A group of US doctors claimed to have successfully treated their COVID-19 patients. They claimed to have used a combination of drugs that included hydroxychloroquine.
The role of journalists includes investigating claims. Instead, they are smearing the doctors. Our local cyberbullies are playing their part in the international smear campaign.
Since the US President suggested that hydroxychloroquine should be examined as a potential treatment, the drug got politicised. For purely political reasons, a campaign was started to discredit this drug.
On May 16, 2020, one of the most prestigious medical journals, The Lancet, took the partisan approach of opposing Trump in its editorial. It concluded “Americans must put a president in the White House come January 2021, who will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics.” [1]
Less than one week later, on May 22, 2020, The Lancet published a peer-reviewed study discrediting hydroxychloroquine as ineffective and unsafe [2]. This led to the World Health Organisation stopping global hydroxychloroquine trials to treat COVID-19. The US media promoted this study as the nail in the hydroxychloroquine coffin.
Sacrificing integrity
Since truth will eventually prevail, The Lancet’s peer-reviewed study was found to be full of fake science, and retracted [2]. But the campaign against hydroxychloroquine did not stop. The US media ridiculed any doctor or politician who spoke favourably about hydroxychloroquine as not ‘listening to the science’.
We are living in an age where our medical and media professionals are eager to sacrifice their professional integrity for political reasons. This is an especially dangerous time for COVID-19 patients, who are to become collateral damage.
The reason for the surge in fake news and fake science coming out of the US is the upcoming Presidential election. With their journalists and academics, the end justifies the means.
As is normally the case, the truth may be found among those who are willing to present their evidence for public scrutiny – which is what the doctors appeared willing to do.
Truth is unlikely to be found among biased US journalists and academics. This is because their singular aim is to support one political party, by any means necessary. Which party? Approximately 96 per cent of US journalists’ campaign contributions go to Democrat candidates [3]. Also, about 80 to 100 per cent of major university employees’ campaign contributions go to Democrat candidates [4].
This bias appears to have a significant effect on the performance of journalists. The Pew Research Centre proved ultra-biased political coverage in favour of Democratic candidates [5].
It is easy to get swept up in the US media bias. However, it is important to understand that they have a specific agenda – that they seem willing to justify misleading the public to achieve.
Grenville Phillips II is a Chartered Structural Engineer and President of Solutions Barbados. He can be reached at NextParty246@gmail.com.
