Letter: A response to those who 'feel' I should be disciplined
Becker writes, "He quotes three physicians who feel the same way. This is the key in understanding their hostility for someone who questions the prevailing narrative - it’s how they 'feel.' It’s purely emotional."
I write in response to Jim Shaw’s column in which he calls for me to lose my medical license due to “spreading bogus information about COVID-19.” He quotes three physicians who feel the same way. This is the key in understanding their hostility for someone who questions the prevailing narrative - it’s how they “feel.” It’s purely emotional.
Kathy Anderson, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, says there should be disciplinary action taken against me. Her organization is the same organization that advocates for children to be able to get abortions without informing their parents, and encourages parents to put their children on sex-changing (pubertal suppression) hormones as young as age 9 if the kids express such an interest.
Dr. Joan Connell, the former state field medical officer, says I should be investigated. Connell is the person who suggested Gov. Burgum was indirectly responsible for a great many deaths due to not implementing a mask mandate policy sooner than he did. This is in the face of the fact that there was no statistically significant difference in COVID rates between North Dakota with a mask mandate, and South Dakota without.
Both of these doctors implored school boards across the state to implement a mask mandate for children in school. They told us that if the school boards didn’t do as they were told, there would be a large number of additional people sick and dead, adults and children alike. Many school boards across the state went against the emotional pleas of doctors like these. What happened is that we found out they were wrong again. There was no difference in infection rates between schools with mandates and schools with freedom.
My “unintelligent” and allegedly bogus information include the following statements:
“Masking offers very limited protection.” Reminder: the CDC just acknowledged that cloth masks don’t help.
“The vaccines are new and experimental. We do not know the long-term effects.” These are facts.
“Each person should determine for themselves if the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks.” My opinion, and I’m sticking with it.
“Ivermectin has been shown to help in some studies, and not in others. It’s extremely safe, and if it has a chance of helping, why would you not take it?” I compared it to taking Melatonin for sleep or Echinacea for colds. Nothing false about these statements.
“Contact tracing is a poor policy that wastes resources for an aerosolized viral pandemic.” True statement.
I’ve made these statements, and many more, all of which are true. The issue is with debate and scientific method for finding the truth, things in which these uber-concerned physicians have no interest. I have frequently discussed COVID on my show "No Apologies" on BEK channel. I’ve invited physicians and public health officials to come on the show and discuss their issues, yet I have no takers. Perhaps, if they can muster the fortitude, Doctors Syverson, Anderson or Connell would be willing to come on the program and defend their statements. I welcome them anytime.
Rep. Rick Becker, a Republican plastic surgeon and businessman, represents Bismarck in the North Dakota Legislature.
This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.