Dr Robert Malone and cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough are the latest to be reinstated to Twitter

[ThatRobGuy]

Twitter reinstates Dr Robert Malone and Dr Peter McCullough accounts

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated as Twitter owner Elon Musk continues to restore banned accounts.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Twitter has reinstated the accounts of two doctors who were banned over the social media platform's policy on Covid-19 misinformation.

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated amid Twitter owner Elon Musk's ongoing efforts to restore accounts that were previously banned.

Malone announced his return to the platform on Tuesday with a Tweet saying 'I'm back', before plugging his latest blog post 'Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare' - which in its first paragraph featured misinformation on Covid-19 vaccines.

McCullough has not yet posted since his account was reinstated.



I know there are going to be some mixed opinions on this one.

But, from purely from a pragmatic standpoint (saying this as someone who's very much pro covid vaccine), I think it makes sense to end their twitter ban.

Though I disagreed with them getting banned in the first place...I think bad information should be combatted with good information and not censorship, even if one agreed with their bans, the conditions that would've justified their bans are no longer applicable.

If it was done in the name of "making sure people aren't exposed to information that would dissuade them from getting the covid 19 jabs, and what impact that could have on the healthcare system", I don't think those conditions apply anymore. Now that most of use have been vaccinated (and boosted), or have already had covid...or both, and most governments themselves have adopted a "live with the virus, it's no going away" approach...combined with the fact that if someone hasn't gotten the vaccine at this point over 2 years in, despite these two guys not being on Twitter for the last year, it would seem as if those folks are pretty "dug-in" on their anti-vaccine position and don't have any intention of changing, so there's no real harm in allowing them back on Twitter at this point. (and furthermore, I would have to assume that the people who were devout followers of these two guys probably found other non-Twitter ways to access their latest content and opinions, so it's not as if the Twitter bans were really accomplishing much)

 

[sandman]

Twitter reinstates Dr Robert Malone and Dr Peter McCullough accounts

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated as Twitter owner Elon Musk continues to restore banned accounts.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Twitter has reinstated the accounts of two doctors who were banned over the social media platform's policy on Covid-19 misinformation.

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated amid Twitter owner Elon Musk's ongoing efforts to restore accounts that were previously banned.

Malone announced his return to the platform on Tuesday with a Tweet saying 'I'm back', before plugging his latest blog post 'Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare' - which in its first paragraph featured misinformation on Covid-19 vaccines.

McCullough has not yet posted since his account was reinstated.



I know there are going to be some mixed opinions on this one.

But, from purely from a pragmatic standpoint (saying this as someone who's very much pro covid vaccine), I think it makes sense to end their twitter ban.

Though I disagreed with them getting banned in the first place...I think bad information should be combatted with good information and not censorship, even if one agreed with their bans, the conditions that would've justified their bans are no longer applicable.

If it was done in the name of "making sure people aren't exposed to information that would dissuade them from getting the covid 19 jabs, and what impact that could have on the healthcare system", I don't think those conditions apply anymore. Now that most of use have been vaccinated (and boosted), or have already had covid...or both, and most governments themselves have adopted a "live with the virus, it's no going away" approach...combined with the fact that if someone hasn't gotten the vaccine at this point over 2 years in, despite these two guys not being on Twitter for the last year, it would seem as if those folks are pretty "dug-in" on their anti-vaccine position and don't have any intention of changing, so there's no real harm in allowing them back on Twitter at this point. (and furthermore, I would have to assume that the people who were devout followers of these two guys probably found other non-Twitter ways to access their latest content and opinions, so it's not as if the Twitter bans were really accomplishing much)

It feels like you drift toward these guys as having bad information … maybe I am wrong

Anyhow…. I do agree that they never should have been banned because I believe people are smart enough to deicide for themselves ...obviously the Government feels differently.

If I have a question about something ….. I like to go to an informed source ….

When I have internet problems …I Contact Al Gore who invented the internet.

If I want to speak gibberish …, I have a couple of options, for either a “word salad” or “c’mon man” both of whom are prolific in their respective field.

But…. if I wanted information regarding vaccines, I would desire a source that was not profiting from the control and distribution…. Somebody with some knowledge ….and Dr. Malone who is touted to be the inventor of mRNA vaccine, or at the very least one of the key persons critical in the research thereof …. would have been a valuable asset to many who were looking for answers.

As you know….. if you control the narrative, you control what people think …. which was the intended purpose of all the bans. Allowing people to make decision based on the free flow of information is an underline factor of the first amendment …controlling the information to dictate policy or mandates is not only wrong, it has no end ….. as Lord Acton stated “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” and controlling the narrative for whatever purpose gives you the absolute power…..we need only look at China.

I never had a problem with those who desired to be vaxed …But hopefully none of those people who took the vax due to insufficient information suffered any debilitating side effects associated with the vaccine.

 

[Tinker Grey]

...obviously the Government feels differently.

The Gov't didn't ban them.

 

[sandman]

The Gov't didn't ban them.

Absolutely the are pulling the strings

It was Twitter by directive...

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It feels like you drift toward these guys as having bad information … maybe I am wrong

I do

But…. if I wanted information regarding vaccines, I would desire a source that was not profiting from the control and distribution…. Somebody with some knowledge ….and Dr. Malone who is touted to be the inventor of mRNA vaccine, or at the very least one of the key persons critical in the research thereof …. would have been a valuable asset to many who were looking for answers.

That's not always a sound rule to follow.

Sometimes the best information about something comes from the company that's profiting from it. It's their product after all, so I would expect them to know the most about it.

For instance, if I want detailed information about the inner workings of Windows 11, Microsoft's going to have the most information on it (despite being ones profiting off of it). I can try to find an independent source, but their information likely isn't going to be as good or in-depth.

For the other part, it's my understanding that while Malone (and some of his followers) tout him as being the inventor...that might be a bit grandiose. In some interviews I've listened to with people like Dr. Paul Offit (who seems to have a more measured approach on the topic of covid vaccines...thinks they were a good thing, but certainly not part of the "all in, let's all get 5 of them" mainstream orthodoxy), his statement on it was that Malone was someone who worked on the early research teams (along with several other people), but to make it sound like it was his brainchild, and his alone, and that he was somehow heavily involved in this current iteration, is a bit of an exaggeration.

It's be sort of like a person who worked on an engineering team for a car maker back in the 1980's claiming they "invented this" in reference to a much more refined version of a feature on a modern vehicle.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Twitter reinstates Dr Robert Malone and Dr Peter McCullough accounts

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated as Twitter owner Elon Musk continues to restore banned accounts.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Twitter has reinstated the accounts of two doctors who were banned over the social media platform's policy on Covid-19 misinformation.

Dr. Robert Malone, an mRNA vaccine researcher, and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, both saw their profiles reactivated amid Twitter owner Elon Musk's ongoing efforts to restore accounts that were previously banned.

Malone announced his return to the platform on Tuesday with a Tweet saying 'I'm back', before plugging his latest blog post 'Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare' - which in its first paragraph featured misinformation on Covid-19 vaccines.

McCullough has not yet posted since his account was reinstated.



I know there are going to be some mixed opinions on this one.

But, from purely from a pragmatic standpoint (saying this as someone who's very much pro covid vaccine), I think it makes sense to end their twitter ban.

Though I disagreed with them getting banned in the first place...I think bad information should be combatted with good information and not censorship, even if one agreed with their bans, the conditions that would've justified their bans are no longer applicable.

If it was done in the name of "making sure people aren't exposed to information that would dissuade them from getting the covid 19 jabs, and what impact that could have on the healthcare system", I don't think those conditions apply anymore. Now that most of use have been vaccinated (and boosted), or have already had covid...or both, and most governments themselves have adopted a "live with the virus, it's no going away" approach...combined with the fact that if someone hasn't gotten the vaccine at this point over 2 years in, despite these two guys not being on Twitter for the last year, it would seem as if those folks are pretty "dug-in" on their anti-vaccine position and don't have any intention of changing, so there's no real harm in allowing them back on Twitter at this point. (and furthermore, I would have to assume that the people who were devout followers of these two guys probably found other non-Twitter ways to access their latest content and opinions, so it's not as if the Twitter bans were really accomplishing much)

Disparate medical views - AKA "second opinions" if you seek them in person - should never have been suppressed. The way one fights misinformation is with better information and discussion, not suppression.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Sometimes the best information about something comes from the company that's profiting from it. It's their product after all, so I would expect them to know the most about it.

For instance, if I want detailed information about the inner workings of Windows 11, Microsoft's going to have the most information on it (despite being ones profiting off of it). I can try to find an independent source, but their information likely isn't going to be as good or in-depth.

Well sure, if the information is about a product you freely purchased, after your own review of the evidence, with ZERO compulsion for you to purchase it. Go to the manufacturer, as it has an interest in you being satisfied with its product, and there are no dangerous side effects (maybe frustration, if you can't figure it out).

However, if it is a brand new drug and delivery technology with no long term data, and people are being forced to get it at risk of job or community loss, AND it has dangerous side effects and NO long term data, that is another story altogether. Then you want a broad spectrum of evidence and from those not financially benefitting from the product.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

The Gov't didn't ban them.

The government asked Twitter to ban them. Yoel Roth, former head of "Trust and Safety" at Twitter was routinely meeting with government officials and making changes based on their requests on a number of topics, which are coming out regularly in the Twitter documents that are being made public. Once the government is involved and "making requests" - i.e. "deputizing" a private business to engage in behavior from which it is prohibited - that Twitter suppress certain individuals and organizations, as it did to prevent the Biden Laptop story from being disseminated, that is suppression of free speech, a violation under the First Amendment.

 

[DaisyDay]

Dr. Malone who is touted to be the inventor of mRNA vaccine

Claimed by Dr. Malone.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

However, if it is a brand new drug and delivery technology with no long term data, and people are being forced to get it at risk of job or community loss, AND it has dangerous side effects and NO long term data, that is another story altogether. Then you want a broad spectrum of evidence and from those not financially benefitting from the product.

Just to go on record I wasn't a fan of the vaccine mandates. As soon as we got to the waves of Delta and beyond (where the benefits with it were largely individual ones, and the externalities arguments about spreading it to others no longer really applied), my stance was pretty much "you have the information, do what you want, I'm as protected as I can get, so if it's not going to stop me giving it to you or you giving it to me, I can see no practical reason to make you get it"

With regards to dangerous side effect, yes, there were a tiny fraction of people who experience some adverse reactions, but for the overwhelming majority of the public, the pros of the covid shots vastly outweighed the cons.

But...I do think that's where the ball was dropped in terms of the messaging. By one side being dismissive of risks (regardless of how tiny the risks were), it had a backlash effect. That was exacerbated by the censorship of anyone mentioning the mere notion that "there may be some things about it that aren't so great".

Those "negative mentions" ranged from practical questions that are perfectly reasonable to ask, all the way to full blown conspiratorial theories about Bill Gates and Soros trying to microchip people.

As soon as it became polarized, the people asking the reasonable questions were the real victims. Many people split into the two large factions.

The "Nothing but the vaccine" crowd vs. the "Anything but the vaccine/Conspiracy" crowd

The people (and medical professionals) who had reasonable questions about it, and those of us who thought the vaccine was a really good thing, and even highly recommended it (but stopped short of advocating mandates), ended up getting the mainstream media treatment of being lumped in with the latter.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Claimed by Dr. Malone.

Yeah, I touched on that bit earlier, Malone's folklore of being "the" inventor is a bit grandiose.

Dr. Paul Offit covers it pretty well here. (I set the timestamp marker on the link to around the 44 minute mark, where the topic is "what Robert Malone did, and didn't, do with mRNA technology.

 

[Diamond7]

Welcome to Fifth Gen (Information) Warfare'

There is no question in my mind that this virus is an act of war. We fight different kinds of war nowadays. We may not know all the details but we do know the basic facts. The Bible makes it VERY clear that there is going to be pestilence. So this should be no surprise for us.

Luke 21: 10,11
"Then He told them, “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven".

 

[Nithavela]

This whole "combat bad information with good information" is a nice sentiment, but I've yet to see it work. People seem to decide what is good information by looking for information they already agree with.

 

[Diamond7]

People seem to decide what is good information by looking for information they already agree with.

I study the research. My father was a doctor so I use to read his medical journals. This is what a reporter is suppose to do. They are to read the research and then explain it to people who can not read at that level of understanding. Very few people read the research now a days.

 

[NxNW]

When I have internet problems …I Contact Al Gore who invented the internet.

Gore never claimed to have done so.

I never had a problem with those who desired to be vaxed …But hopefully none of those people who took the vax due to insufficient information suffered any debilitating side effects associated with the vaccine.

I'm unaware of anyone having taken it due to insufficient information. Are you?

 

[NxNW]

However, if it is a brand new drug and delivery technology with no long term data, and people are being forced to get it at risk of job or community loss, AND it has dangerous side effects and NO long term data, that is another story altogether.

Do you have any examples of such a situation?

 

[Nithavela]

I study the research. My father was a doctor so I use to read his medical journals. This is what a reporter is suppose to do. They are to read the research and then explain it to people who can not read at that level of understanding. Very few people read the research now a days.

Nice to see that you agree.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

This whole "combat bad information with good information" is a nice sentiment, but I've yet to see it work. People seem to decide what is good information by looking for information they already agree with.

You're always going to have the "google what I want to believe" type folks whether you attempt to censor some of the sources of bad info or not.

Plus, when you're dealing with conspiracy theorists, banning the people who are saying what they like tends to strengthen their resolve, as in their mind, the bans are seen as "further evidence of the conspiracy"

I would argue in the grand scheme of things, good information has won out of bad information organically more times that not. Look at some of the goofy things that people used to believe even as recent as 60-70 years ago.

 

[Nithavela]

You're always going to have the "google what I want to believe" type folks whether you attempt to censor some of the sources of bad info or not.

Plus, when you're dealing with conspiracy theorists, banning the people who are saying what they like tends to strengthen their resolve, as in their mind, the bans are seen as "further evidence of the conspiracy"

I would argue in the grand scheme of things, good information has won out of bad information organically more times that not. Look at some of the goofy things that people used to believe even as recent as 60-70 years ago.

Do you have any evidence for the higher efficiency of your suggested method?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Do you have any evidence for the higher efficiency of your suggested method?

Fewer people are eating red meat (or eating less of it)
The Fur industry isn't doing so hot
More people made the switch to driving more fuel efficient vehicles or EVs
We've made great strides in areas of social acceptance for certain groups over the past 60 years (though, to hear someone people talk, you'd think it was the opposite)

None of those was accomplished by shutting down the speech of the advocates on the other side.

I'd argue that the organic transformation on issues is superior (because it's sincere) when compared to artificially trying to squash an idea tomorrow via speech restrictions.