Social "Dr." Phil, "Dr." Oz, and "Dr." Drew under fire for their WTF statements about COVID-19...

The Big Bang

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Messages
10,137
Reaction score
2,180
Of course, "apologies" are going to be made by all because people are pointing out how FUCKED UP they are to be so fucking irresponsible and cruel.

They are all right-wing by the way.

"Dr." Phil talking about COVID-19...


https://www.usatoday.com/story/ente...-coronavirus-deaths-car-accidents/5151534002/

He added: "The fact of the matter is we have people dying, 45,000 people a year die from automobile accidents, 480,000 from cigarettes, 360,000 a year from swimming pools, but we don’t shut the country down for that, but yet we’re doing it for this? And the fallout is going to last for years because people’s lives are being destroyed."

https://globalnews.ca/news/6827243/coronavirus-dr-oz-deaths-reopening-schools-tradeoff/



Lastly, "Dr." Drew said STUPID/IGNORANT shit that he is now (surprise surprise after he was ROASTED because of it) "apologizing" for.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6787875/dr-drew-coronavirus-apology/

Drew’s apology came after a video made the rounds on the internet with clips from a series of appearances he made over a two-month period downplaying the seriousness of the novel coronavirus, which has killed more than 76,000 people worldwide as of Monday.
 
Oz is a fucking quack, medical board should've revoked his license years ago when he was still on Oprah.
 
Of course, "apologies" are going to be made by all because people are pointing out how FUCKED UP they are to be so fucking irresponsible and cruel.

They are all right-wing by the way.

"Dr." Phil talking about COVID-19...


https://www.usatoday.com/story/ente...-coronavirus-deaths-car-accidents/5151534002/

He added: "The fact of the matter is we have people dying, 45,000 people a year die from automobile accidents, 480,000 from cigarettes, 360,000 a year from swimming pools, but we don’t shut the country down for that, but yet we’re doing it for this? And the fallout is going to last for years because people’s lives are being destroyed."

https://globalnews.ca/news/6827243/coronavirus-dr-oz-deaths-reopening-schools-tradeoff/



Lastly, "Dr." Drew said STUPID/IGNORANT shit that he is now (surprise surprise after he was ROASTED because of it) "apologizing" for.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6787875/dr-drew-coronavirus-apology/

Drew’s apology came after a video made the rounds on the internet with clips from a series of appearances he made over a two-month period downplaying the seriousness of the novel coronavirus, which has killed more than 76,000 people worldwide as of Monday.


None of them are immunologist or virologist or even better economist but thst doesn’t stop them from using their Title and celebrity. The right bitches and moans when a celebrity has a political view and that’s good because who gives a fuck what Kayne thinks but it’s this validity they give to celebrity “doctors” that is highly hypocritical and down right irresponsible.
 
Is Dr. Drew is a right winger? I'm not 100% sure he is, but I'm open to being corrected
 
Is Dr. Drew is a right winger? I'm not 100% sure he is, but I'm open to being corrected

I don’t think he is as far right as Dr. Oz but lately he is saying things that are just as stupid
 
He was right. There is no need to apologize.
 
Dr.Phil gave Kim Jung Ill a Pill and thats why you cant kill Kim Jung Ill
 
This is what happens to the brains of multi-millionaire "first do no harm" doctors when they see their stock portfolios taking a huge hit.
 
He was right. There is no need to apologize.

They twisted his words to make it seem like he was talking about killing children. At that point, there’s no point arguing as they will just twist the words again.
 
Phil is the biggest hack of them all.

At least Drew and Oz are currently licensed MDs generally regarded as competent in their fields of study, despite their TV careers spewing quackery.

Phil however has had his psychology license revoked since 2006 over unethical behavior.

You can't do much but shake your head seeing ppl heed epidemiological advice in regard to a pandemic from an unlicensed TV shrink.
 
One of the points Oz tactfully touched upon there was that at-risk kids are well-fed when school is open. That's because despite the school lunch crisis in the public school system right now our approach has still been to kick the bucket down the road, and feed the kids while accruing debt. Many of these kids from poor households aren't fed at home, and aren't sent to school with lunches (or money to purchase from the school). Frankly, I think that reflects on the poor as much as it does a broken system. These people are poor because they don't value what should be valued, and make bad life decisions, not vice versa.

However, that last observation is moot. The point is that kids tend to receive care and attention through our school system. It's a government check-up on parents who otherwise will misbehave: abusers, neglecters, and the like. It's also critical to the development on the next generation. They get exercise, they learn social skills, they learn behavior, they progress in their studies, and they put faculty back to work.

This is obviously a conversation for adults. Some won't be capable of discussing it rationally. It's morbid, but it's necessary. We all drive every day despite the risk it incurs to our health. The gain to our quality of lives outweighs the risk. One simply has to ask at which point this scale is balanced regarding our response. Dr. Oz and Dr. Drew are legitimate medical doctors. They are entrepreneurial, to the detriment of their integrity at times, but these are legitimate MDs, and one things MDs do is assess matters of life and death with an unflinching eye.

It's not clear to me what Oz means by 2%-3% morbidity. If he means that the projected total deaths due to COVID are only estimated to increase 2%-3% if we reopen schools, then I'm inclined to agree with him. The net positive outweighs the net negative.

In any case this conversation-- this precise topic-- is unavoidable. We will have to decide at some point when to return to a greater normalcy, and how. What are the steps? What comes back first? Deciding the time forces a consideration of the cost/benefit, and due to the nature of the subject, that assessment cannot avoid factoring in human lives.

If you are too fragile to handle this topic, stop crying, and go back to playing on your phone with the rest of the kids.
 
One of the points Oz tactfully touched upon there was that at-risk kids are well-fed when school is open. That's because despite the school lunch crisis in the public school system right now our approach has still been to kick the bucket down the road, and feed the kids while accruing debt. Many of these kids from poor households aren't fed at home, and aren't sent to school with lunches (or money to purchase from the school). Frankly, I think that reflects on the poor as much as it does a broken system. These people are poor because they don't value what should be valued, and make bad life decisions, not vice versa.

However, that last observation is moot. The point is that kids tend to receive care and attention through our school system. It's a government check-up on parents who otherwise will misbehave: abusers, neglecters, and the like. It's also critical to the development on the next generation. They get exercise, they learn social skills, they learn behavior, they progress in their studies, and they put faculty back to work.

This is obviously a conversation for adults. Some won't be capable of discussing it rationally. It's morbid, but it's necessary. We all drive every day despite the risk it incurs to our health. The gain to our quality of lives outweighs the risk. One simply has to ask at which point this scale is balanced regarding our response. Dr. Oz and Dr. Drew are legitimate medical doctors. They are entrepreneurial, to the detriment of their integrity at times, but these are legitimate MDs, and one things MDs do is assess matters of life and death with an unflinching eye.

It's not clear to me what Oz means by 2%-3% morbidity. If he means that the projected total deaths due to COVID are only estimated to increase 2%-3% if we reopen schools, then I'm inclined to agree with him. The net positive outweighs the net negative.

In any case this conversation-- this precise topic-- is unavoidable. We will have to decide at some point when to return to a greater normalcy, and how. What are the steps? What comes back first? Deciding the time forces a consideration of the cost/benefit, and due to the nature of the subject, that assessment cannot avoid factoring in human lives.

If you are too fragile to handle this topic, stop crying, and go back to playing on your phone with the rest of the kids.

You said it yourself...

You don't know what he means by saying "2%-3%".........

So if YOU don't know what he's TRYING to say, then...what the fuck? Why defend him?
 
Rich people think the market is more important than saving lives. LOL And you're surprised?

They are just upset because they've lost millions in investment income.
 
None of them are immunologist or virologist or even better economist but thst doesn’t stop them from using their Title and celebrity. The right bitches and moans when a celebrity has a political view and that’s good because who gives a fuck what Kayne thinks but it’s this validity they give to celebrity “doctors” that is highly hypocritical and down right irresponsible.

Isn’t "Doctor" Phil NOT a real doctor and just has a PhD after doing some Arts program in psychology ?
The fk he going talking about the pandemic for ?

Dude should preface it with "I’m not a real Doctor but...." and having running below a ticker stating "....NOT A REAL DOCTOR"
People might mistake it for a real medical opinion.
 
Last edited:
You said it yourself...

You don't know what he means by saying "2%-3%".........

So if YOU don't know what he's TRYING to say, then...what the fuck? Why defend him?
One could easily turn this on you: if you don't know what it means, then why are you attacking him?

I'm defending the conversation, because we need to have it, and I'm defending his medical credentials. You're the one who put "Dr." in quotes. He's your better. Respect his title even if you don't respect the man or his opinions.
 
One could easily turn this on you: if you don't know what it means, then why are you attacking him?

I'm defending the conversation, because we need to have it, and I'm defending his medical credentials. You're the one who put "Dr." in quotes. He's your better. Respect his title even if you don't respect the man or his opinions.

No my man.

I am shitting on him because he's psycho.

I was not confused like you are.

NO ONE should be confused.

 
You said it yourself...

You don't know what he means by saying "2%-3%".........

So if YOU don't know what he's TRYING to say, then...what the fuck? Why defend him?
Because people like you always promote your own translation of words as fact.
 
No my man.

I am shitting on him because he's psycho.

I was not confused like you are.

NO ONE should be confused.


See, that lady right there is the one who is obviously making an errant presumption. She immediately assumes he intended to mean 2%-3% of the population. She's obviously too dimwitted to realize that's higher than our current projected mortality rates for COVID outright.

Over the past month our finest peer-reviewed publications, from The Lancet to JAMA to the BMJ, have predicted an ultimate CFR between 0.6%-2.3%. That's just of those who become infected. Accounting for those who don't this drops to a ceiling projection of 1.3%.

You're hysterical, and hyper-partisan. You're just howling because this was on FOX news. I don't give a shit if you or Twitter is offended. We'd all benefit if your types were just quiet while the smart people figure this out.
 
Back
Top