of historical interest. It was long ago supplanted by the Belmont Report and Declaration of Helsinki. Both ALSO emphasize informed consent, but antivaxxers love the Nuremberg Code because of its association with Nazi doctors.