Doctors who criticise vaccines or lockdown policies on social media could face being struck off if regulators rule they are guilty of spreading ‘fake news’, according to new guidance from the GMC. The Telegraph has the story.
The core guidance for medics has been updated for the first time in almost a decade to cover media such as Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. The rules on use of social media include a duty to be “honest” and “not to mislead”, as well as to avoid abuse or bullying.
The draft regulations from the General Medical Council (GMC) – which the watchdog describes as a 21st-century version of the Hippocratic Oath – also say doctors must speak out if they encounter “toxic” workplace cultures that threaten patient safety. And they say medics must take action if they encounter workplace bullying, harassment or discrimination.
The watchdog regulates doctors, who can face a range of sanctions – including being struck off the medical register – if they are found to have failed in their duties.
Charlie Massey, the Chief Executive of the GMC, said… the fundamental principles of the guidance remained the same, but had been updated to reflect the modern world.
“We’ve had feedback that doctors want more clarity on using social media. We are already clear that doctors must be honest and trustworthy in their communications, and are now emphasising that this applies to all forms of communication. The principles remain the same whether the communication is written, spoken or via social media,” he said.
The use of social media by medics has become an increasingly vexed issue during the pandemic, the report adds.
In December a judge ruled that the GMC’s interim orders tribunal had made an “error of law” when it ordered a GP accused of spreading misinformation to stop discussing Covid on social media.
Dr. Samuel White, who was a partner at a practice in Hampshire, raised concerns about vaccines and claimed “masks do nothing” in a video posted last June.
The GMC’s Interim Orders Tribunal imposed restrictions on Dr. White’s registration as a result. But the High Court said this decision was “wrong” under human rights law.
He had claimed “lies” around the NHS and Government approach to the pandemic were “so vast” that he could no longer “stomach or tolerate” them.
In August, the tribunal concluded Dr. White’s way of sharing his views “may have a real impact on patient safety”. It found Dr. White allegedly shared information to a “wide and possibly uninformed audience” and did not give an opportunity for “a holistic consideration of COVID-19, its implications and possible treatments”.
But the GP’s barrister, Francis Hoar, argued the restrictions imposed on his client’s registration were a “severe imposition” on his freedom of expression.
The draft guidance says doctors can be held accountable for promoting misleading information or stepping outside areas of their expertise. They are told to “be honest and trustworthy … make clear the limits of your knowledge.. [and to] make reasonable checks to make sure any information you give is not misleading.
“This applies to all forms of written, spoken and digital communication,” the draft guidance states. And doctors are warned that online rows and trolling could jeopardise their professional futures.
It is of course outrageous that medics should be at risk of losing their career for questioning on Twitter the Government line on its draconian public health interventions. If there’s one thing we were lacking during the pandemic it was not an excess of conformity amongst doctors. The right of medics to ‘informed dissent’ should be strengthened, as per the High Court ruling in favour of Dr. White, not weakened.
On the other hand, there are plenty of Government advisers I can think of who could do with being penalised for “stepping outside areas of their expertise”. Somehow I doubt anything similar will ever be applied to them, however.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: The GMC guidance is still the subject of a public consultation – and anyone can contribute. Click here to begin the process.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So, why the reference to 2024?
I can only think it is Labours implicit, and sick, support for a proscribed organisation, Hamas.
They are not terrorists, they just work for Hamas, as I believe one person put it.
The only people who would say Hamas aren’t terrorists are the Jew-hating, terrorism-supporting rape-apologists. Everybody in possession of a functioning moral compass has both feet firmly planted in reality.
Downtickers on your marks…
Just thinking out loud… let’s assume that this act of violence was committed not as a protest over the Middle East but for arguments sake because somebody had lost their partner to the jibby jabs, how would that change our thinking, if at all?
Stella Creasy has as far as I am aware supported the government throughout the Scamdemic so she has blood on her hands. I wonder how I would feel if someone close died because they fell for the propoganda. I suspect I would want to achieve rather more than a broken window.
MP’s happily take the money so I suggest they learn to accept the downsides. And I rather suspect similar ‘antisocial’ acts might well become more prevalent once Kneel has his feet under the table and starts to enforce his version of Agenda 2030.
No, it’s not nice.
Now, now, what is the difference between a Jew hater and a Palestinian hater? And the stories of rape and beheaded babies have long been debunked as Israeli propaganda, which does not say much for those making up such perverse stories. And more than one source has claimed that your so-called terrorists performed a purely military operation on 7th October.
But, hey, 7th October was a long time ago. How come your non-terrorist Israelis are still today bombing refugee camps and killing countless innocent civilians – 9 months on?
Was it one week ago that Israeli forces rescued 4 hostages from the hands of Hamas? Only at the cost of the lives of 3 other hostages and over 200 Palestinians, not to mention several hundred wounded Palestinians, the latter presumably being unable to access anything other than minimal medical treatment.
Do you condone such excessive and rather inhumane behaviour? I hope not.
But I am certainly against the destructive actions taken against this politician. People need to sit down together and discuss grievances, not just hit out in violence. And that applies to Israel too, in my opinion.
Oh dear, CGW, I wonder what you would think if it was your baby that was beheaded or your daughter being daily raped in Gaza. Debunked? Are you one of those people who wants to see the photos for yourself, then?
Now there are daily rapes, in among all that rubble? It depends on your source of information, does it not? I read about Israelis sexually mistreating Palestinian prisoners. I have read multiple reports of Hamas ‘terrorists’ comforting their prisoners, telling them they will not be harmed or molested because “we are muslims”. Then they were fired upon by Israeli tanks and all died except for one or two sole Israeli survivors. And pure logic dictates that fighters under attack would be more concerned about their own well-being than playing with the opposite sex or beheading babies. Have you seen the photographs of the Israelis who came up with the latter stories?
So it all depends on what you read and what you believe. And I just do not believe that Israelis have a carte blanche to go around killing thousands of civilians – with what justification, because they are Palestinians?!
You would not understand if it was explained to you using small words. Old saying, or joke; the mind is like a parachute, it works best when open.
Those who call Hamas terrorists should remember that this was also the word used to describe Nelson Mandela. I do not condone the attacks on civilians on Oct 7 but that does not mean I cannot understand what desperation can do after 80 long vile years of Zionist dislocation, ethnic cleansing and slaughter.
The only thing that cheers me about all this (apart from the fact that most people now regard Mandela not as s terrorist but as a saint) is the growing number of noble upstanding Jewish people all over the world who are joining in the condemnation of the Zionist atrocities in Gaza. Judaism does not equal Zionism.
I am not Jewish, but my wife’s father was. A week ago we took a pebble from our London garden to lay on Daddy Moishe’s grave in Brighton. We did so without any doubts that he would have agreed with our views.
What do you think Zionism is, Paul?
What makes you think he is capable of thought? The apologist for the RoP swine.
I do not want to answer for Paul but I think Zionism has resulted in what was a purely Arab area of the world being slowly but surely occupied by a foreign group of people justifying their existence on some thousand year old document or other. Please pardon my ignorance but I look at basic facts, and Israel, currently being accused of apartheid and genocide, did not exist before 1948, and the region has been one of conflict ever since the whole Zionist project started around the end of the 19th century. One can only praise Zionism for its consistency and durability.
What is RoP?
Think about it.
Mandela was a terrorist and commie, the decline in SA is all too obvious. Look at the mortality when black rule starts, increases 5% a year, that’s ppl dying needlessly mostly black ones. Now we all know SA is a corrupt crime hell hole too. Obviously none of this gets reported as it would be “racist” but Mandela is an astoundingly evil and incompetent head of state.
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/ZAF/south-africa/death-rate
He was.