650

Summary

Over 15,000 doctors, through the Committee to Protect Health Care, urged the Senate to reject Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health and human services, citing his anti-vaccine advocacy, promotion of conspiracy theories, and lack of qualifications.

Critics, including Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, warn his leadership would endanger public health. Supporters claim opposition is driven by pharmaceutical interests.

Kennedy’s confirmation would require near-unanimous Republican support in the Senate.

Advocacy groups are campaigning against his appointment, emphasizing his alleged role in spreading misinformation during past public health crises.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Does the health insurance industry, a criminal syndicate, support the nutter RFK?

[-] podperson@lemm.ee 4 points 1 hour ago

The math is easy on that one: RFK is against vaccines & drug treatments and seems to disagree with much of modern, science-based medicine. If all of that stuff, in the eyes of the CDC, becomes "unnecessary," then the insurance industry will be able to deny a lot more coverage, followed by the C-suite scheduling of "money fight Fridays."

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 14 points 8 hours ago

Lol, imagine the incoming senate actually listening to the rabble.

[-] RedAggroBest@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Okay but imagine that do...

Then we get reminded that Senate approval is a formality when he puts RFK there anyways

[-] Vertelleus@sh.itjust.works 55 points 19 hours ago

They should try bribing the Republicans, that's how you get results.

[-] masterbaexunn@lemmy.world 11 points 19 hours ago

Don't you mean make a donation to the pac?

[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 28 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

That’s great and all, but it’s not going to happen. In fact, all the hate will only cause him to grow even stronger and dumber.

[-] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 106 points 1 day ago

It's funny that doctors believe republicans care about their opinion. See Dr. Anthony Fauci for reference.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 hours ago

See Dr. Anthony Fauci for reference.

My god, the crimes committed against that man after all he has done for this ungrateful country are just absolutely unforgivable.

[-] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 hour ago

To run the NIAID and awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom FROM George W. Bush, should have been enough. I have learned the masses are fucking stupid literal sheep.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago

That's almost an endorsement to Senate Republicans.

[-] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 hour ago

That this point it is a requirement until they get sick.

[-] takeda@lemm.ee 19 points 21 hours ago

I cannot believe there is even consideration about giving him preemptive pardon.

Like, it's not even clear what possible crime he committed, but since they might go after him we should issue a pardon just in case.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago

Many of them have been whipped up into a murderous frenzy over Fauci. Now, that's the dumbasses yokels in the deplorable base. How many of the elites in the qon power structure want to go after him, who knows. I"m sure donvict had his feelings hurt about something related to Fauci because Fauci is part of the reality-based community, so maybe he might let it happen.

[-] subignition@fedia.io 8 points 22 hours ago

You know what, you have to respect them for trying. The alternative is staying silent and accepting this without any show of resistance at all.

Sometimes it's hard to know which battles to pick.

Resisting this appointment kinda forces Trump to double down, because it was an election promise. It also diminishes drs credibility in future matters. "Drs moan about everything".

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago

Many of them seriously would love to see him literally hanged alongside Biden, Kamala, Pence, Obama, Hillary....the dumbasses are all convinced he did something wrong to donvict, themselves, the country. You know, because, repeat after me, like all good parrots do: "gain of function! gain of function!"

[-] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 30 points 21 hours ago

The only thing he's right about is the junk we have in our food and chemicals that are banned in the EU but allowed to be in our food

[-] madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world 9 points 15 hours ago

There are also many ingredients banned in the US that aren't in the EU. This trend of focusing on food ingredients misses the bigger picture.

While processed food is generally garbage, our food supply is generally safe, the real issue is healthy, whole foods aren't accessible enough.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 15 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

That’s the sad thing. RFK is “right” about a lot, not just about health but about what happened in the election, but that doesn’t make the bad bundled with him OK.

Some people are crazy or corrupt and should absolutely not hold office, but that doesn’t necessarily invalidate points they raise… But apparently we can’t have it that way. We go all in someone or bury, nothing in between

[-] Zink@programming.dev 10 points 19 hours ago

You are correct that it doesn’t necessarily invalidate points they raise. But if you’re dealing with somebody who is crazy or corrupt AND they represent the party famous for arguing in bad faith, it’s probably a waste of time to evaluate whether or not you can trust a given thing they say.

[-] blattrules@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago

And banning those advertisements.

[-] huginn@feddit.it -4 points 19 hours ago

And the EU allows food that we don't in ours, like Cyclamate. Raw milk and unwashed eggs are all perfectly legal too.

They're not perfect.

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

unwashed eggs are all perfectly legal too.

Becsuse washing eggs makes them spoil easier as it ruins the bloom which protects the eggs from pathogens.

The risk here is so non-existent, that I can safely eat my eggs raw. This is an official stance of the Finnish health authorities.

I trust them saying that.

But if RFK said that about American eggs, I would laugh out loud.

Most American bread sold here has to be marketed as dessert, because of the high sugar content. I mean, there really isn't demand for it, but you'll sometimes see some in some novel "America" shelves/sections.

German tries American coke for the first time (00:58)

[-] kungen@feddit.nu 10 points 16 hours ago

I, too, normally eat my eggs with the shell still attached.

And you realize that egg shells are porous? Unwashed eggs are sealed, and that's one of the reasons why Europe can sell eggs without even refrigeration.

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 18 hours ago

Their eggs are fine.

[-] MetalMachine@feddit.nl 1 points 17 hours ago

Sure, never said they were. But they ban alot of chemicals that are harmful and judging on health outcomes and obesity rates they seem to have it better.

[-] huginn@feddit.it -2 points 9 hours ago

EU health and obesity rates have way more to do with urbanism than diet and health outcomes compared to the USA is such a useless comparison. America's trying to kill you off the moment you get sick. Pay or die: yeah no wonder it's such a shit show.

[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 50 points 23 hours ago

Doctors are about to get the climate scientist treatment. It’s not a Cassandra curse. It’s not that they don’t believe you. They just don’t see the consequences affecting them personally, so they don’t care.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Also, the dumbasses seem to think using terms like "herd immunity" only confirms the garbage that the likes of Alex Jones is filling their empty heads with. "Herd immunity! That's how the global elites think about all of us! Just a herd to be culled until there is only 500,000,000 people on the planet, just like the Georgia Guidestones says!"

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 18 points 21 hours ago

Pfff, doctors, what do they know about health, am I right?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 21 hours ago

The right seems to despise expertise of nearly all kinds, most especially if it involves going to a university.

So yeah, if doctors tell them something that hurts their feelings (like wear a mask, get vaccinated, meat is bad for you, alcohol is bad for you) they are going to get just as butthurt about that kind of expertise as they will about scientists telling them that evolution and global warming are real things...

[-] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 9 points 18 hours ago

Apparently they didn't follow trump the first time around. The surest way to get him to do something is to tell him not to.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago

Quick question. Honest question. How many doctors are there in the USA? I feel like this headline could have been more impactful if it gave an idea of what percentage of the medical field feels this way. 15,000 doctors, across all 50 states......maybe I'm wrong, this is just a gut feeling based on nothing, but that seems low. Feels like some of the bigger states could have 15,000 doctors by themselves.

I'm not in any way defending RFK. I'm just saying this particular story seems like a non-story at those numbers.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 18 points 23 hours ago
[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 28 points 23 hours ago

As a person who's organized petitions for widely felt issues, the impact isn't strictly from a raw percentage of participation (though it's a significant factor when that number is large). The impact comes from the number of people involved. Of the roughly 1 million doctors in the country, 1% were so against the concept that they chose to take direct action.

If that many people were moved to action, how many are against it but not ready or willing to fight? How many felt it wouldn't matter if they signed? How many more didn't hear about it?

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago

Yeah, it’s still impactful, I just also got curious about the number of doctors in the US and figured it was silly to look it up and not share.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 21 hours ago

Imagine if 4m citizens signed a petition, I don't think anyone would be arguing that "but it's not even 2% of the population!"

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago

Right, I'm sure many doctors are well aware of what demons the right are. I could see some organized effort to target doctors and sic the insane RW nutjobs on them in a campaign of stochastic terrorism.

That, or lean on people with the ability to punish them at their jobs, or have some way to make them unemployed.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

At the same time it's risky to use small percentages of big populations even if it looks big. If you cast a net big enough, you can drum up thousands of pretty much anyone for pretty much anything (I wonder how many nurses you or doctors you could get to say they're anti-vaxx). Not saying this doesn't hold water but just take with a grain of salt.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago

Agreed, and the right wing definitely does organize disinfo campaigns that exploit this. I remember the stupid anti-science right wingers trying to make a lot of hay with the Oregon Petition. Sure, they had a lot of people that had no business weighing in, but they had PhDs in that list, ya'll, and they had, get this, over 31,000 of them overall, ya'll!

The general population is not known for either their critical thinking skills, knowing the difference between engineering and science, and their numeracy, so it was a clever scheme...

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago

"All those doctors are a buncha elitists, I tell ya! I'm on the macho manly carnivore diet and even the know-it-all doc says I only need THREE statins!"

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

Meanwhile, the qons will just consider that the libz have been owned.

this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
650 points (99.4% liked)

politics

19308 readers
2313 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS