Good... any medical professional pushing Covid falsehoods needs to be stripped of their license and sent for psych evaluation. Doctor loses license, must have psych evaluation for COVID falsehoods, board says https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article257335847.html A doctor with decades of experience can’t practice medicine after her license was temporarily suspended over complaints that she shared coronavirus misinformation, according to a Maine licensing board. The board has ordered her to undergo a neuropsychological evaluation, it said. Dr. Meryl J. Nass, who got a license to practice medicine in Maine in 1997, had her license “immediately” suspended for 30 days after a board investigation and review of complaints against her on Jan. 12, according to a suspension order from the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine. Nass, who’s an internist in Ellsworth, must “submit” to an evaluation by a “Board-selected psychologist” on Feb. 1, the board’s evaluation order issued Jan. 11 said. “I have no comment about submitting to a neuropsych exam, except that the board ordered me to do so on shaky grounds,” Nass told McClatchy News, adding that she’s had her license for a total of 41 years. “The information received by the Board demonstrates that Dr. Nass is or may be unable to practice medicine with reasonable skill and safety to her patients by reason of mental illness, alcohol intemperance, excessive use of drugs, narcotics, or as a result of a mental or physical condition interfering with the competent practice of medicine,” the evaluation order states. The complaints against Nass include how the board was told she engaged in “public dissemination of ‘misinformation’” about COVID-19 and vaccinations “via a video interview and on her website,” the board said about the October 26, 2021 complaint. It lists several comments Nass made that were subject to the board’s investigation. Roughly 10 days later, the board got another complaint about Nass “spreading COVID and COVID vaccination misinformation on Twitter,” it said. Nass called “disinformation and misinformation” a “fuzzy concept” that the board hasn’t defined for her, she said. “There’s no law that says doctors can’t express their educated opinion on any subject.” Other grounds for her suspension include how Nass treated COVID-19 patients with Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, according to the board. On Dec. 19, a physician notified the board that Nass diagnosed a sick, unvaccinated patient “‘over the phone’” with COVID and prescribed 5 days of Ivermectin,” the board said. This patient had to be hospitalized for COVID-19. With another patient, Nass is accused of emailing the board about another COVID-19 patient saying she was “forced” to “provide misinformation” in order to obtain hydroxychloroquine. The board said Nass told them during a Zoom meeting that she “lied and said the patient had Lyme disease and so the pharmacist dispensed the medication only because I lied.” On Dec. 31, a Certified Nurse Midwife reported that Nass prescribed one of her pregnant patients who tested COVID-19 positive with hydroxychloroquine earlier in 2021, according to the board. (More about this medical clown at above url)
So now you support medical malpractice..... because holding doctors accountable for poor care and medical misinformation is "cancel culture" in your eyes. Good to know this -- you can probably your inane "Cancel Culture" definition across a host of other professions (e.g. the civil engineer whose bridges always collapse) and other workplace situations (e.g. employee being fired for non-performance). Yep... we can now remind you of your definition of 'Cancel Culture" continually when it comes to holding politicians and others accountable.
Got it ... when you agree with it, you call it "accountability." When you disagree, you call it "cancel culture."
So let's get back to basics. Did a group of people (e.g. a medical board) raise an online mob, have people protesting at her office, doxed her information so people protested outside her home, vandalized her property and cause regular threats of violence to be directed at her. Or did they simply perform a proper medical review of the treatment she had been providing to her patients as per state law and guidelines that have been in place since the early 1800s. It is important to understand the difference between Cancel Culture and normal professional/business practices for regulation and review. Get back to me when you understand the difference when it comes to applying accountability to people for their actions in their jobs or elected offices --- and applying cancel culture to them. I provided many examples over time clearly demonstrating the difference.
It's just a question GWB; since you seem to be all over the map with what cancellations you agree with: Case in point: https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-to-conservative-channel.364193/#post-5523354 Where is the medical malpractice there?
Now, the medical board did no such things. But what do you do when criminals not on the board do such things? As I've stated in the past, you lump everyone into one criminal basket due to the actions of a minority. In this example, there is not enough interest to see the mob effect you like to cast over all protestors, both legal and unlawful. It's also important to understand that just because some protestors are being unlawful, we don't conclude all protestors are unlawful. Get back to me when you recognized that the actions of a few do not necessarily represent the actions of all, or most.
Once again... this is a business decision. If carrying a channel undermines your brand.... or the channel is not in high demand (which OAN is not) then you are going to replace it with another channel in higher demand with the limited bandwidth your satellite TV service has allocated.
Get back to us when you understand how online-based channel culture works in the modern era and how it leads to physical violence many times against the targets of it. There are clear lines between proper accountability and channel culture. At this point, I believe it will be necessary for courts to properly define the lines when it comes to protecting those who hold public office. There is a difference between a parent peacefully protesting at a public school board meeting and the parent raising an online mob to violently protest outside the school board member's house.