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.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Māori electorate
Electorate
Electorate
Response rates from 258 Classical Liberalism voters.
35% Yes |
65% No |
32% Yes |
48% No |
2% Yes, this will decrease the amount of misinformation patients receive |
10% No, but the doctors should be required to disclose that the advice contradicts contemporary scientific consensus |
0% Yes, and the doctors should also lose their medical license |
6% No, scientific consensus can quickly change and patients should be allowed to try unconventional ideas |
2% No, only when the advice was proven to harm the patient |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 258 Classical Liberalism voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 258 Classical Liberalism voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Classical Liberalism voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9FV9PNR1yr1Y
covid advice was misinformation, and bad science based on cooperate greed and gain. doctors lost license by saying not to get the shot which is 100% understandable
@9DVZLJ31yr1Y
This should be determined on a case-by-case basis
@9DQR9YC1yr1Y
Need to consider individual circumstances case bu case
@9DK5XRY1yr1Y
No but doctors should be held responsible if there are any adverse impacts on their patients who took the advice.
@9DGGGXJ1yr1Y
No, as so long as the advice is found to be reasonable and is in the patients best interest, not the Governments.
@9DF8H581yr1Y
Yes, they are supposed to protect lives not put them at risk. This pandemic many have aided in causing a lot of harm and division.
@9D87P921yr1Y
Yes as long as it did not prevent practitioners putting forward evidence based questions or considering reasonable alternatives eg. dessicated thyroid vs synthetic T4, where there is strong evidence to support discussion and putting options forward; in regards to spreading false or misinformation such as those sadly shared about COVID-19 this is a definite yes!
@9D85JWT1yr1Y
Should only penalize if it is clearly is not the best interest of the patient.
Either way the doctor shall disclose that this is not contemporary scientific consensus.
More importantly, if a alternative is disused the doctor shall give evidence why this method is effective.
