Have you watched the banned video?

[OnMyWay]

This is the video that was banned by FB and You Tube.  You probably haven't heard about it if you only watch CNN, MSNBC, etc.  It is long, but worth your time.  So what do you think?  These doctors are all insane, or are they onto something?

https://lbry.tv/@GeekforTruth:c/American-Doctors-Address-COVID-19-Misinformation:4?fbclid=IwAR2gTeAyXpjJACF0ZawxY9ngwON2CkM0nnJdeyKGiAIxmS27Mls36KbNAZQ

[GeoffH]

2 hours ago, OnMyWay said:

These doctors are all insane,

 

I've seen it, I would have said deluded and wrong rather than insane. 

 

Here is an article from the BBC discussing one Doctor in particular.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53579773

And another article from MedPage Today discussing the qualifications and experience of the Doctors in the video (none of them are front line scientists FWIW) and the support of some of those doctors (against established scientific fact) is concerning.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87797

 

There are currently two drugs that have been shown to help, hydroxychloroquine is not one of them, it is not efficacious and testing  has shown that.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

Edited July 30, 2020 by GeoffH

[intrepid]

1 hour ago, OnMyWay said:

So what do you think?  These doctors are all insane, or are they onto something?

Call me gullible if you like but I kind of understand what they are saying and believe them.  If I were infected I would like to hope I could follow their advise or to be one of their patients .

[KC813]

10 hours ago, OnMyWay said:

This is the video that was banned by FB and You Tube.  You probably haven't heard about it if you only watch CNN, MSNBC, etc.  It is long, but worth your time.  So what do you think?  These doctors are all insane, or are they onto something?

https://lbry.tv/@GeekforTruth:c/American-Doctors-Address-COVID-19-Misinformation:4?fbclid=IwAR2gTeAyXpjJACF0ZawxY9ngwON2CkM0nnJdeyKGiAIxmS27Mls36KbNAZQ

This video did get considerable coverage on CNN News online, with multiple stories in different sections, more written stories then I saw on FOX online (I don’t watch the opinionated talking heads on either network).

For decades I have been in positions where I evaluate statements to determine the likelihood of a claim’s accuracy, often needing to reconcile sometimes multiple conflicting views to find the most probable truth.  (‘Most probable’ since rarely is something 100% certain). 

 

I’ve stayed out of the COVID conversation here.  We are all often handicapped from reaching logical conclusions by a lack of proven or relevant facts.  Despite that, I have noticed many members on this board work hard to keep an open mind in their search for the truth of all we are hearing and reading.  This is a great board!

The video OMW posted makes a good example of the questions we have to consider before accepting any claim to be even ‘possibly’ correct/accurate/truthful – the questions many of us instantly consider when we hear any ‘factual’ statements.  Of course, there will always be some who will believe whatever they hear if it validates their own ideas or ideology.

Organizational bias:  Who is this group, “America’s Frontline Doctors”?  History?  Source of funding?  Purpose?  Known reliability of past statements?  Any political affiliation?

          Quick reliability assessment:  Neutral.  No history as an organization, just use of the name by individual speakers.  No organizational data found, no prior activities seen as a group, just by individuals.

Event staging:  The event appeared well-organized, high quality video.  Who ‘set the stage’ for their program?  Medical discussion, but was not affiliated with a medical professional group.  Answer- organized and sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots (a group I give a low reliability rating because of their exhibited political bias, but you can make your own assessments). The speakers were introduced by a Republican Congressman Ralph Norman, who has since distanced himself from some of the remarks made by the speakers. 

Effect on reliability of the video:  Lowers reliability of information presented as would be for any presentation from group devoted to a very specific political point of view. 

Individual Credibility:  Expertise in the field? Past accomplishments?  Past activities of merit?

          Quick assessment:  Reliability rating of speakers on this exact topic below 40%.   The identified speakers are MDs or DOs.  [caveat- just being an MD or atty does not guarantee a person is smart, wise, impartial or truthful] One no longer practices medicine.  Although they are in the medical profession, at least one with ER expertise, none appear to be virologists or persons specialized in any field directly related to the scientific topic on which they are speaking.  Some of the identified speakers have made extremely low-probability factual claims in the past on nonmedical topics.  A quick search does not show any other scientific or medical accomplishments that would bolster their credibility.  Several of the speakers are involved in other low-probability conspiracy theories, leading to a high possibility that some wish to be identified with extreme positions.

Individual Motives:    More then one speaker has close political connections to the President administration and have participated in the administrations groups and with persons who have a history of making statements with a low probablity of factual accuracy.

Video source & dissemination:  The video published directly by Breitbart, a media outlet with an admitted political bias.  Although sometimes containing accurate information, the frequency of known incorrect facts diminishes this source’s reliability.

Overall Reliability of the Statements Made:  Low reliability. 

[As an aside from reading actual studies (and not the drug company press releases), I rate an about 35% chance that hydrozychloroquine in combination will be found to be of some benefit at some stage of COVD treatment, but it takes time for the studies to pinpoint the correct stage and treatment regimen.  However, claims of it being a cure, a vaccine, or that it is now a safe and effective treatment against COVID are exceptionally unlikely (<5% reliable).]

Just my opinions, all subject to change as more factual information comes to light. 

Everyone rates truth with their own scale.  It is impossible to be totally impartial, and even then it requires active thought and personal introspection to try to recognize and overcome my own biases

Cr@p, that was long-winded!  Best I stay out of controversial subjects.

 

[Mike J]

Not sure I would put much faith in the opinion of a doctor who also believes some government officials are half human and half reptilian alien.   Or tormenting spirits that have "astral sex" with women and cause gynecological problems.  Seriously, is this someone you would trust for medical advice? 

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3095096/aliens-and-reptilians-odd-beliefs-dr-stella

[sonjack2847]

15 minutes ago, Mike J said:

Not sure I would put much faith in the opinion of a doctor who also believes some government officials are half human and half reptilian alien.   Or tormenting spirits that have "astral sex" with women and cause gynecological problems.  Seriously, is this someone you would trust for medical advice? 

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3095096/aliens-and-reptilians-odd-beliefs-dr-stella

I believe san mig pilsen is better icy cold,I believe that cheese on toast is better with onions, not sure if I believe a doctor who thinks that some people are half alien.

[OnMyWay]

3 hours ago, Mike J said:

Not sure I would put much faith in the opinion of a doctor who also believes some government officials are half human and half reptilian alien.   Or tormenting spirits that have "astral sex" with women and cause gynecological problems.  Seriously, is this someone you would trust for medical advice? 

https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3095096/aliens-and-reptilians-odd-beliefs-dr-stella

Yes, she struck me as a bit off right away, but just drop her off.  There are some things they said that should not be just dismissed outright.

[OnMyWay]

3 hours ago, sonjack2847 said:

not sure if I believe a doctor who thinks that some people are half alien.

There is a lot of chatter about the government releasing new info on alien life.  Perhaps you should wait for the news!  

[OnMyWay]

8 hours ago, KC813 said:

This video did get considerable coverage on CNN News online, with multiple stories in different sections, more written stories then I saw on FOX online (I don’t watch the opinionated talking heads on either network).

 

 

For decades I have been in positions where I evaluate statements to determine the likelihood of a claim’s accuracy, often needing to reconcile sometimes multiple conflicting views to find the most probable truth.  (‘Most probable’ since rarely is something 100% certain). 

 

 

 

 

I’ve stayed out of the COVID conversation here.  We are all often handicapped from reaching logical conclusions by a lack of proven or relevant facts.  Despite that, I have noticed many members on this board work hard to keep an open mind in their search for the truth of all we are hearing and reading.  This is a great board!

 

 

The video OMW posted makes a good example of the questions we have to consider before accepting any claim to be even ‘possibly’ correct/accurate/truthful – the questions many of us instantly consider when we hear any ‘factual’ statements.  Of course, there will always be some who will believe whatever they hear if it validates their own ideas or ideology.

 

 

Organizational bias:  Who is this group, “America’s Frontline Doctors”?  History?  Source of funding?  Purpose?  Known reliability of past statements?  Any political affiliation?

 

 

          Quick reliability assessment:  Neutral.  No history as an organization, just use of the name by individual speakers.  No organizational data found, no prior activities seen as a group, just by individuals.

 

 

Event staging:  The event appeared well-organized, high quality video.  Who ‘set the stage’ for their program?  Medical discussion, but was not affiliated with a medical professional group.  Answer- organized and sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots (a group I give a low reliability rating because of their exhibited political bias, but you can make your own assessments). The speakers were introduced by a Republican Congressman Ralph Norman, who has since distanced himself from some of the remarks made by the speakers. 

 

 

Effect on reliability of the video:  Lowers reliability of information presented as would be for any presentation from group devoted to a very specific political point of view. 

 

 

Individual Credibility:  Expertise in the field? Past accomplishments?  Past activities of merit?

 

 

          Quick assessment:  Reliability rating of speakers on this exact topic below 40%.   The identified speakers are MDs or DOs.  [caveat- just being an MD or atty does not guarantee a person is smart, wise, impartial or truthful] One no longer practices medicine.  Although they are in the medical profession, at least one with ER expertise, none appear to be virologists or persons specialized in any field directly related to the scientific topic on which they are speaking.  Some of the identified speakers have made extremely low-probability factual claims in the past on nonmedical topics.  A quick search does not show any other scientific or medical accomplishments that would bolster their credibility.  Several of the speakers are involved in other low-probability conspiracy theories, leading to a high possibility that some wish to be identified with extreme positions.

 

 

Individual Motives:    More then one speaker has close political connections to the President administration and have participated in the administrations groups and with persons who have a history of making statements with a low probablity of factual accuracy.

 

 

Video source & dissemination:  The video published directly by Breitbart, a media outlet with an admitted political bias.  Although sometimes containing accurate information, the frequency of known incorrect facts diminishes this source’s reliability.

 

 

Overall Reliability of the Statements Made:  Low reliability. 

 

[As an aside from reading actual studies (and not the drug company press releases), I rate an about 35% chance that hydrozychloroquine in combination will be found to be of some benefit at some stage of COVD treatment, but it takes time for the studies to pinpoint the correct stage and treatment regimen.  However, claims of it being a cure, a vaccine, or that it is now a safe and effective treatment against COVID are exceptionally unlikely (<5% reliable).]

 

 

Just my opinions, all subject to change as more factual information comes to light. 

Everyone rates truth with their own scale.  It is impossible to be totally impartial, and even then it requires active thought and personal introspection to try to recognize and overcome my own biases

Cr@p, that was long-winded!  Best I stay out of controversial subjects.

 

Nice analysis!  There are some details within their content that I think need a more detailed discussion.

The one thing I don't understand is that there is such a push to not allow people to use hydrozychloroquine, and/or not have doctors prescribe it.  As far as I have read, there is no valid reason why someone should not be allowed to try it, especially as a prophylactic.  It has been around for years and risks are very minimal for most people.  This angle appears to be pure politics.

[OnMyWay]

17 hours ago, GeoffH said:

 

I've seen it, I would have said deluded and wrong rather than insane. 

 

Here is an article from the BBC discussing one Doctor in particular.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53579773

And another article from MedPage Today discussing the qualifications and experience of the Doctors in the video (none of them are front line scientists FWIW) and the support of some of those doctors (against established scientific fact) is concerning.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87797

 

There are currently two drugs that have been shown to help, hydroxychloroquine is not one of them, it is not efficacious and testing  has shown that.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014

I would not dismiss everything they said.  There are some interesting tidbits in there that warrant a further look.

Read the comments on the Medpage article.  There are a variety of opinions there, some by doctors.  At least, their comment indicates that they are doctors.  We never know for sure.