zlacker

_sigh_ Do Americans really go and check which team a doctor plays for before deciding whether to take their recommendations seriously? If he was affiliated with a Democratic governor, somehow I don't think it would be brought up with the same implication.

Go read the Wikipedia page for Dr. Makary; he's a well published and awarded researcher, not a partisan hack like your comment makes him out to be. It's distressing to me that in America "he/she supports a different party than I do" is enough reason to cast doubt on an entire career of great work.

>>honkda+(OP)
America is effectively two nations forced into one at this point.

>>honkda+(OP)
Doctors were literally paid to push certain drugs. They are not infallible nor perfect, and they can just as easily be paid to say untrue things as anyone else.

> If he was affiliated with a Democratic governor, somehow I don't think it would be brought up with the same implication.

It would be, but from the other side (e.g. Dr Fauci anyone?)

>>juve19+Sr
Of course they can, I don't see anyone debating that point. Dr. Makary actually spent part of his career working _against_ profit-seeking doctors and predatory hospitals. I'm not sure why you're bringing that up in the first place, unless you have some specific bone to pick with him, and if you do I'm curious what it is. What you're saying is just as misdirected as if we were talking about engineers and I pointed out that they can be literally paid to write bad code, they are neither infallible nor perfect, and can just as easily be paid to say untrue things as anyone else.

>It would be, but from the other side (e.g. Dr Fauci anyone?)

You've actually illustrated my point very well here. What I'm saying is that it's great that places like HN are largely able to discuss public health at face value, rather than through the Red v. Blue lens that most Americans insist on reducing things to. Unfortunately, as soon as you accuse "the other side" of doing just about anything, your intentions are revealed, the water is muddied, and the discussion becomes useless.

>>honkda+qv
Someone simply mentioned his affiliation. I don't see a problem. This doctor is dabbling in policy, not whether or not my prescription is still good. Policy means politics. His background therefore matters.

> What I'm saying is that it's great that places like HN are largely able to discuss public health at face value, rather than through the Red v. Blue lens that most Americans insist on reducing things to.

Not really true anymore, sadly.