Doctor John Campbell

[king1]

Curious to know peoples take on the good doctor nowadays... 

I know he is/was influential and helped a lot of people make a lot of sense of the numbers in the early days of the pandemic, but from what I am reading some folks seem to think he has gone off the rails a bit...

for example
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus...t-happened
https://www.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/...source_of/
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMajorityRepo..._campbell/

a bit of a fact checking fail by the looks of it
https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/sciche...-covid-19/

and this monstrosity of a discussion about a video he produced, number of british deaths from covid, and being called out by the BBC...
https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthr...?t=7163826

which pertains to this article.


yet you can not argue he is popular with millions of followers

we had a bit of a discussion about him HERE


Has he changed?   he seems to have created quite a polarising following, you either love him or hate him... 

I'm of two minds, on the one hand he is assimilating copious amounts of data from multiple sources - no-one can really be blamed for the odd misinterpretation of data and results...  but on the other though, he is portraying himself as a knowledgeable professional in the field, with a wide following, so there should be a certain level of accountability for the information one provides as fact...

[Praktica]

Life's too short to spend hours watching his videos.

[Olive]

Life's too short to spend hours watching his videos.

Indeed.   And I distrust anyone who portrays their opinions via YouTube rather than in writing.   They are usually grifting.    And it's naff to call yourself Doctor.

[harm_less]

Life's too short to spend hours watching his videos.

Indeed.   And I distrust anyone who portrays their opinions via YouTube rather than in writing.   They are usually grifting.    And it's naff to call yourself Doctor.

Anyone who has a doctrate (PhD) is fully entitled to use the title 'Doctor'. Dr. John Campbell attained a PhD from the University of Bolton in the UK for his "development of teaching methods using digital media such as online videos" which is exactly what he is doing by way of his YouTube channel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Campbell_(YouTuber)#Early_life_and_education

Modern education is increasingly reliant on use of web based delivery methods so being dismissive of such content would seem a bit outdated in perspective.

In regard to the flack he is receiving over some of his posts' content that is only to be expected towards anyone that doesn't follow the accepted pharmaceutical line in regards to health advice. The fact that his channel is still active on YouTube while many others have been suspended in regard to their disinformational content is testament to the accuracy of his presentations. Big pharma rules in today's healthcare environment and Dr Campbell is very skilled in not only presenting accurate appraisals of the reams of research data he absorbs but also then backing his presentations with the research document he sources it from making his videos inarguable in most cases, and when he does slip up he is all to willing to redress the subject.

[Praktica]

Comments about "accepted pharmaceutical line" and "big pharma" are getting close to going down the CT rabbithole.

[harm_less]

Comments about "accepted pharmaceutical line" and "big pharma" are getting close to going down the CT rabbithole.

When was the last time you came home from a GP's appointment with dietary and physical activity recommendations?
The usual result is to trip to the pharmacist following your doctor's consultation which was in a surgery festooned with drug company paraphernalia.

Dr Campbell had a pretty hard nosed pharmaceutical approach when he first started his COVID related videos but we are noting that various contacts he has made during the past two years have served to remove the scales from his eyes in this regard, and especially so since the release of the Pfizer trial documents revealed the level of harm that they were attempting to keep under covers. He has an instinctively investigative mind so it isn't surprising to see him rolling back a few misconceptions.

[Praktica]

Comments about "accepted pharmaceutical line" and "big pharma" are getting close to going down the CT rabbithole.

When was the last time you came home from a GP's appointment with dietary and physical activity recommendations?
The usual result is to trip to the pharmacist following your doctor's consultation which was in a surgery festooned with drug company paraphernalia.

Dr Campbell had a pretty hard nosed pharmaceutical approach when he first started his COVID related videos but we are noting that various contacts he has made during the past two years have served to remove the scales from his eyes in this regard, and especially so since the release of the Pfizer trial documents revealed the level of harm that they were attempting to keep under covers. He has an instinctively investigative mind so it isn't surprising to see him rolling back a few misconceptions.

I often discuss my physical activity with my GP, and I have indeed received dietary advice on occasion - it looks like that rabbit hole is getting bigger.

[harm_less]

When was the last time you came home from a GP's appointment with dietary and physical activity recommendations?
The usual result is to trip to the pharmacist following your doctor's consultation which was in a surgery festooned with drug company paraphernalia.

Dr Campbell had a pretty hard nosed pharmaceutical approach when he first started his COVID related videos but we are noting that various contacts he has made during the past two years have served to remove the scales from his eyes in this regard, and especially so since the release of the Pfizer trial documents revealed the level of harm that they were attempting to keep under covers. He has an instinctively investigative mind so it isn't surprising to see him rolling back a few misconceptions.

I often discuss my physical activity with my GP, and I have indeed received dietary advice on occasion - it looks like that rabbit hole is getting bigger.

Not necessarily. We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build which in either case would make dietary advice blatantly relevant. You may also be consulting an integrative health focussed GP which would also explain your experiences.

[Magoo]

im not one for research, so my conclusions are anecdotal at best, but i think i can cut to the heart of the matter with some confidence..
i know a line of bullshit when i hear it.

1) yes he has a doctorate, so did that hairy legged hag down timaru way issuing exemptions.
so does jack karvorkian, mengele had a doctorate from that noble institution of learning the university of munich.
(wasnt a medical doctorate either from memory.)
a doctorate is not a character reference, and irrelevant to mr campbells credentials as a peer reviewed specialist dispensing health advice on the internet.

2) mr campbell uses excellent resources, peer reviewed even, then makes leaps and assumptions based on what he has read. He then offers medical conclusions as researched fact, it is not. it is an interpretation (his) of those documents he has chosen to read.

3) Chosen to read? yes, mr campbell is not averse at all to not acknowledging counter science to his 'theories', just the bits that suit his message. im not going to mention iver fucking mectin again.

4) He fuels fuckwits. His 'opinions' are parroted everywhere. the 'over reporting of numbers'. Honestly i dont know where to start with this criminal. he has accused pfizer of causing over a thousand deaths. the moron forgot to say what caused the deaths was not necessarily vaccine or even covid ffs. imbecile. the list goes on.

5) He is a Youtube manifestation (some might say infestation), he was in the right place at the right time, again not a qualification as specialist or researcher. just a youtuber. views are not votes, nor are they endorsements, to mr campbell they are money, pure and unpolished, the great motivator. be sure to hit the like button and ring the notification bell.

6) He passes off his conclusions as science, but they are not peer reviewed, and no more science than casting spells. much of his sourcework is not peer reviewed, and he quotes it as fact. next time youre chatting with the miserable little prick ask him about mrna and heart attacks. lies.

7) i dont like the cut of his jib, and im a very good judge of people. hes a nit picker, uses 'what about this' and 'this study says'. and argues minutia like the pro's do on the jerk circuit. He has no lips. his eyes are too close together and his mum dresses him funny.

jolly good then.

---

no one is immune to the algorithm, and mr campbell is just another passage into the warren.

[Olive]

Comments about "accepted pharmaceutical line" and "big pharma" are getting close to going down the CT rabbithole.

I agree.   One of my areas of interest is nutrition, and after much reading I ended up with a style of eating that works for me.  In the course of exploring the evolving field of dietary exclusions, supplementations etc I had to wade through an incredible number of magical thinkers, ignoramuses, and downright charlatans to get to those who could back up their recommendations with actual peer reviewed studies.   Unfortunately some of those who seemed credible when it came to diet have turned out to simply be contrarians, loathers of Big Pharma,  who have joyfully slid into the rabbit hole and lost all of their early credibility.  I have a feeling that "Doctor" John Campbell is in the same category - started out sincere and knowledgeable but has succumbed to CT.

[Praktica]

I often discuss my physical activity with my GP, and I have indeed received dietary advice on occasion - it looks like that rabbit hole is getting bigger.

Not necessarily. We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build which in either case would make dietary advice blatantly relevant. You may also be consulting an integrative health focussed GP which would also explain your experiences.

Nope - Jan doesn't do "integrative health" - she practises good old fashioned patient oriented medicine. No naturopaths, osteopaths, "nutritionalists", yoga practitioners or other quacks are involved.

[harm_less]

Interesting to see posts from those seeking or receiving dietary advice who are receptive to this while also disparaging Dr Campbell's promotion of non-pharmaceutical approaches in addressing COVID.

Dr Campbell is adopting a more integrative approach which is in line with his good old fashioned patient oriented medicine regime. He also repeatedly advises that he is not dispensing health advice which of course is patently impossible for viewers who he has absolutely no knowledge of medically.

[Olive]

Are you saying that Ivermectin is not a pharmaceutical product?

[king1]

Interesting to see posts from those seeking or receiving dietary advice who are receptive to this while also disparaging Dr Campbell's promotion of non-pharmaceutical approaches in addressing COVID.

to be fair, accepting dietary advice from nutritionists is very different than taking advice from a medical professional advocating advice that "doesn't follow the accepted pharmaceutical line".   The former is established knowledge and doesn't really require any justification, the latter really does requires closer scrutiny and a higher bar given it is going against established medical practice and knowledge.

[harm_less]

Are you saying that Ivermectin is not a pharmaceutical product?

No, but using it in a prophylactic manner beyond what its label claim is, is outside its pharmaceutically intended purpose so in that way it is being treated as an alternative treatment substance. There are currently practitioners using a wide variety of off-patent drugs in off-label applications to combat cancer which is not dislike the way ivermectin is being promoted in some quarters to (rightly or wrongly) combat COVID. In both cases the use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income so is of course criticised by them and definitely not going to be viewed positively in the unlikely event that research is carried out on the efficacy of such substances in those applications.

[king1]

There are currently practitioners using a wide variety of off-patent drugs in off-label applications to combat cancer which is not dislike the way ivermectin is being promoted in some quarters to (rightly or wrongly) combat COVID. In both cases the use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income so is of course criticised by them and definitely not going to be viewed positively in the unlikely event that research is carried out on the efficacy of such substances in those applications.

That sounds a lot like desperate cancer patients prepared to pay a lot of money for less conventional treatments, after exhausting established treatments, to less reputable medical professionals, to stave off their inevitable death...  

and regarding 

use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income 

I'm not so sure that is the case at all, big pharma have had decades of higher prices to recover their development costs, they know well in advance that patents are expiring.  The only implication I can really see for big pharma is that decision of whether to keep supplying the drug themselves in a competitive market. I guess most do...

But in regard to Ivermectin and Covid, any drug for mass distribution has to be considered safe for the treatment intended, but it seems clear to Merck at least that this is not the case.  You would have to be a brave CEO to go against the advice of the company that actually developed it I would have thought
https://www.merck.com/news/merck-stateme...-pandemic/

[harm_less]

There are currently practitioners using a wide variety of off-patent drugs in off-label applications to combat cancer which is not dislike the way ivermectin is being promoted in some quarters to (rightly or wrongly) combat COVID. In both cases the use of cheap alternatives to derive a desired result is denying pharmaceutical companies of potential income so is of course criticised by them and definitely not going to be viewed positively in the unlikely event that research is carried out on the efficacy of such substances in those applications.

That sounds a lot like desperate cancer patients prepared to pay a lot of money for less conventional treatments, after exhausting established treatments, to less reputable medical professionals, to stave off their inevitable death...  

This sounds pretty reputable to me: https://gmri.org.nz/cms/the-paradigm-shi...-industry/
This research follows the same strategy pioneered by Jane McLelland who is living proof of the results of this approach and that 'terminal' cancer isn't necessarily fatal.

[king1]

That sounds a lot like desperate cancer patients prepared to pay a lot of money for less conventional treatments, after exhausting established treatments, to less reputable medical professionals, to stave off their inevitable death...  

This sounds pretty reputable to me: https://gmri.org.nz/cms/the-paradigm-shi...-industry/
This research follows the same strategy pioneered by Jane McLelland who is living proof of the results of this approach and that 'terminal' cancer isn't necessarily fatal.

Well yes it does but that looks very aspirational, in the process of developing new and better systems for cancer treatment.  Not really an established treatment ready for the masses, might be a few years yet...

the use of ivermectin for covid treatment isn't really comparable though, as it hasn't been proven to be safe 'enough' for mass distribution, which is obviously whats required to treat covid.

[harm_less]

Interesting to see posts from those seeking or receiving dietary advice who are receptive to this while also disparaging Dr Campbell's promotion of non-pharmaceutical approaches in addressing COVID.

to be fair, accepting dietary advice from nutritionists is very different than taking advice from a medical professional advocating advice that "doesn't follow the accepted pharmaceutical line".   The former is established knowledge and doesn't really require any justification, the latter really does requires closer scrutiny and a higher bar given it is going against established medical practice and knowledge.

In the posts I was referring to Olive is happy to use dietary and supplement advice but only after she has filtered out the unreliable practitioners, which could have been done by contacting the professional body that regulates these health providors, whereas Practika is openly dismissive of nutritionists while taking dietary advice from his GP who is unlikely to be formally qualified to practice in this capacity but in doing so is effectively following integrative principles.

It seems that some people are happy to compromise their outlooks when the situation demands.

[king1]

to be fair, accepting dietary advice from nutritionists is very different than taking advice from a medical professional advocating advice that "doesn't follow the accepted pharmaceutical line".   The former is established knowledge and doesn't really require any justification, the latter really does requires closer scrutiny and a higher bar given it is going against established medical practice and knowledge.

In the posts I was referring to Olive is happy to use dietary and supplement advice but only after she has filtered out the unreliable practitioners, which could have been done by contacting the professional body that regulates these health providors, whereas Practika is openly dismissive of nutritionists while taking dietary advice from his GP who is unlikely to be formally qualified to practice in this capacity but in doing so is effectively following integrative principles.

It seems that some people are happy to compromise their outlooks when the situation demands.

I see your point, i guess everyone has their own minimum level of 'qualified' that they are comfortable with... 

Your last paragraph really is a succinct description of what people do every day with every decision they make...