Covid and the Media

[andyguitar]

Do you think the media in your country are telling the truth about Covid 19?

 

[Wishful]

I can't choose because I have no idea what the media is saying about Covid. No TV; I don't bother with news sites, so I really have no idea what's going on in the world. I'm just watching the snow melt.

 

[ljimbo423]

Do you think the media in your country are telling the truth about Covid 19?

I think for the most part, the media I've been watching here in the USA, are telling the truth. However, that truth is often unbalanced and one sided. So even though I feel like they are being honest and truthful, I don't feel like I'm getting the whole truth.

I've been mainly watching one channel online because I don't have cable. They have been constantly criticizing our government and very often with good reason.

I know another TV station that I haven't been watching but have in the past, would be doing just the opposite. Consistently praising what our president and government are doing.

Like I said though, they each have a biased view, therefore I feel like I'm not getting the whole truth. If anybody knows of a TV station here in the USA that is giving a balanced view of covid 19, could you share that with me?

I don't bother with news sites, so I really have no idea what's going on in the world. I'm just watching the snow melt.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Like I said though, they each have a biased view, therefore I feel like I'm not getting the whole truth. If anybody knows of a TV station here in the USA that is giving a balanced view of covid 19, could you share that with me?

I don't really watch channels any longer. We You Tube. You go forth and find: a whole variety of sources...who often comment on other sources...in an endless feeding frenzy of opinion. Or listen to the actual lecture. Or read the actual paper.

I think the more regular news outlets are not weaving this story together into the bigger picture. But that will eventually become clearer. Testing and a shot- may actually NOT be the panacea we long for.

 

[Hip]

Do you think the media in your country are telling the truth about Covid 19?

That's a very broad question. There are so many aspects to the coronavirus pandemic. Which particular aspects do you have in mind?

The death rate?
The number of deaths?
The death rate in different age groups?
The number of medical personnel who have died from coronavirus while tending to patients?
The degree of overload in hospital ICUs?
The shortage of masks and protective equipment?
The efficacy of various drugs against coronavirus?
The predictions of the pandemic mathematical models?
The symptoms of coronavirus?
The possibility that immunity to coronavirus will only be short lived?
The fact that there are 6 further coronaviruses in bats, just waiting to jump to humans?
The efficacy of masks for the general public?
The efficacy of social distancing?
The efficacy of lockdown?

 

[andyguitar]

Any of them.

 

[Hip]

Any of them.

So for example, if I feel that the media are telling the truth in 99% of the many different aspects of coronavirus, but may be erroneously presenting 1% of these aspects, how would I vote in this poll?

Some guidance to define what is meant by telling the truth would be helpful. Do you mean everything is a lie, or do you mean there might be a few small areas where they are not telling the truth?




Also, when you ask are the media telling the truth, do you mean are the media correctly and faithfully representing the views and data coming out from various authoritative sources — the scientists, medical professionals, studies and government officials. That's the media's job, after all.

Or are you asking whether the media are themselves deliberately misrepresenting or distorting what these sources say? Which they definitely should not be doing, as the quality media should not fabricate, they should only report what authoritative sources tell them.

 

[Wayne]

I'm just watching the snow melt.

@Wishful -- I heard a story once about a couple (from the "North") who were on a trip through Arkansas. An unusual snowstorm came in, dumping several inches of snow. It made for hazardous traveling, and the "Northern" couple were pretty frustrated that they weren't seeing any of the snowplows they were used to hitting the roads as soon as the snow fell.

They finally made it to a place to pull over where a few of the locals were congregating. The Northerner apparently couldn't help himself, and began to grumble about the lack of snow removal, and such. As I heard it, the locals listened without interrupting. To the point about the lack of snow removal, one of them very slowly and cordially replied with something like, "Well, the way we see it, if the Lord decides to bring snow to these here parts, we just wait until the Lord decides to take it away."

 

[Wayne]

Do you think the media in your country are telling the truth about Covid 19?

There's no major media in the U.S. (including PBS) which dares to report on health issues that don't conform almost 100% with "accepted, standard medical care". One major reason for that is because of the billions of dollars in drug advertising that almost every one of these outlets depend on.

Which of course means that when it comes to something like this major worldwide pandemic, about the only coverage you're going to see discussed is that which is drug or vaccine oriented. It's really sad that the pharma companies even have PBS refusing to do things like interview people from major Naturopathic organizations. BTW, PBS is the non-profit and partially government funded Public Broadcasting System).

Media outlets do give information I believe to be credible on a number of aspects of this pandemic. But when it comes to the vital information they could disseminate that could profoundly help people better protect themselves, and better treat themselves if they became infected, they all get a failing grade, as in a major F.

My own belief is that if they did even a good job at disseminating some of this information, most of the major consequences of this pandemic could be over in pretty short order.

 

[Tammy]

Or are you asking whether the media are themselves deliberately misrepresenting or distorting what these sources say? Which they definitely should not be doing, as the quality media should not fabricate, they should only report what authoritative sources tell them.

Who do you include as an authoritative source? Even authoritative sources don't necessarily all agree with each other.

 

[Hip]

It's really sad that the pharma companies even have PBS refusing to do things like interview people from major Naturopathic organizations.

Naturopathic organizations never test the efficacy of their suggestions, they usually just tell everyone that they will work, but offer no evidence. Even the clinical trial for intravenous vitamin C as a coronavirus treatment is not being performed by naturopathic organizations, but by the medical profession.

By contrast, all the pharmaceutical companies who suggest their drugs might help are right now performing clinical trials to test these suggestions, or are helping to fund trials. If the drugs fail to help, the failure is reported; and if they work, the success is reported. This is exactly what you want: you want some suggestions about what might work, and you want those suggestions to be tested in clinical trials, so that you can eliminate the failures and uncover what works, if indeed anything does.

Naturopathic organizations and supplement manufacturers rarely do anything like this. I think they should learn to do so. I suspect there may be some supplements which can help with coronavirus, but unless someone tests them, we will not have any evidence that proves their efficacy.

 

[Tammy]

By contrast, all the pharmaceutical companies who suggest their drugs might help are right now performing clinical trials to test these suggestions. If the drugs fail to help, the failure is reported; and if they work, the success is reported.

Maybe..............maybe not. Personally, I wouldn't bet on full disclosure by big Pharm. I don't put my full trust in them . Big pharm has brought harm to many.

 

[Hip]

Who do you include as an authoritative source? Even authoritative sources don't all agree. Is the government included?

That often comes down to the judgement of a journalist and his or her editor. In fact, that's one of the most important skills of a journalist, to discern which sources are high quality reliable ones, and which are suspect. Journalists and editors do not always get it right, but they certainly try very very hard, because the reputation of their newspaper, TV channel, etc is at stake.

There's nothing more embarrassing for a newspaper or journalist to print something which later is shown to be bunkum. In my previous life before ME/CFS, I used to go out with a journalist for 10 years, so I've seen how the business works.

 

[Wayne]

If the drugs fail to help, the failure is reported; and if they work, the success is reported.

@Hip, One good starting point would be to look at the history of Vioxx, and the tens of thousands of people that Pfizer knew were dieing of it (while they fought discontinuation efforts), and then multiply that fiasco many times over.

But that is sort of beside the point. You point out the "shortcomings" of Naturopathic Medicine, and how it compares so unfavorably to conventional medicine. I'm just going to mention a few things: First, these are two totally different approaches to health care, and I personally think the Naturopathic approach is far superior.

The main reasons for my belief is that the therapies they recommend are almost always FAR safer, FAR less espensive, and FAR more effective. I'm going to give just a brief example of one of the failures of conventional medicine, and would seem to refute what I quoted in your post. It's a testimonial I just ran into online:

Kelly from Pasadena, Ca​

November 4, 2018 at 1:33 pm​

"Accutane is awful, it had my niece thinking of ways to kill her brothers and sisters and when she stopped the Accutane she had Obsessive Compulsive Disorder her hands bled she washed them so many times."​

​

This is just so typical. Modern drugs that are supposed to have passed the most sophisticated scientific rigor ever known to mankind, literally destroying people's brains (and bodies). But that all seems to be OK, because it's "scientifically" backed???

Then add the tens of millions of people that have been put on antidepressants that have NEVER been shown to be more effective than placebo. Doesn't it ever make you wonder how "science" got so off track that it's willing to literally sacrifice the brains, and destroy the lives of so many people?

What about the tens of thousands of people that have been crippled from using fluoroquinilone antibiotics? For no good reason! In almost all cases where they're prescribed, incredibly low-cost effective alternatives are available. And these are the kinds of recommendations made most often by Naturopathic Physicians.

What about the hundreds of thousands of people who die every year from medical errors and taking prescription drugs as directed? But that all seems to be OK by conventional medicine standards. But if even a single person appears to have died from some kind of Naturopathic remedy, conventional medicine and their allies in the media hype the story up in almost unbelievable ways. Kind of reminds me of something Stalin was supposed to have said: When one person dies it's a tragedy; when a million die, it's a statistic.

What about the tens of thousands of who have reported significant injury and death from the HPV vaccination? (including many who developed ME/CFS from it). Or the hundreds of thousands who have died from opioid drug prescriptions? What about many people, especially senior citiziens, who are taking any where from a half dozen to a dozen (or more) prescription drugs at one time, in a manner that was never "scientifically" studied?

Or the tens of millions that needlessly take statin drugs? Or the half million who have gall bladder surgeries, of which most could have been prevented? How about the many people who develop ME/CFS, only to be told by their conventional doctor it's all in their head, or "just depression"? Naturopathic Physicians literally never say those kinds of things, because they are oriented to start looking for root causes. In this respect, they are MUCH more intelligent than "scienced-based" conventional medical doctors. -- I could literally go on and on.

Not to say that there are no benefits to be had, but going to a conventional doctor, and putting our lives in the hands of our current medical system is one of the most dangerous things a person can do, in my estimation anyway. From my perspective, major aspects of conventional health care is not at all based on science, but much more so on greed and manipulation. And in some cases, just plain ol' ignorance.

I once heard a story about a prominent oxygenation health practitioner from Europe who had the opportunity to ask the head of the AMA why various oxygenation therapies weren't used in the U.S., especially since they were so safe, effective, and low cost. The head of the AMA apparently replied by saying he didn't really know anything about these kinds of therapies.

When it was explained to him how they are widely used in Europe, the AMA head replied by asking whether he would be willing to submit these therapies to randomized double blind placebo control studies, which he of course considered the "gold standard". His answer (which likely stunned the AMA head): He said there was no way he would submit them to these studies, because it would entail preventing people from having oxygenation treatments that have proved the test of time over the past several decades.

And so it is. "Never the twain shall meet". (Rudyard Kipling)

I'll repeat my earlier assertion, that the media is essentially being corrupted by the negative influence of pharmaceutical companies, and conventional medicine's drug and vaccine oriented approaches to the COVID-19 pandemic. Of course I haven't done any surveys, but I would bet that literally every practicing ND believes as I do; that MUCH could be done to counter this pandemic, in ways that are way cheaper, safer, and more effective than the current conventional approach. -- And ND's should most certainly be given a place at the table--and heard!

 

[percyval577]

I didn´t vote, because I think that the media are rather too short sighted to have an adequate idea how to handle it properly, though they may be not that bad that they wouldn´t (like to) detect things being very wrong.

So I think they don´t report the truth, but they do not lie either.

I stopped once more watching news, it´s simply too stupid an approach.

 

[Pearshaped]

I dont trust the media in my country bec almost all media sources belong to the same people who dont share my political view.And I see weird things in Germany:
there is this virologist who,very carefully questioned if the total lockdown really would have been necessary,since he and his colegue went from covid-Household to covid-household,they tested sufaces,doornobs,bathrooms,and the pets vor the virus.They did not find ONE living virus anywhere in these households.Now,the media is tearing him apart.IDK what reason they have.But sounds spanish to me.

 

[IThinkImTurningJapanese]

But sounds spanish to me.

What did the Spaniards do?

 

[andyguitar]

Also, when you ask are the media telling the truth, do you mean are the media correctly and faithfully representing the views and data coming out from various authoritative sources — the scientists, medical professionals, studies and government officials

That's a question for those who are voting. If you want to know what people think about a particular subject that is being covered by the media then starting a thread specifically about that might be worth a try. As to what I mean...….if you ask those around you the question you usually get a reason from them as to why they do or don't think the media is telling the truth. Depends what aspect of all this the person is most interested in.

 

[Hip]

That's a question for those who are voting.

But it makes a difference where a misrepresentation of the truth arises.

If it is the scientists who have got something wrong, then it's not the media's fault; the media would just be faithfully reporting what a scientific study or a scientific expert has said. The media cannot be accused of lying or distorting the truth if they have only faithfully reported what the experts have said.

So from the wording of your question, if the error starts with the science, and is not the fault of the media (who are only just faithfully reporting the science), then I suggest people should answer "Yes, the media are being truthful".


Sometimes the media does have an agenda of its own, like the way the it often will praise and build up a famous person for a couple of years, always publishing flattering articles about them; and then suddenly the media will turn on that famous person, and start publishing very critical and cutting articles. So sometimes the media can have its own views and agenda on a subject.

 

[Hip]

But that is sort of beside the point. You point out the "shortcomings" of Naturopathic Medicine, and how it compares so unfavorably to conventional medicine. I'm just going to mention a few things:

There are many shortcomings regarding the clinical trial testing of pharmaceutical drugs, and Dr Ben Goldacre has been a good critic of these shortcomings. But that does not change the fact that naturopathic organizations do not organize any clinical trials at all. Supplement companies sometimes fund clinical trials, but not nearly enough.

It is flaw in naturopathic medicine, because it means many statements of naturopathic medicine have never been tested to check their validity. And when there are studies performed on supplements, it is usually medical scientists who perform them, not naturopathic organizations.

So you would not expect the media to report much on suggested alternative treatments for coronavirus, unless those treatments were undergoing tests of efficacy in clinical trials. But where such trials are taking place, then the media do report it. For example: Can Vitamin D help fight against the coronavirus? Scientist investigate after study found taking the supplement saw 50 per cent fall in chest infections

I'll repeat my earlier assertion, that the media is essentially being corrupted by the negative influence of pharmaceutical companies, a

In the UK media, the problem has been a double standard in relation to conventional medicine and alternative medicine, a double standard which favors alternative medicine over conventional medicine.

In the UK, when it comes to conventional medicine, journalists apply strict rules, and everything they publish must be backed by evidence from clinical trials. And righty so.

But when it come to alternative medicine, journalists suddenly lose their critical eye, and will publish anything without scrutiny. For example, they might publish a long detailed article on a detoxification diet, even though there is little evidence that such detox diets do any good. But because detox diets are fashionable (or were fashionable), the newspapers published lots glowing articles.

Alternative medicine in the UK media is treated more like lifestyle articles, and so naturopaths and other alternative medicine groups can make any claim, and those claims are rarely questioned by journalists.

Things have improved though. Over the last 20 years Dr Ben Goldacre has been critical of unfounded alternative medicine claims in newspapers, so I think these days UK newspapers are slightly more cautious about publishing unproven alternative health treatments.

I am not sure if this double standard was also present in US media. Does the US media publish glowing articles on unproven things like detox diets and so forth?



I should add that, if my memory is correct, the hay-day of these glowing alternative medicine articles in UK newspapers was in the era from about 1990 to 2010. Before that era, you did not see as much alternative medicine in newspapers; and at present, there is not so much alternative medicine as there used to be.