In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
15d
The statement discusses the departure of a top vaccine official and suggests it is a positive step for public health control. It implies criticism of the official's past actions regarding drug approvals and vaccine mandates. The tone is critical and suggests a need for change in health priorities.
- The statement could potentially harm the reputation of the official by attributing negative actions to them without detailed evidence. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It may not fully respect the privacy and dignity of the official by publicly criticizing their professional actions. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote a shift in health priorities, which could be seen as promoting understanding and change. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but lacks detailed evidence, which could be seen as not fully constructive. [-1]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.