Posted on 10/12/2022 5:28:50 AM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
I’m not sure the first amendment issue is the best argument. The Supreme Court had recognized limitations on the first amendment not being absolute. I would be concerned that the argument maybe that misinformation would be akin to the proverbial yelling fire in a crowded theater.
While this law is clearly immoral on its face and government overreach, I would tend to think the better argument is that there is already a pathway for relief in a malpractice suite. If a physician commits the act of malpractice which would clearly include misinformation, the remedy would be a civil lawsuit. No need for this law which would be capricious and whimsically enforced.
I think this is the dagger argument in the heart of a court challenge to this law.
Doctors who were okay with endorsing Deep State’s CoupFlu diktats likely won’t complain about being muzzled by the state.
It provides them cover.
They’ll welcome it.
Best thing to do: Eat right and exercise to reduce your risk of having to see a so-called healthcare professional.
The problem with the law is the definition of “misinformation”.
If (you are a licensed MD) and a patient comes to you with treatable breast cancer, and you tell her to try garlic, and she dies of metastatic disease 3 years later, you are going to lose your license.
There ARE garlic proponents, but none of them are MDs, and while it’s frustrating to us that nothing happens to them, well, them’s the rules of the game.
Malpractice trials have always had the “respectable minority” defense - if you did something that a majority of MDs do not, as long as there is a “respectable minority” who practice as you do, you should be good to go.
What this law does is to eliminate the “respectable minority” concept, to enthrone consensus instead.
Consensus in science, or medicine, isn’t all that common. But the forces pushing for consensus (insurance companies, Medicare, hospital systems) all want a standard which can be applied in (almost) all cases - because it’s cheaper.
Once you see consensus documents coming from someone or something which is paying the bills - you can be sure it’s all about the Benjamins.
Precisely what I do. Also, I do meditation to calm the mind and decrease cortisol in the body.
Hey California ... aren’t you glad you didn’t get rid of Gavin Nobrain ... I mean Newsom when you had the chance?
Doctors are the educated people who DETERMINE information.
How does a government bureaucrat with a high school diploma know what is ‘misinformation’?
Crap like this does not end well for people in government. History is filled with bloody endings of tyrannical government types. Newsom and Democrats better change course quickly.
See my tagline
I tend to agree - to a degree. Because doctors are licensed, they don’t have free speech. I used to be a real estate agent. We were licensed. If I said, in an ad, that a house was in a homogenous neighborhood, or said it had a “family room”, that was forbidden. I could have lost my license. But the average person can say it at will.
So the key is the use of the word “consensus” in the statement. That is patently absurd. Those who embraced the consensus, kicked a rather famous inventor out of the Catholic church a few centuries ago because he disagreed with the consensus.
OTOH, if the doctor really IS giving deadly disinformation, that is what civil lawsuits are for, as you pointed out.
This is just another reason to get out of California.
I’ve taken up yoga. That helps me slow down, improves my breathing, relaxes me.
I’ve had it with medical professionals.
I have infinitely more respect for used car dealers than our de facto NHS.
Bull****.
They've got it. They're too gutless to speak.
As for risking their licenses, if they'd stuck together and spoke out about what Deep State was doing, what was Deep State going to do?!
Fire them all?!
Unfortunately for us all, they've refused to challenge Deep State.
Note to any docs who refuse to bow to Deep State: Here's a deal...Agree to treat me, I'll pay in cash and sign any liability waiver you like. If Deep State yanks your paper, I'd still see you for consults because I'd want your opinion as a trust but verify if I have to see one of Deep State's docs.
The Church punished Galileo for his ‘misinformation,’ religious organizations and government don’t tolerate disagreement.
Translated:
In any such states - in this case, California - the government dictates what you are told regarding your health and the health/healthcare of your loved ones.
In other words, in those states medical advice from any cited licensed professionals cannot be trusted to be in the best interest of the patient.
They haven’t passed such laws in my state, but I ceased trusting doctors years ago when I was told that my condition was permanent and that I should seek ‘psychological help’.
I have since cured myself. Someday I’ll publish...IF I regain my motivation to do so (the outreach I undertook was sorely demoralizing as to the mindset of the general public and I remain withdrawn on the project, mindfully making notes for a comprehensive rewrite).
Good response.
Gavin’s law will delete available choices of treatment.
I think we should declare that the constitution does not apply to California and let them pass all the crazy laws they want and have to live with them.
That’s got a rank in the top 10 of the most annoying websites I’ve been subjected to.
Websites like that are what should be declared a crime.
Supposedly the point of yoga is to prepare the body for meditation.
I do both, but meditation far more often.
Whatever works.
Just over a year ago the official party line was that the vaccinations were 100% effective in preventing COVID. If this legislation had existed then, doctors would have been punished by the State for reporting evidence that this was untrue.
Weren’t some fellows treated rather rudely when they suggested the world may not be flat?
Hmmm. What goes around comes around.
“Misinformation’ means false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”
When, in true science, there is an official consensus, then science has ended and mere orthodixy has taken over. Cancelling dissent in scientific matters, cancels science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.