@ISIDEWITHQuestionsHealthcareStarted 2yrs agoActive 1 day ago

Should medical boards penalize doctors who give health advice that contradicts contemporary scientific consensus?

In 2022 lawmakers in the U.S. state of California passed legislation which empowered the state medical board to discipline doctors in the state who “disseminate misinformation or disinformation” that contradicts the “contemporary scientific consensus” or is “contrary to the standard of care.” Proponents of the law argue that doctors should be punished for spreading misinformation and that there is clear consensus on certain issues such as that apples contain sugar, measles is caused by a virus, and Down syndrome is caused by a chromosomal abnormality. Opponents argue that the law limits freedom of speech and scientific “consensus” often changes within mere months.

+
Expand
+ Settings

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 34.4k America voters.

38%
Yes
62%
No
32%
Yes
40%
No
5%
Yes, this will decrease the amount of misinformation patients receive
11%
No, but the doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus
1%
Yes, and the doctors should also lose their medical license
7%
No, only when the advice was proven to harm the patient
4%
No, scientific consensus can quickly change and patients should be allowed to try unconventional ideas

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 34.4k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 34.4k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from America voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9GX62WV from North Carolina  answered…1yr1Y

No, only if the advice was proven to harm the patient. Doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts scientific consensus.

 @9BJF3B4 from Virginia  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but only when the advice was proven to harm the patient

 @9GWKTHP from Arizona  answered…1yr1Y

They should not. Scientific consensus about transgenderism and such has been proven WRONG, and yet everyone acts like it is true.

 @9BP88YF from Indiana  answered…2yrs2Y

No, only when the advice was proven to harm the patient and the doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus.

 @9WQGF95 from New York  answered…6mos6MO

No, only when the advice was proven to harm the patient
No, scientific consensus can quickly change and patients should be allowed to try unconventional ideas
No, but the doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus

 @9H5VH62 from North Carolina  answered…1yr1Y

No, only if the advice was proven to harm the patient, but doctors should be required to disclose that their advice contradicts scientific consensus

 @9GFPK3Z from Kansas  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but only when the advice was proven to harm the patient, scientific consensus can change and patients should be allowed to try unconventional ideas

 @9FF9SFF from Washington  answered…2yrs2Y

No, but doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus, this must also be proven not to harm the patient

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6mos6MO

Axis of Desperation: Russia Recruits North Korean Soldiers in Ukraine War

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III confirmed on Wednesday that North Korea had sent troops to Russia to join the fight against Ukraine, a major shift in Moscow’s effort to win the war. Mr. Austin called the North’s presence a “very, very serious” escalation that would have ramifications in both Europe and Asia.“What exactly are they doing?” Mr. Austin told reporters at a military base in Italy after a trip to Ukraine. “Left to be seen.” He gave no details about the number of troops already there or the number expected to arrive.Mr. Austin cast President Vladimir V. Putin’s need for North Korean mercenaries as a sign of desperation.“This is an indication that he may be in even more trouble than most people realize,” he said. “He went tin-cupping early on to get additional weapons and materials from the D.P.R.K.,’’ he said, using the abbreviation for Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, “and then from Iran, and now he’s making a move to get more people.”But he said intelligence analysts were still trying to discern whether the troops were moving toward Ukraine.Ukrainian officials insist they are headed there, and Ukraine’s defense minister was quoted on Wednesday saying he expected to see North Korean troops in Kursk, the Russian territory that Ukraine has occupied, in the coming days.Mr. Austin’s statement came as American intelligence officials said they were preparing to release a trove of intelligence, including satellite photographs, that show troop ships moving from North Korea to training areas in Vladivostok on Russia’s east coast and other Russian territory further to the north.For two weeks, there have been reports of the movements, fueled by the Ukrainian and South Korean governments, that more than 12,000 North Koreans were training to fight alongside Russian soldiers.American officials have said they estimate that 2,500 North Korean troops have been dispatched. But they made no estimate of how many more might follow, or even how well they might perform on territory that the North’s conscripts have never fought in, amid fellow fighters who speak a different language.

▲  1410 replies

Active 1wk ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5mos5MO

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1127 replies