Continuing my discussion of how ideological medical and science journals strive to redefine almost every public policy controversy into matters of public health to push leftwing agendas: An article in the notoriously woke New England Journal of Medicine argues that rather than give SNAP benefits to poor people — what used to be called food stamps — cash transfers should be provided to improve the “health” of the recipients. Read More ›
The New England Journal of Medicine recently published an advocacy article that attacks academic freedom and urges stifling contentious campus debates. Specifically, Evan Mullen, Eric J. Topol, and Abraham Verghese urge universities to "speak out publicly" and issue official institutional opinions about public controversies involving its professors "when it concludes that a faculty member's opinion could cause public harm." Read More ›
A Perspectives editorial penned by law professors in the New England Journal of Medicine enters the fray again, this time, advocating lawfare by governments against fossil fuel industries. The authors take heart from a legal settlement between a Louisiana parish and oil companies. But this case is not the same thing at all as paying damages for climate change. Read More ›
I don't smoke, but I am wary of efforts to prevent other people from so doing. Now, blue cities — and soon states, most likely — have hit upon a way to ban smoking known as "Tobacco Free Generation" (TFG). Read More ›
Our most august medical journals are in danger of becoming more woke ideological-advocacy publications than disseminations of learned scientific studies. This is particularly true of the New England Journal of Medicine, which regularly publishes progressive gibberish pushing "equity" that is often nearly impossible to understand. Read More ›
The New England Journal of Medicine continues to publish advocacy articles that push hard-left policies on controversial issues such as climate change, guns, race, etc. — seeking to harness the authority of doctors to push non-medical political agendas. Now, we are told, the “health community” wants to end the use of fossil fuels. Read More ›
There the New England Journal of Medicine goes again, publishing articles that promote an autocratic health-care system. This time, two bioethicists from the National Institutes of Health (!) ask the question, “Adolescents, Parents, and Covid-19 Vaccination — Who Should Decide?” I’ll bet you knew that the answer wouldn’t be the parents! Read More ›
The vaccine mandates are an exploding cigar. Not only are they causing severe societal dislocation, but they have been implemented in a one-size-fits-all approach that is not justified by current scientific understandings. Read More ›
Opponents of puberty blocking can no longer be denigrated as supposed religious fanatics or transphobic haters. Hopefully, the ultimate beneficiaries of this sea change will be the children whose bodies will not now become fodder in the well-meaning but ultimately destructive name of “gender affirmation.” Read More ›
There the New England Journal of Medicine goes pushing woke agendas again. This time, the extremely politically progressive medical journal has published an article urging that medical students be taught that left-wing social-justice engagement should be among their professional duties. Read More ›
