I too am a physician, however I have no formal training in epidemiology. I have learned a great deal about this field over the last two years in my own investigation into the vaccine trials and observational studies from around the world. This does not make me an expert. I am an anesthesiologist with a background in mathe…
I too am a physician, however I have no formal training in epidemiology. I have learned a great deal about this field over the last two years in my own investigation into the vaccine trials and observational studies from around the world. This does not make me an expert. I am an anesthesiologist with a background in mathematics and physical systems modeling (I had a career as an engineer prior to medical school).
Although I agree that mis/dis/malinformation abounds, I have a different take on our approach and the validity of information that supports the thesis that the Covid vaccines are safe and effective.
In this article you have cited a number of misinformation spreaders, including Children's Health Defense. In full disclosure, I am affiliated with that organization. In fact, I have been serving as the Senior Science Editor for The Defender, our online publication. I do not take this position lightly and have endeavored to ensure that what we publish is reasonable, factual and defensible. Moreover, I often discuss our material with experts who are affiliated with our organization before taking the step to publish anything.
I have found that our separate camps have become echo chambers. That is why I have chosen to subscribe to your substack. My intention is not to discredit you in any way but to encourage an open exchange of ideas. I believe you are earnestly explaining your position in good faith. I just happen to disagree with some of your opinions/interpretations.
As a physician, I take my role in this very seriously. CHD pays me only a fraction of what I could earn as a clinical anesthesiologist. I have children and aging parents to support. In other words, I have nothing to gain by speaking up and spreading what you are labeling "misinformation".
I have offered some commentary and what I believe are very reasonable questions on your last two substack articles, specifically around the UK Health Surveillance Data set and the estimates of "lives saved" by the Covid-19 vaccination campaign.
I am hoping that you will address them to perhaps uncover where our disagreements originate and in doing so, find more productive ways for all of us to learn from one another.
Given the fact that we both agree that misinformation is a huge problem, wouldn't the most effective solution be to have an open dialogue about where the misconceptions are on both sides?
I have recently launched my own substack, "An Insult to Intuition", where I have explained how I initially came to a different position with regard to the Covid-19 vaccines. You don't need to be a paid subscriber to comment.
I personally think you're much more likely to be just trying to put links out to increase your influence and ability than "taking your role seriously". Your org. got outed as a disinformation machine and you think pushback might win you a few more viewers.
Dandarc, I understand how you could mistrust someone with an opposing point of view on this heavily divided topic. Ack, I get it!
Did you read through Setty’s article? If so, can you address something (aside from his affiliation) that specifically registers as untrue?
Something that we can openly debate, or ask Katelyn to address?!
I wonder if you (and we all) can come to the table to discuss these important issues with a sense of curiosity rather than contempt.
Listening to people soundly argue the other side of an issue can challenge and expand our thinking, and thus help strengthen our own arguments at the very least.
And, comments like his give us a golden opportunity to use this space to debate and dismantle false information in real time!
I read a credible source that just about 1/4 of all anti-covid-19 vaccine tweets came from this one source. Therefore no need to give them any clicks.
The problem with your approach is that disinformation is so incredibly easy to create. For example, I'll make something up that I hope is disinformation right now - "Chevalisa Bruzzone is a Russion Bot." Prove me wrong.
Half-Italian Bot, I suppose. :-) Again, can you let us know a specific thing you read in Setty's response that you would like to challenge? Let's talk about it. I would also be curious to learn more about the credible source you reference just above. If you can put some specific data on the table, I'd love folks—Katelyn included—to be able to respond.
And you say "I have nothing to gain by speaking up and spreading what you are labeling "misinformation", while also saying you are "serving as the Senior Science Editor for The Defender, our online publication."
You reek of lies. You're scared that the truth will wreck your precious bottom line.
I regard everything that does not promote your lie-platform to also be a lie.
You should be ashamed of yourself. An anesthesiologist as the senior science editor for a publication purportedly about children's health and vaccines? Is that the best they could find? I hope that money you're making buys you some good sleep aids because it sure as heck isn't buying you any moral compass.
Hi Dr. Jetelina,
I too am a physician, however I have no formal training in epidemiology. I have learned a great deal about this field over the last two years in my own investigation into the vaccine trials and observational studies from around the world. This does not make me an expert. I am an anesthesiologist with a background in mathematics and physical systems modeling (I had a career as an engineer prior to medical school).
Although I agree that mis/dis/malinformation abounds, I have a different take on our approach and the validity of information that supports the thesis that the Covid vaccines are safe and effective.
In this article you have cited a number of misinformation spreaders, including Children's Health Defense. In full disclosure, I am affiliated with that organization. In fact, I have been serving as the Senior Science Editor for The Defender, our online publication. I do not take this position lightly and have endeavored to ensure that what we publish is reasonable, factual and defensible. Moreover, I often discuss our material with experts who are affiliated with our organization before taking the step to publish anything.
I have found that our separate camps have become echo chambers. That is why I have chosen to subscribe to your substack. My intention is not to discredit you in any way but to encourage an open exchange of ideas. I believe you are earnestly explaining your position in good faith. I just happen to disagree with some of your opinions/interpretations.
As a physician, I take my role in this very seriously. CHD pays me only a fraction of what I could earn as a clinical anesthesiologist. I have children and aging parents to support. In other words, I have nothing to gain by speaking up and spreading what you are labeling "misinformation".
I have offered some commentary and what I believe are very reasonable questions on your last two substack articles, specifically around the UK Health Surveillance Data set and the estimates of "lives saved" by the Covid-19 vaccination campaign.
I am hoping that you will address them to perhaps uncover where our disagreements originate and in doing so, find more productive ways for all of us to learn from one another.
Given the fact that we both agree that misinformation is a huge problem, wouldn't the most effective solution be to have an open dialogue about where the misconceptions are on both sides?
I have recently launched my own substack, "An Insult to Intuition", where I have explained how I initially came to a different position with regard to the Covid-19 vaccines. You don't need to be a paid subscriber to comment.
This is part I of a three part analysis:
https://madhavasetty.substack.com/p/safe-and-effective
I welcome anyone here to drop your thoughts on my own critique of the situation. Thank you for considering this.
I personally think you're much more likely to be just trying to put links out to increase your influence and ability than "taking your role seriously". Your org. got outed as a disinformation machine and you think pushback might win you a few more viewers.
Dandarc, I understand how you could mistrust someone with an opposing point of view on this heavily divided topic. Ack, I get it!
Did you read through Setty’s article? If so, can you address something (aside from his affiliation) that specifically registers as untrue?
Something that we can openly debate, or ask Katelyn to address?!
I wonder if you (and we all) can come to the table to discuss these important issues with a sense of curiosity rather than contempt.
Listening to people soundly argue the other side of an issue can challenge and expand our thinking, and thus help strengthen our own arguments at the very least.
And, comments like his give us a golden opportunity to use this space to debate and dismantle false information in real time!
No normalization of disinformation. Even the presentation of it normalizes it. This is how your evil game works.
You're astroturfing and gaslighting.
I read a credible source that just about 1/4 of all anti-covid-19 vaccine tweets came from this one source. Therefore no need to give them any clicks.
The problem with your approach is that disinformation is so incredibly easy to create. For example, I'll make something up that I hope is disinformation right now - "Chevalisa Bruzzone is a Russion Bot." Prove me wrong.
Half-Italian Bot, I suppose. :-) Again, can you let us know a specific thing you read in Setty's response that you would like to challenge? Let's talk about it. I would also be curious to learn more about the credible source you reference just above. If you can put some specific data on the table, I'd love folks—Katelyn included—to be able to respond.
Precisely. It is exactly like the BBC example above. Gaining viewership of their lies is the entire point.
And you say "I have nothing to gain by speaking up and spreading what you are labeling "misinformation", while also saying you are "serving as the Senior Science Editor for The Defender, our online publication."
You reek of lies. You're scared that the truth will wreck your precious bottom line.
I regard everything that does not promote your lie-platform to also be a lie.
And everyone else should do the same.
You should be ashamed of yourself. An anesthesiologist as the senior science editor for a publication purportedly about children's health and vaccines? Is that the best they could find? I hope that money you're making buys you some good sleep aids because it sure as heck isn't buying you any moral compass.
How many bots did you use to like your own post?
You paid $5/month to peddle this tripe in order to continue your organization's normalization of disinformation.
That is the entire point of our supposed Doctor Setty's post.
We do not normalize your disinformation. We see it for what it is.