Read on Twitter
#TBT "He has also hired a...cadre of..medical students and residents...to carry out his grunt work....they’re busy trawling Twitter in search of physicians who use social media to praise drugs without disclosing that they’ve been paid by pharma companies." https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/15/vinay-prasad-profile/
Profile of a second year junior attending: "Dr. Vinay Prasad is a professional scold...Anyone is fair game for his ire."
Keeping the discourse polite and avoiding ad hominems from the beginning?
Keeping the discourse polite and avoiding ad hominems from the beginning?
Is this good?
"While he takes issue with Prasad’s style, Topol is a fan overall."
"While he takes issue with Prasad’s style, Topol is a fan overall."
Evolution, maturation, or simply defending Ioannidis? https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/27/hear-scientists-different-views-covid-19-dont-attack-them/
Perhaps the post-Covid Prasad wouldn't block everyone who dares to push back against his never-in-doubt polemics, wouldn't assume the worst about everyone's motives?
Now, while I know they didn't write the headline, should clinicians with no direct knowledge of the actual case, no review of records or direct knowledge of the true history, write about whether care performed by a colleague was appropriate? https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-bushs-unnecessary-heart-surgery/2013/08/09/c91c439c-0041-11e3-9a3e-916de805f65d_story.html
Questioning clinical judgement and motives without facts in a national op-ed?
How does that compare to "tagging" an employer?
I'd stay away from both, frankly.
How does that compare to "tagging" an employer?
I'd stay away from both, frankly.
An oncology fellow commenting on the cardiac care provided without any first hand knowledge of the case in the Washington Post?
Huh?
Huh?
Same fellow? "When major decisions must be made amid high scientific uncertainty, as is the case with Covid-19, we can’t afford to silence or demonize professional colleagues with heterodox views...
...Even worse, we can’t allow questions of science, medicine, and public health to become captives of tribalized politics. Today, more than ever, we need vigorous academic debate."
(I'll charitably go with maturation)
