(22-03-2022, 03:49 PM)Magoo Wrote: i might start calling myself Doctor.Must say I'm tiring somewhat in having to remind people that a PhD is a doctrate, therefore someone that has attained a PhD, as Dr. Campbell has, can legitimately refer to themselves as a doctor. In Dr Campbell's case he has a doctrate related to training nurses which isn't too far away from educating the general public which he does a pretty fine job of by sourcing, digesting and abridging scientific and research papers which he then presents in an easy to understand form.
that or The General, but Doctor sounds better. more genteel, more befitting for a man of my calm disposition.
Mr Campbell does as most internet pundits do.
he is an aggregator. he takes studies and documents from many sources to form an idea then runs with that.
his sources seem very good, so his ideas seem to make sense.
his ideas are not research, they are a collection of other peoples research drawn from to form conclusions to suit a narrative.
please dont insult the degreed scholars and institutions out there by calling it research, or evidence.
You only have to read the numerous positive comments posted in reply to his YouTube presentations by very skilled and highly qualified medical professionals to appreciate that his content passes the muster in terms of accuracy. That's good enough proof of truth for me.
If peer reviewed science papers don't qualify as research in your opinion then what does?
(22-03-2022, 03:33 PM)king1 Wrote:I put more credence in a collection of scientific papers from reliable international organisations than a public service website whose primary purpose is to drive immunisation uptake. To paraphrase the weakness that Dr Campbell was struggling to describe 'follow the money'.(22-03-2022, 02:40 PM)harm_less Wrote: Papers linked to in Dr. Campbell's video:it refers to this site
https://www.medscape.co.uk/viewarticle/c...tiveuk_int
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.abn8014
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/...1.full.pdf
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthc...022-01-11/
Newshub is hardly a reliable source of health or science information and their article contains absolutely no links to scientific studies to support its content.
https://www.immunology.org/coronavirus/c...on-vaccine