Because folks are going off again about "young people don't just suffer cardiac arrest!", I'm going to once again note that Ohio has had a policy to train folks to recognize/ respond to exactly that in young athletes.

It started in 2017.
odh.ohio.gov/know-our-progr… 2016.

Here's the problem with this thinking on scientific debate. 👇 Without deep expertise, the only thing listeners are judging is who is more convincing, not who is actually factually correct. /1 I've gotten so many "you're elitist!" accusations for saying this, and I think people get insulted as if I'm suggesting they're not intelligent enough to discern. But that has nothing to do with it. /2

Antivaxxer praises Musk for helping him spread his misinformation. Reminds me of HIV deniers crowing about spreading their misinformation via the internet 20 years ago.

Imagine being so excited to give time and attention to someone whose antivax views have put people in danger around the globe. Imagine being so excited to defend anti-science millionaires and billionaires. Changed the settings because too many trolls.

Cirino talks about students with particular views being "shouted down" rather than discussed. In my 20 years of experience, that's not what happens. Let me give an example: discussing vaccines in my classes on infectious disease. /1

https://twitter.com/Honesty4OhioEd/status/1661434864183177217

/2 Obviously I am very pro-vaccine. But I don't go into my classes as an advocate. I teach the science--what types of vaccines are there? How do they work? How have they changed ID epi over the past 100+ years? How do we know they're successful?