I don't think that the epidemiology she learned is different than the one I learned. She just can't separate her professional opinion from her emotions and political beliefs.
So true, I think that is true of far too many people nowadays. It astonished me how so many of the policies coming from the top went against basic immunology, and that so many doctors just ignored what should have been "common medical sense" and dismissed natural immunity. I think our Universities are to blame, they truly don't teach people to think critically and learn how to agree to disagree, they turn everything to a moral, black and white battle to the point where University-educated people won't engage in honest discourse about hot topics because their sense of moral outrage clouds their judgement.
"University-educated people won't engage in honest discourse about hot topics because their sense of moral outrage clouds their judgement."
A strange morality indeed, Aimee, is that which abdicates a responsibility to evaluate balance of harm beyond monomaniacal pursuit of self-interest.
Heightened sense of personal risk does indeed cloud judgement, but is the resulting insolvency intellectual or moral?
I don't disagree with your very perceptive observation, but after decades of working in risk management, I've come to realize that the majority of expressed outrage is offered in an effort to obscure what is, at its root, seldom more than avid pursuit of self interest.
The entire idea of public health presupposes a large degree of selflessness, which looks good on paper, but is very difficult in practice. What benefits the greater good is not always what benefits the individual patient - mammography is a great example.
Poignantly observed and highly astute comment, RNK1409.
There are two primary categories; public and private.
Public health is, and must be, coldly utilitarian, entirely unconcerned with the fate of any one individual. It is essential that it remain solely concerned with the collective.
Private health is and must remain entirely focused on the care of individuals, regardless of the collective. It cannot attend to individual outcomes with a "paint by numbers" approach.
The two categories are often in conflict with each other's aims, and this, too, is essential. Without that friction, the needs of unique individuals become subject to the utilitarian calculus. The result is avoidable illness and death. Likewise, concern for one life may lead to the death of many. It's a question of balance through conflict, an unavoidable aspect of human behavioral dynamics.
When mass business closure was announced, the refusal of public health authorities to include the well-documented effect of poverty on health in the utilitarian calculus, was something I observed with a great deal of misgiving.
At first, I was astonished and thought a correction would be immediately forthcoming. When the inevitably harmful effects of non-medical intervention were reported, they were dismissed or shouted down, whichever tactic the reputation of the reporting entity required.
Preemptive unnecessary intubation was the first clue, followed shortly thereafter by observing many local private practices forced into bankruptcy and closure by outwardly imposed denial of care.
Those small practices were avatars for the widening gyre of what was simultaneously happening to countless other non-medical businesses. At the at the tail of the Pareto distribution curve, operates a numerical majority of income-generating operations that disproportionately fail with small diminution of monetary velocity. This is the "domino effect" leading to misery and want.
The conclusion became inescapable that it was individualized self-interested expression of fear on the part of those wielding power, that led to abdication of responsibility for inclusion of all medical harm within the utilitarian calculus.
More concisely, they cared more about their personal safety than that of even the collective, let alone any individual other than themselves and their inner circle of dependents.
Sacrifice of food, shelter and health for thee, but not for me.
To your everyday example of mammography, we can add intrusive treatment of what amounts to a glacial progression beyond a presentation of what functionally amounts to benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Time and trespass upon Doc Prassad's bandwith prevent a deeper discussion of the myriad harms, but in closing, I offer the desperation of lonely older adults and the side affects attendant to SSRI uptake. Accelerated memory loss adds to generalized anxiety about impending loss of autonomy. One of the results of this is DNR advance directives by those losing their will to live.
Politicizing the pandemic response was a criminal act, the way that it transpired. Fear-induced monomania was understandable and forgivable only before any data signals emerged from the noise of the initial panic.
I am in RI and worked at same institution as her (though she did like 3 shifts/month so never really saw her). She was like my Covid nemesis. Her posts and interviews drove me insane. I think it’s funny how you saved all her stupid fucking tweets. She doesn’t even realize how wrong she was and probably wouldn’t care because she got famous and a job a place full of other tribal stupid people.
As I kept reading, I could feel that familiar frustration from the Covid-era bubbling up higher and higher in my throat as the lies just kept on getting bigger and bigger and bigger (yeah, 3 layers of porous cloth is the magical answer🙄) and I almost lost it as she continued encouraging paxlovid and vaccine mandates.😣
I agree, lightning and dry timber is the only way to regain people's trust in top-down government-involved science and medicine. Unfortunately, like the rest of them, I doubt she sees the error of her ways and her credibility is not going to take any hits, so the mistrust is just going to continue. I for one, as a 41 year old wife and mother, know that I will never blindly trust whatever the governmental medical and health bodies claim without doing my own research (and a lot of that info is thanks to people like you who understand it all far better than us lay people, and take the time to explain your analysis), having seen the depth of corruption and greed at play, and which is likely still in play, through far too many obvious lies. Lies of commission (lying about the efficacy and safety of protocol and therapeutics and alternative treatments) and of omission (not telling people about vitamin D levels, exercise, baseline metabolic health to decrease disease severity). I used to be the pusher of the Flu shot every Fall for myself, my husband, and my 5 kids (I already knew the probability of them "guessing" the correct stain for the following year could potentially be as low as 10% but I trusted them!!!!), but after learning how corrupt the Pharmaceutical industry is, and how keeping Vit D levels sufficiently (higher than the current FDA recommended levels) high and exercising does amazing things for one's immune system, I will never again take the not-very-effective flu shot, even when I am older (and I will never push it on my family).
Thinking through all this, I think I actually consider it a blessing that so many of our eyes have been opened by the governmental Covid scandal, so we can see government agencies as they truly are--just flawed humans who might not have our best interest at heart. This empowers us to be our and our family's own advocates for our health, and it has led me to discover who the medical practitioners are that not only have integrity, but are also the "best," because these professional also had the habit of mind to think critically and not blindly follow governmental protocol (which contradicted what medical students themselves learned, basic immunology, in medical school). If that is not a strong argument for smaller government, I don't know what is!! 😂
And another thing Covid showed us, was that the phrase "talk to you doctor" is the worst advice on earth, since we now so clearly see that having an MD beside your name is no guarantee of medical understanding nor intellectual honesty.
The lesson of Covid - for me at least - is that the search for truth is so often absent from the list of factors that form a person's opinions - and that physicians have been THE worst offenders. I've come to see that the creators of Star Trek had a brilliant insight by recognizing that a humanoid who is interested only in fact would indeed be an alien from another planet.
Well said. I do wonder why it seems intellectual dishonesty is so rampant, more so than ever... seems all our Universities have done is created close-minded, egotistical masses!
Wow- maybe she’s enjoying her 15 minutes of fame? How did she graduate from medical school and get her Master’s ? It’s sad that she has any followers at all. I’m guessing that she’s not a lot of fun at parties. Thank you, again, Vinay, for shining the light on this healthcare professional ( I choked on that word). Sunlight is a great disinfectant as they say…
Is Megan Ranney a paid shill for Pfizer? I know the more likely explanation is that she should be counted as a "naive sucker".
I'd like to know why supposed liberals have become such gullible waifs for big business - big pharma? The scary part is that her opinions are promoted without question by the legacy media.
WHAT A NUTJOB. It is hard to believe how many docs out there just will not let it go even today - despite what is right in front of their faces both in the data and the real world. What is especially pathetic is that even if they know they have been wrong they do not have the intellectual honesty to admit it.
I don't think that the epidemiology she learned is different than the one I learned. She just can't separate her professional opinion from her emotions and political beliefs.
So true, I think that is true of far too many people nowadays. It astonished me how so many of the policies coming from the top went against basic immunology, and that so many doctors just ignored what should have been "common medical sense" and dismissed natural immunity. I think our Universities are to blame, they truly don't teach people to think critically and learn how to agree to disagree, they turn everything to a moral, black and white battle to the point where University-educated people won't engage in honest discourse about hot topics because their sense of moral outrage clouds their judgement.
"University-educated people won't engage in honest discourse about hot topics because their sense of moral outrage clouds their judgement."
A strange morality indeed, Aimee, is that which abdicates a responsibility to evaluate balance of harm beyond monomaniacal pursuit of self-interest.
Heightened sense of personal risk does indeed cloud judgement, but is the resulting insolvency intellectual or moral?
I don't disagree with your very perceptive observation, but after decades of working in risk management, I've come to realize that the majority of expressed outrage is offered in an effort to obscure what is, at its root, seldom more than avid pursuit of self interest.
The entire idea of public health presupposes a large degree of selflessness, which looks good on paper, but is very difficult in practice. What benefits the greater good is not always what benefits the individual patient - mammography is a great example.
Poignantly observed and highly astute comment, RNK1409.
There are two primary categories; public and private.
Public health is, and must be, coldly utilitarian, entirely unconcerned with the fate of any one individual. It is essential that it remain solely concerned with the collective.
Private health is and must remain entirely focused on the care of individuals, regardless of the collective. It cannot attend to individual outcomes with a "paint by numbers" approach.
The two categories are often in conflict with each other's aims, and this, too, is essential. Without that friction, the needs of unique individuals become subject to the utilitarian calculus. The result is avoidable illness and death. Likewise, concern for one life may lead to the death of many. It's a question of balance through conflict, an unavoidable aspect of human behavioral dynamics.
When mass business closure was announced, the refusal of public health authorities to include the well-documented effect of poverty on health in the utilitarian calculus, was something I observed with a great deal of misgiving.
At first, I was astonished and thought a correction would be immediately forthcoming. When the inevitably harmful effects of non-medical intervention were reported, they were dismissed or shouted down, whichever tactic the reputation of the reporting entity required.
Preemptive unnecessary intubation was the first clue, followed shortly thereafter by observing many local private practices forced into bankruptcy and closure by outwardly imposed denial of care.
Those small practices were avatars for the widening gyre of what was simultaneously happening to countless other non-medical businesses. At the at the tail of the Pareto distribution curve, operates a numerical majority of income-generating operations that disproportionately fail with small diminution of monetary velocity. This is the "domino effect" leading to misery and want.
The conclusion became inescapable that it was individualized self-interested expression of fear on the part of those wielding power, that led to abdication of responsibility for inclusion of all medical harm within the utilitarian calculus.
More concisely, they cared more about their personal safety than that of even the collective, let alone any individual other than themselves and their inner circle of dependents.
Sacrifice of food, shelter and health for thee, but not for me.
To your everyday example of mammography, we can add intrusive treatment of what amounts to a glacial progression beyond a presentation of what functionally amounts to benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Time and trespass upon Doc Prassad's bandwith prevent a deeper discussion of the myriad harms, but in closing, I offer the desperation of lonely older adults and the side affects attendant to SSRI uptake. Accelerated memory loss adds to generalized anxiety about impending loss of autonomy. One of the results of this is DNR advance directives by those losing their will to live.
Politicizing the pandemic response was a criminal act, the way that it transpired. Fear-induced monomania was understandable and forgivable only before any data signals emerged from the noise of the initial panic.
I am in RI and worked at same institution as her (though she did like 3 shifts/month so never really saw her). She was like my Covid nemesis. Her posts and interviews drove me insane. I think it’s funny how you saved all her stupid fucking tweets. She doesn’t even realize how wrong she was and probably wouldn’t care because she got famous and a job a place full of other tribal stupid people.
We need protection from people like her...oof!!
GENIUS article!
As I kept reading, I could feel that familiar frustration from the Covid-era bubbling up higher and higher in my throat as the lies just kept on getting bigger and bigger and bigger (yeah, 3 layers of porous cloth is the magical answer🙄) and I almost lost it as she continued encouraging paxlovid and vaccine mandates.😣
I agree, lightning and dry timber is the only way to regain people's trust in top-down government-involved science and medicine. Unfortunately, like the rest of them, I doubt she sees the error of her ways and her credibility is not going to take any hits, so the mistrust is just going to continue. I for one, as a 41 year old wife and mother, know that I will never blindly trust whatever the governmental medical and health bodies claim without doing my own research (and a lot of that info is thanks to people like you who understand it all far better than us lay people, and take the time to explain your analysis), having seen the depth of corruption and greed at play, and which is likely still in play, through far too many obvious lies. Lies of commission (lying about the efficacy and safety of protocol and therapeutics and alternative treatments) and of omission (not telling people about vitamin D levels, exercise, baseline metabolic health to decrease disease severity). I used to be the pusher of the Flu shot every Fall for myself, my husband, and my 5 kids (I already knew the probability of them "guessing" the correct stain for the following year could potentially be as low as 10% but I trusted them!!!!), but after learning how corrupt the Pharmaceutical industry is, and how keeping Vit D levels sufficiently (higher than the current FDA recommended levels) high and exercising does amazing things for one's immune system, I will never again take the not-very-effective flu shot, even when I am older (and I will never push it on my family).
Thinking through all this, I think I actually consider it a blessing that so many of our eyes have been opened by the governmental Covid scandal, so we can see government agencies as they truly are--just flawed humans who might not have our best interest at heart. This empowers us to be our and our family's own advocates for our health, and it has led me to discover who the medical practitioners are that not only have integrity, but are also the "best," because these professional also had the habit of mind to think critically and not blindly follow governmental protocol (which contradicted what medical students themselves learned, basic immunology, in medical school). If that is not a strong argument for smaller government, I don't know what is!! 😂
And another thing Covid showed us, was that the phrase "talk to you doctor" is the worst advice on earth, since we now so clearly see that having an MD beside your name is no guarantee of medical understanding nor intellectual honesty.
Thank you, Vinay!
As someone who fights forest fires for a living - I really enjoyed post - keep up the good good fight
And thank you for your service!
The lesson of Covid - for me at least - is that the search for truth is so often absent from the list of factors that form a person's opinions - and that physicians have been THE worst offenders. I've come to see that the creators of Star Trek had a brilliant insight by recognizing that a humanoid who is interested only in fact would indeed be an alien from another planet.
Well said. I do wonder why it seems intellectual dishonesty is so rampant, more so than ever... seems all our Universities have done is created close-minded, egotistical masses!
Dr. Ranney must not have read the Cochrane data.
She read it and pronounced it wrong.
Dr Ranney may not be able to read...
Certainly can't think😝
She is not be illiterate.
But INNUMERACY is just as rampant among "scientists" and "medical/healthcare" professionals.
Dr. Ranney is a quack..
Wow- maybe she’s enjoying her 15 minutes of fame? How did she graduate from medical school and get her Master’s ? It’s sad that she has any followers at all. I’m guessing that she’s not a lot of fun at parties. Thank you, again, Vinay, for shining the light on this healthcare professional ( I choked on that word). Sunlight is a great disinfectant as they say…
Is Megan Ranney a paid shill for Pfizer? I know the more likely explanation is that she should be counted as a "naive sucker".
I'd like to know why supposed liberals have become such gullible waifs for big business - big pharma? The scary part is that her opinions are promoted without question by the legacy media.
I lost count how many times I rolled my eyes while reading that!
😆
The propaganda they were spoon fed was IMMENSE.
What shocked me was how the supposedly "educated" masses blindly just ate it up!! I think people trust corporate media way too much.
Oh. My. God.
I would not let this Dr. near me or mine with a ten foot pole. She needs help.
She needs her license reviewed. At least take remedial immunology.
Deranged. Oh so very sad.
Just saw Matt's comment using deranged as well. Great minds ;)
An amazing example of the unscientific fear mongering rhetoric we have all been exposed too. As if the "worried Well" weren't worried enough.
WHAT A NUTJOB. It is hard to believe how many docs out there just will not let it go even today - despite what is right in front of their faces both in the data and the real world. What is especially pathetic is that even if they know they have been wrong they do not have the intellectual honesty to admit it.