News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, they should call them what they are: anti-science.
Pro-preventable disease
the anti-vaxxers or the doctors who are willing to treat them?
to be honest, the current evidence we have about clinical best practices actually supports doctors not trying to convince anti-vaxxers, so in some sense I can see a way of defending "(anti-)vaccine-friendly" clinical practice, as a way to ensure they have some biomedical healthcare - not just out of concern for the health and well-being of the anti-vaxxers (who deserve to live and be healthy despite their self-destructive and ignorant practices), but also for the health and well-being of the society who is threatened and burdened when other people get sick
there are social and economic costs to illness, and it is a situation in which we have to be invested in one another's health
(this ironically makes being anti-vaxx all the more anti-social and unethical, but the solution to anti-vaxx and anti-science movements should be invested in the well-being of everyone)
If there are no societal roadblocks to prevent anti-vaxx parents raising their children to also be anti-vaxxers, then the cycle of misinformation will only get worse as time progresses.
Regardless, parents should not have the ability to prevent their children from getting vaccinations on the basis of their own unscientific beliefs.
right, but people don't get socialized or educated by their doctors, doctors are like gatekeepers for medicine and surgeries that you get to see in very short windows of time once a year ... withholding access to medicine and surgery is not going to help the situation
right, but the flip side is that you're OK with foregoing the individual's right to opt in or out of a medical procedure ... I haven't read enough bioethics to arrive at some kind of position on this, but I don't think either side is obviously right - on the one hand individual liberties being protected results in more overall harm and deaths from fewer vaccinations; on the other hand ignoring individual liberties is authoritarian and can create medical trauma, as well as may backfire and result in greater resistance.
Either way, we need to solve this on a societal level through education, developing greater trust in biomedicine, and probably by penalizing the grifters who profit from promoting anti-vaxx anxieties.
The best bet would not to have them on caseload. Once word spreads, more antivaxxers come, your vulnerable populations and infants are at risk.
denying healthcare because a patient has vaccine hesitancy seems really unethical to me, but I also think that it probably overall increases community risks compared to other methods like empathetic-refutational interviewing, especially because refusal to listen and address concerns and meeting vaccine hesitancy with sanctions will have an effect of further undermining trust and so helping anti-vaxx and anti-science movements