It seems to me this is really a scary deal. California AB 2098 now allows the State to take actions against any doctors spreading "mis information or dis information". It specifically refers to Covid so I am unclear if it relates only to Covid or any treatment. What this really means is if you disagree with us we can take your license. Isn't that the definition of State Control. It specifically refers to disagreeing with CDC or FDA recommendations.
Think back over the last 12 months and the number of CDC proclamations that have proven untrue or at least open for disagreement.
. Ventilators are an appropriate treatment
. Remdisivir is a good treatment
. Vaccines will keep you from getting Covid
. Vaccines will keep you from spreading Covid
. Natural immunity doesn't exist with Covid
. Ivermectin and or Hydroxy is a dangerous treatment
. Masks are a better safety measure than a vaccine. [CDC Director Redfield]
. Young children easily spread to Covid to adults
. Schools are a huge incubator for Covid
. Toddlers 2-5 should get vaccinated
. Children 6-12 should also get vaccinated.
I don't really want to debate any specific points above but I would argue ALL of them and likely many more are either untrue or at least open for a healthy debate. If I read the bill correctly if a Dr. gave information contrary to any of the above they could be subject to sanctions and possible disbarment. How do Dr's react to that sort of threat? They toe the line and follow the rules.
For 2 years now every time Fauci, CDC et. al. changes their message we heard "this is a new virus and it is evolving and we are learning as we go". Now a Dr. could get disbarred for offering an alternative. Even my D-i-L who is 100% all in on the party line for Covid says Dr's disagree all the time. They have a 2 year old and she says some say he should get allergy shots others say wait.
What happened to don't get between a Dr. and their patient.
This is a really troubling development and IMO says at least in Ca. the CDC can dictate treatment for all Ca residents.
Think back over the last 12 months and the number of CDC proclamations that have proven untrue or at least open for disagreement.
. Ventilators are an appropriate treatment
. Remdisivir is a good treatment
. Vaccines will keep you from getting Covid
. Vaccines will keep you from spreading Covid
. Natural immunity doesn't exist with Covid
. Ivermectin and or Hydroxy is a dangerous treatment
. Masks are a better safety measure than a vaccine. [CDC Director Redfield]
. Young children easily spread to Covid to adults
. Schools are a huge incubator for Covid
. Toddlers 2-5 should get vaccinated
. Children 6-12 should also get vaccinated.
I don't really want to debate any specific points above but I would argue ALL of them and likely many more are either untrue or at least open for a healthy debate. If I read the bill correctly if a Dr. gave information contrary to any of the above they could be subject to sanctions and possible disbarment. How do Dr's react to that sort of threat? They toe the line and follow the rules.
For 2 years now every time Fauci, CDC et. al. changes their message we heard "this is a new virus and it is evolving and we are learning as we go". Now a Dr. could get disbarred for offering an alternative. Even my D-i-L who is 100% all in on the party line for Covid says Dr's disagree all the time. They have a 2 year old and she says some say he should get allergy shots others say wait.
What happened to don't get between a Dr. and their patient.
This is a really troubling development and IMO says at least in Ca. the CDC can dictate treatment for all Ca residents.
