I know the answer to the question in this blog's title after hearing him speak to this question, but I'm not going to say it here because the entire conversation is so accurately nuanced and worth hearing. I did note however when he referred to studies he trusted they came from research conducted by independent bodies outside of the US. Does that then infer that medical studies done in the US are more likely to be biased, and thus unreliable? He does not explicitly say this, but I will personally say I have seen over and over credible sources say this is indeed the case, and a big part, perhaps the biggest part, of why health care in the US is "broken".
The most obvious problem is studies designed and conducted by any party, near or distant, that stands to benefit in any way by a positive result, is BY DEFINATION, biased, and automatically invalidated. And we've all heard of that "revolving door" problem, right? How the heck does this "little" problem slip through the cracks unnoticed?
Hello NIH, CDC, FDC, agencies "bought" by the US pharma industry. Studies conducted by independent overseas bodies and universities are, generally speaking, the most reliable. It is no wonder then that the NIH considers studies done outside of the US untrustworthy.
Dr Jay Bhattacharya in conversation with a father who wants to know whether to trust vaccines for his children ever again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by8sEVTrqkY
No comments:
Post a Comment