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.
39% Yes |
61% No |
32% Yes |
40% No |
6% Yes, this will decrease the amount of misinformation patients receive |
8% No, but the doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus |
2% Yes, and the doctors should also lose their medical license |
7% No, only when the advice was proven to harm the patient |
5% No, scientific consensus can quickly change and patients should be allowed to try unconventional ideas |
See how support for each position on “Medical Consensus” has changed over time for 14.2k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Medical Consensus” has changed over time for 14.2k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9BJF3B412mos12MO
Yes, but only when the advice was proven to harm the patient
@9BP88YF12mos12MO
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.
@9GX62WV5mos5MO
No, only if the advice was proven to harm the patient. Doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts scientific consensus.
@9FF9SFF7mos7MO
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
@9GFPK3Z6mos6MO
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
@99LGRGT1yr1Y
No, but patients should be made aware of the contemporary scientific consensus so that patients are well informed to make their own decisions.
Explore other topics that are important to America voters.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Active 1 day agoDiversity training is any program designed to facilitate positive intergroup interaction, reduce prejudice and discrimination, and generally teach individuals who are different from others how to work together effectively. On April 22, 2022, Florida Governor DeSantis signed into law the “Individual…
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
The United Nations defines human rights violations as deprivation of life; torture, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; slavery and forced labor; arbitrary arrest or detention; arbitrary interference with privacy; war propaganda; discrimination; and advocacy of racial or religious hatred. In…
