I wonder whether this medical student will be cancelled

[evilbooyaa]

Say, and I know this hard to believe, but what if someone that had cachet had written this. Maybe a senior faculty member that had otherwise been known to have a reality-based slant on the world.

Would they be treated the same way?

I don’t believe they would.

Weischalbaum posts with RaDiCaL CaNdOr all the time on twitter. No consequences. But maybe senior faculty who is not an untouchable chair...

CA programs require a DEI essay to work there.

Imagine Utah requiring some anti transgender essay or something.

I just want to practice and enjoy tacos (in CA) or ski (in UT).

Anyway, not an area that I’d imagine any of us would find common ground.

And that's bull**** too. Nothing wrong with calling out bull**** on both sides of the aisle.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[qtpai]

Of course I enjoy the recognition. But I didn't do it for that. I did it because I believe what I am saying.

The whole point of the article is that there is a whole range of opinions that are very widespread that are different than those that constitute the consensus of the public health establishment. And that these opinions are based on a different set of values than the consensus view in public health. And that these opinions are legitimate and valid and worth being heard and recognized and represented. And indeed worth weighting as important in the policy decisionmaking process.

This is indeed public health 101. The public is a stakeholder in public health decisionmaking. No expertise needed outside an Intro to Public Health class or the equivalent. And in the sense that alternative views that are very widespread were suppressed--public health actually failed to function properly, in a fundamental way.

Let's not forget that Tucker is the most popular show on television. There's a reason this is the case. It's because he reflects many widely held views. He represents the views of the American people more than anyone on CNN or MSNBC does.

The public health community can do everything it wants to try to ignore half of the population. You can call people like me "grifters", "clout-chasers", etc. But there is a reason my message was popular.

And that's because I spoke to the hearts of tens if not hundreds of millions of people in this country. Who agree with me and couldn't more strongly disagree with you.

Who agree with me not because they are ignorant or bad. But because they have different values than you. Because they are different than you and see the world differently.

The whole point of the article is that these people do not deserve to be ignored or bulldozed, even if you (or I for that matter) strongly disagree with them.

Ya'll can call that grift, clout-chasing, and say terrible things to me all you like. But whenever I feel my heart like I do now, I know I did the right thing.

And I know there's nothing greater than standing up for what you believe in. Taking those knocks to stand up for people who don't feel and aren't being heard.

And I know that most people reading this will reject this. They'll say I'm deluded or ignorant or cynical or lying. But there will be one or two people who read this who will suddenly understand. I'm writing this for them.

Cheers.

And yes, even to the angriest of you out there. Those who think I'm a terrible human being. Genuinely, best of luck to you. Take it from someone who used to be angry at "grifters" just like you: there's a better life and a better way of looking at life out there. If you remember anything from this post please remember that. I hope someday you understand that.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

Of course I enjoy the recognition. But I didn't do it for that. I did it because I believe what I am saying.

The whole point of the article is that there is a whole range of opinions that are very widespread that are different than those that constitute the consensus of the public health establishment. And that these opinions are based on a different set of values than the consensus view in public health. And that these opinions are legitimate and valid and worth being heard and recognized and represented. And indeed worth weighting as important in the policy decisionmaking process.

This is indeed public health 101. The public is a stakeholder in public health decisionmaking. No expertise needed outside an Intro to Public Health class or the equivalent. And in the sense that alternative views that are very widespread were suppressed--public health actually failed to function properly, in a fundamental way.

Let's not forget that Tucker is the most popular show on television. There's a reason this is the case. It's because he reflects many widely held views. He represents the views of the American people more than anyone on CNN or MSNBC does.

The public health community can do everything it wants to try to ignore half of the population. You can call people like me "grifters", "clout-chasers", etc. But there is a reason my message was popular.

And that's because I spoke to the hearts of tens if not hundreds of millions of people in this country. Who agree with me and couldn't more strongly disagree with you.

Who agree with me not because they are ignorant or bad. But because they have different values than you. Because they are different than you and see the world differently.

The whole point of the article is that these people do not deserve to be ignored or bulldozed, even if you (or I for that matter) strongly disagree with them.

Ya'll can call that grift, clout-chasing, and say terrible things to me all you like. But whenever I feel my heart like I do now, I know I did the right thing.

And I know there's nothing greater than standing up for what you believe in. Taking those knocks to stand up for people who don't feel and aren't being heard.

And I know that most people reading this will reject this. They'll say I'm deluded or ignorant or cynical or lying. But there will be one or two people who read this who will suddenly understand. I'm writing this for them.

Cheers.

And yes, even to the angriest of you out there. Those who think I'm a terrible human being. Genuinely, best of luck to you. Take it from someone who used to be angry at "grifters" just like you: there's a better life and a better way of looking at life out there. If you remember anything from this post please remember that. I hope someday you understand that.

Wow you really went all in with this one eh. I appreciate the adherence to the modern playbook.

Small, uh, point here:

Let's not forget that Tucker is the most popular show on television. There's a reason this is the case. It's because he reflects many widely held views. He represents the views of the American people more than anyone on CNN or MSNBC does.

By "the most popular show on television", you mean...cable news ratings?

3.5 million?

But just last month it was something called "The Five"?

Bro you spoke to the heart of a couple million octogenarians who still watch cable television.

Do you apply this same sort of logic to your PhD work? Your committee must love you.

 

[NotMattSpraker]

Ya'll can call that grift, clout-chasing, and say terrible things to me all you like. But whenever I feel my heart like I do now, I know I did the right thing.

And I know there's nothing greater than standing up for what you believe in. Taking those knocks to stand up for people who don't feel and aren't being heard.

And I know that most people reading this will reject this. They'll say I'm deluded or ignorant or cynical or lying. But there will be one or two people who read this who will suddenly understand. I'm writing this for them.

Do you apply this same sort of logic to your PhD work? Your committee must love you.

If people closed out their oral thesis defense with something like the above monologue, I might consider going back in to academics. Entertaining AF.

 

[Mandelin Rain]

My diagnosis:

Enjoy the 15 minutes kid. The next 15 years suck.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

If people closed out their oral thesis defense with something like the above monologue, I might consider going back in to academics. Entertaining AF.

Playing the role of "someone reviewing this kid's residency application" - I'm going to resist making a meme of one of his shirtless Instagram photos with some yellow bubble-text saying "niacin totally prevented breast cancer in my xenograft mice".

Looking forward to the publication!

 

[evilbooyaa]

*snip*

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

Of course I enjoy the recognition. But I didn't do it for that. I did it because I believe what I am saying.

The whole point of the article is that there is a whole range of opinions that are very widespread that are different than those that constitute the consensus of the public health establishment. And that these opinions are based on a different set of values than the consensus view in public health. And that these opinions are legitimate and valid and worth being heard and recognized and represented. And indeed worth weighting as important in the policy decisionmaking process.

This is indeed public health 101. The public is a stakeholder in public health decisionmaking. No expertise needed outside an Intro to Public Health class or the equivalent. And in the sense that alternative views that are very widespread were suppressed--public health actually failed to function properly, in a fundamental way.

Let's not forget that Tucker is the most popular show on television. There's a reason this is the case. It's because he reflects many widely held views. He represents the views of the American people more than anyone on CNN or MSNBC does.

The public health community can do everything it wants to try to ignore half of the population. You can call people like me "grifters", "clout-chasers", etc. But there is a reason my message was popular.

And that's because I spoke to the hearts of tens if not hundreds of millions of people in this country. Who agree with me and couldn't more strongly disagree with you.

Who agree with me not because they are ignorant or bad. But because they have different values than you. Because they are different than you and see the world differently.

The whole point of the article is that these people do not deserve to be ignored or bulldozed, even if you (or I for that matter) strongly disagree with them.

Ya'll can call that grift, clout-chasing, and say terrible things to me all you like. But whenever I feel my heart like I do now, I know I did the right thing.

And I know there's nothing greater than standing up for what you believe in. Taking those knocks to stand up for people who don't feel and aren't being heard.

And I know that most people reading this will reject this. They'll say I'm deluded or ignorant or cynical or lying. But there will be one or two people who read this who will suddenly understand. I'm writing this for them.

Cheers.

And yes, even to the angriest of you out there. Those who think I'm a terrible human being. Genuinely, best of luck to you. Take it from someone who used to be angry at "grifters" just like you: there's a better life and a better way of looking at life out there. If you remember anything from this post please remember that. I hope someday you understand that.

Well at least you can write an article apologizing for going on tucker now you martyr. Feel free to write an article calling out his untruths.

 

[KaiBuzz]

Tucker averages 3.3 million viewers a night so he hardly represents/reflects the views of the majority of Americans.

 

[sirspamalot]

Tucker averages 3.3 million viewers a night so he hardly represents/reflects the views of the majority of Americans.

Tucker in fact does represent a majority of Americans.. I mean, the group that is racist antiscience and antisemitic.

He's got that fraction nailed down, no cap.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

Hey, @qtpai - this your boy?

But you DEFINITELY are on the side of "hundreds of millions of Americans" by going on his show 3 years after the pandemic started right? Just being a selfless hero? What a patriot.

Why even send in an ERAS application? I bet there are a dozen program directors just salivating over your wisdom and intellect.

 

[deleted1111261]

I really was just peripherally aware of Tucker and understood it as a white populism show. It didn’t seem like the best idea to go on, but seems like 30% of our population felt it was a valid place to explore their grievances.

But, over the last few days, I understand more about what the show was doing. I would say I misundestimated what nefarious business he was engaging in. People more aware of him than me will probably mind.

What’s fascinating is that both the populist right and woke left think the other are “grievance culture”, when it is clear both are basically the same. It’s the circle / U phenomenon where the more extreme each faction gets, the closer they get to each other.

I recant saying it shouldn’t be a big deal.

This is a judgment issue. It’s the equivalent of showing up as a speaker at an Antifa rally and saying “well, they do make some good points and I wanted to explain where I agree with them”.

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

I expect to be cancelled but MSNBC/CNN (Russiagate?) is a crock of **** as well. I stopped watching this nonsense (both sides) the moment John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate. The perverse financial incentives preclude any meaningful reporting. Go to Substack

 

[deleted1111261]

I expect to be cancelled but MSNBC/CNN (Russiagate?) is a crock of **** as well. I stopped watching this nonsense (both sides) the moment John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate. The perverse financial incentives preclude any meaningful reporting. Go to Substack

100%
Trash

 

[sirspamalot]

Wasn't a good luck, but nothing and I mean -nothing- beats the poison Fox spills daily. Hands down.

 

[medgator]

.

What’s fascinating is that both the populist right and woke left think the other are “grievance culture”, it is clear both are basically the same

Only one of them showed up to party on 1/6/2021. Not sure the equalization is accurate

 

[medgator]

Hey, @qtpai - this your boy?

View attachment 366738
View attachment 366739
View attachment 366740

But you DEFINITELY are on the side of "hundreds of millions of Americans" by going on his show 3 years after the pandemic started right? Just being a selfless hero? What a patriot.

Why even send in an ERAS application? I bet there are a dozen program directors just salivating over your wisdom and intellect.

Isn't dominion looking at a settlement in the Bs?.... Hope the ratings were worth it for TC.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

It's all trash.

I can honestly say, without a hint of exaggeration or a close second, this is BY FAR the most politics I have EVER engaged in on the internet.

So, let the record reflect my white-hot rage for @Chartreuse Wombat who started this thread. Why. Why would you do this.

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

It's all trash.

I can honestly say, without a hint of exaggeration or a close second, this is BY FAR the most politics I have EVER engaged in on the internet.

So, let the record reflect my white-hot rage for @Chartreuse Wombat who started this thread. Why. Why would you do this.

White hot rage?

OK

QED

 

[sirspamalot]

Lol. Anyone who says J6 was acceptable in any way shape or form goes straight into the dumpster. Sedition isn't a block party. Its a treasonous offense that has resulted in *hundreds* of convictions (and a few deaths, sadly). We ain't doing that. Anyone that promotes this, or activities designed promote this (the vote was stolen, etc) as acceptable needs to be sued into oblivion or tossed in jail.

To me, its the eqiuvalent of lying on rounds/ in the hospital. You can hate the attending, you can hate the hours, hell you can even hate the patients sometimes. Have a mistress, kick your dog (yeah, you're a scumbag but you can work here).

But you cannot, ever, lie. Once that line is crossed, there is no coming back.

 

[TheWallnerus]

I didn't know in which thread to publish my work: this one, or Dare You To Reply. Sometimes it's just hard to know where to submit.

"We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin."
Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19 (LANCET)

N.I.H. Leader Rebuts Covid Lab Leak Theory at House Hearing

Lab Leak Most Likely Origin of Covid-19 Pandemic, Energy Department Now Says (U.S. agency’s revised assessment is based on new intelligence)

 

[RickyScott]

Also have tangential question- are California faculty not allowed to use departmental funds to attend acro?

Why California Bans State-Funded Travel to Nearly Half of States (Published 2022)

A 2016 law banning travel to states with anti-L.G.B.T.Q. policies is in the spotlight.

www.nytimes.com

 

[TheWallnerus]

If you’re a Chinese academic faculty, are you allowed to voice support for your country vis a vis Ukraine or do you need to condemn… and keep up to date with periodic condemnations as necessary? God forbid you’re a Russian academic. Might as well be a leper in old Judea.

 

[sirspamalot]

That WSJ article is like meth for fringe right addicts. Whether it has any* gravitas other than "low value prediction" will remain to be seen.

Meanwhile... the fringe right be like..

 

[communitydoc13]

"low value prediction"

Yeah, who knows. Lab vs zoonotic probably unknowable in the short term and may be unknowable ever. Low confidence recommendation for lab theory now from 2/6 pertinent agencies.

Lab work should be reviewed carefully at international level of course. Safety is paramount. Hopefully there can be some positive movement on this front.

Conspiracies almost never happen (except when it comes to setting prices).

 

[sirspamalot]

Ah conspiracies.

J6 was a conspiracy fueled event that had me seriously thinking about a) arming myself more thoroughly and/or b) relocating out of the country. At least until the path was clear.

If Trump won, our country would have been destroyed. It would have been the beginning of the end, like 1933. Zero doubt.

I don't love the hard left, but I cannot live with the hard right, for its darkness would eventually consume everything. POC, minorities, and anyone that didn't (eventually) toe the line (hard right christian) would be subject to a withering spiral.

I've done some extensive reading of the 1930's era and what most folks don't realize is that it happens one paper cut at a time. Its just a tiny cut amirite? And, he can't be serious right? He's a buffoon, he's just doing it for the attention..

Then a big cut, followed by more paper cuts. Soon, there's blood everywhere and no turning back. No way to stop it.

If America goes, so goes the world, with few exceptions. MTG/Desantis represent a very real threat to the stability and safety of the future of America. Hopefully, they will be seen for the insanity they are.. but who knows.

 

[TheWallnerus]

That WSJ article is like meth for fringe right addicts. Whether it has any* gravitas other than "low value prediction" will remain to be seen.

Meanwhile... the fringe right be like..

I remember in med school in the 90s our microbiology professors saying masks don’t help not spread disease. I mean what did I know. I’m just a med student. I remember them and other doctors deriding the pictures in the news we would see of people in Asia wearing masks. Again, the 90s.

A coronavirus emerges from Wuhan China. There is a lab in Wuhan that studies and grows coronaviruses.

I think in the 90s we would have thought
the lab leak theory seemed to be theory we would have to rule out.

This is not the 90s, and we are a lot better at thinking now. (If China gives weapons to Russia, the science behind lab leak theory being correct is going to become unchallengeable.)

EDIT: Would also say fringe right and fringe left… it changes so much that over time there is no right and left. Used to be, anti-vax meant you were progressive and liberal. There was a branch of liberalism that was strongly anti-vax, as attested by the high rates of measles in kids in California eg. Then with COVID that kind of changed. Through the lens of history “right” and “left” doesn’t mean anything. There are only popular opinions and those questioning/against those opinions.

 

[RickyScott]

I remember in med school in the 90s our microbiology professors saying masks don’t help not spread disease. I mean what did I know. I’m just a med student. I remember them and other doctors deriding the pictures in the news we would see of people in Asia wearing masks. Again, the 90s.

A coronavirus emerges from Wuhan China. There is a lab in Wuhan that studies and grows coronaviruses.

I think in the 90s we would have thought
the lab leak theory seemed to be theory we would have to rule out.

This is not the 90s, and we are a lot better at thinking now. (If China gives weapons to Russia, the science behind lab leak theory being correct is going to become unchallengeable.)

The bats that host corona virus are 1000 km from wuhan. There is a lab in wuhan studying coronavirus in which numerous employees were some of the first cases. How is a lab leak theory implausible?

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

Great, you've pinpointed it. Step two is washing it off.

Tommy Boy (1995) clip with quote Great, you've pinpointed it. Step two is washing it off. Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote. Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share. Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.

getyarn.io

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

This thread sucks me in again!

I've been agnostic about the origin, mostly because I've spent years trying to internalize wisdom about things I can and cannot change - and knowing the difference.

In my day-to-day life, it really doesn't matter where it came from. It came from somewhere, I don't have a time machine, ergo, I don't give this any mental energy.

That being said, I spent years forced to do all these trainings and certifications and recertifications around biological safety practices for my PhD and postdoc work. Without fail, I always thought to myself "wow, I can't believe they let [person XYZ] do this, that seems like an accident waiting to happen".

The Bell curve is the same everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some chucklehead who didn't take precautions seriously.

 

[TheWallnerus]

This thread sucks me in again!

I've been agnostic about the origin, mostly because I've spent years trying to internalize wisdom about things I can and cannot change - and knowing the difference.

In my day-to-day life, it really doesn't matter where it came from. It came from somewhere, I don't have a time machine, ergo, I don't give this any mental energy.

That being said, I spent years forced to do all these trainings and certifications and recertifications around biological safety practices for my PhD and postdoc work. Without fail, I always thought to myself "wow, I can't believe they let [person XYZ] do this, that seems like an accident waiting to happen".

The Bell curve is the same everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some chucklehead who didn't take precautions seriously.

The interesting thing to me was if you said “I think it came from a lab,” and were a famous person or politician or a university professor or physician (or med student on Tucker!) you were courting cancellation. Sure there’s a MIASMA of bad juju that one risks in getting lumped in with other beliefs that seem to accompany “lab leak theory,” but no one seemed to be able to separate the theory from the miasma.

I do think thinking about these things (metacognition?) has implications for our lives. If you take a time machine and travel back 25 years ago, hypofractionation and extracranial SBRT seemed like right wing loony theories in rad onc (Gil Lederman probably worked on Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars system for all I know). I felt cancellation agita (before we even knew what cancellation was) from doing a lot of breast hypofract early in my career. Now, the tide has changed. If you AREN’T doing hypofract, that seems more right wingy, and hypofract seems owned by the liberal rad onc intelligentsia.

 

[temujim]

This thread sucks me in again!

I've been agnostic about the origin, mostly because I've spent years trying to internalize wisdom about things I can and cannot change - and knowing the difference.

In my day-to-day life, it really doesn't matter where it came from. It came from somewhere, I don't have a time machine, ergo, I don't give this any mental energy.

That being said, I spent years forced to do all these trainings and certifications and recertifications around biological safety practices for my PhD and postdoc work. Without fail, I always thought to myself "wow, I can't believe they let [person XYZ] do this, that seems like an accident waiting to happen".

The Bell curve is the same everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some chucklehead who didn't take precautions seriously.

Past is the past, but seems worth following up on NIH funding Ecohealth which funded SARS CoV (gain of function??) research in Wuhan. The president of Ecohealth alliance was a co-author on a Lancet editorial in 2021 claiming no lab leak... honest 🤞. No conflicts of interest for realz. Although not commenting on origins, the NIH inspector general wasn't kind in their assessment of oversight of over 2.5 million in grants to Ecohealth.

 

[Lamount]

The interesting thing to me was if you said “I think it came from a lab,” and were a famous person or politician or a university professor or physician (or med student on Tucker!) you were courting cancellation. Sure there’s a MIASMA of bad juju that one risks in getting lumped in with other beliefs that seem to accompany “lab leak theory,” but no one seemed to be able to separate the theory from the miasma.

I do think thinking about these things (metacognition?) has implications for our lives. If you take a time machine and travel back 25 years ago, hypofractionation and extracranial SBRT seemed like right wing loony theories in rad onc (Gil Lederman probably worked on Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars system for all I know). I felt cancellation agita (before we even knew what cancellation was) from doing a lot of breast hypofract early in my career. Now, the tide has changed. If you AREN’T doing hypofract, that seems more right wingy, and hypofract seems owned by the liberal rad onc intelligentsia.

This is what happens when a scientific debate becomes focused on the personalities involved rather than the arguments put forth. We always seem to forget that a reasonable point can be argued by the very same person who recently made an unreasonable one. A scientific debate should be like chess -where the next best move depends only on current board position, and has nothing to do with your opponent.

 

[TheWallnerus]

A scientific debate should be like chess -where the next best move depends only on current board position, and has nothing to do with your opponent.

we're probably as close to this as a society as we are to how citizens of the United Federation of Planets deal with money

 

[sirspamalot]

Don't you dare insult those lovely Ferengi

 

[deleted1111261]

The more insular and elitist the organization is, the more closed of his debate.

Of medical specialties, RadOnc has one of the worst problems with this. “Big names”, “experts”, “academic oncologist” .. it’s a morass, and unfortunately there is no way out when one side thinks they are better. The smugness doesn’t help.

 

[Neuronix]

This thread was reported for devolving into a political discussion.

We do not want the forum to be all about politics and DEI. We have threads for those things, please keep those discussions there.

Closing this thread.