Michael Schellenberger

Rank 40 of 47
|
Score -95
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
761d
We need to fight health misinformation to save lives, say experts. But we don't. The best way to fight bad information is with good information. And Covid showed that censorship prevented debate over deadly lockdowns, and put the West on the road to totalitarianism.
3/26/2025, 2:20:28 AM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
317d
@MartyMakary Big Pharma tried to derail his nomination and failed:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
439d
Trump's nominee as head of the FDA, Marty Makary, is controversial with scientists, say the media. In fact, Makary's views are mainstream. They're attacking him because he has stood up to Big Pharma, which gives the media, and the vax scientist attacking him, millions of dollars.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
317d
.@MartyMakary wrote a brilliant book on harms caused by the health and medical establishment. You can hear my interview with him here:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
317d
Congratulations to @DrJBhattacharya & @MartyMakary for becoming our next Director of NIH and Commissioner of FDA, respectively! They were censored and persecuted for being right about Covid. The success of both men is proof that the American dream is alive and well! 👏🩷🇺🇸
Jay Bhattacharya
@DrJBhattacharya
·
338d

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the credibility and impact of public health figures and policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. It presents a critical view of Anthony Fauci's arguments and supports Jay Bhattacharya's views, suggesting a vindication of the latter's stance. The tone is assertive and somewhat confrontational, implying a clear division between 'right' and 'wrong' perspectives.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement may cause harm by dismissing opposing views without nuanced discussion, potentially polarizing public opinion. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not respect the dignity of those it criticizes, particularly Anthony Fauci, by labeling his arguments as 'almost uniformly proved wrong.' [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks empathy and understanding, focusing on discrediting rather than fostering constructive dialogue. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    It does not engage in constructive criticism, as it leans towards personal attacks rather than addressing specific arguments or evidence. [-1]