Fascist Fauci over a period of three years has released massive amounts of misinformation—like “take the vaccine and you won’t get COVID.” He has lied about where it came from, refuses to tell if the vaccine companies have given him “royalties”. Worse, he has lied by not telling the public there are NO studies showing the value and safety of the vaccine to those under five. And, not told young males that take the vaccine, they have a good chance to have a lifetime of heart problems.
Every California doctor that quotes Fauci is passing along misinformation will they have their licenses taken from them? Why not?
“Attorney Laura Powell and Dr. Aaron Kheriaty spoke briefly in opposition to AB 2098 – they had to share 3 minutes.
Powell addressed Assemblyman Low: “You can’t achieve your goals [in AB 2098] without violating the Constitution.” She also said “there is no misinformation crisis. The public has lost faith in the medical industry.”
Dr. Aaron Kheriaty said the text of AB 2098 makes statements about COVID that are already out of date, noting that the bill was written during the pandemic. “A physician with a gag order is not a doctor patients can trust.”
AB 2098: CA Doctors Who Spread COVID ‘Misinformation’ Risk Losing License to Practice
Use of the stigmatizing label ‘misinformation’ in a medical disciplinary environment is anti-scientific and unethical
By Katy Grimes, California Globe, 6/28/22
According to Democrat Assemblyman Evan Low, his controversial bill, AB 2098, “helps to ensure we tackle misinformation and disinformation” doctors could be spreading to patients about COVID.
AB 2098 was heard Monday in the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee.
The definition of misinformation, according to the bill is chilling when applied to medical practices:
“‘Misinformation’ means false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus to an extent where its dissemination constitutes gross negligence by the licensee.”
Many medical professionals have called this definition “medical tyranny.” Imagine if cancer was treated the same by this Legislature. Is there “contemporary scientific consensus” on treatments, and are physicians threatened with the loss of their licenses if they try new treatments or medications for cancer patients?
Attorney Laura Powell and Dr. Aaron Kheriaty spoke briefly in opposition to AB 2098 – they had to share 3 minutes.
Powell addressed Assemblyman Low: “You can’t achieve your goals [in AB 2098] without violating the Constitution.” She also said “there is no misinformation crisis. The public has lost faith in the medical industry.”
Dr. Aaron Kheriaty said the text of AB 2098 makes statements about COVID that are already out of date, noting that the bill was written during the pandemic. “A physician with a gag order is not a doctor patients can trust.”
According to California Health Coalition Advocacy: “Top doctors in their field from UCSF, Stanford, and other well respected institutions are speaking out about their lack of support for COVID-19 vaccines for children. Would these respected doctors be disciplined if AB 2098 were to pass?”
The bill analysis from the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee summarizes AB 2098:
“Makes disseminating misinformation, as defined, or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines, by a physician and surgeon unprofessional conduct.”
“The understanding of the data and science related to COVID-19 continues to change as more studies are done,” California Health Coalition Advocacy said. “Standards of care are being updated as new information and treatments emerge. Any attempt at determining ‘contemporary scientific consensus’ will be fleeting.”
Will this new law begin and end with COVID? Or will it spread to other medical conditions?
Under the bill, doctors cannot provide information and advice to patients about COVID unless it is in accordance with the “contemporary scientific consensus.”
That didn’t set well with Senator Melissa Melendez (R-Lake Elsinore). “We know things now that we didn’t know during the pandemic,” Melendez said. She suggested a scenario where a physician is disciplined on “yesterday’s settled science” which then became accepted information and/or treatment today.
Assemblyman Low (D-Campbell) insisted in the hearing Monday that “malicious intent” has to be at the root of the misinformation. But he admitted he is still working on the language in the bill.
Sen. Melendez asked how the medical board will prove “malicious intent. “The board is made up of one-half doctors and one-half attorneys. The attorneys are no more qualified than I am.”
An Emergency Room physician who provided testimony in favor of AB 2098 for Low told Sen. Melendez, “It’s a malicious regard for the truth.”
Melendez said her concerns remained, and added, “I am concerned it will be used as a cudgel to intimidate physicians.”
Sen. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) who authored the sister bill to AB 2098, SB 1018, said with Medical Board and Medical Association support, “doctors of California say the medical board needs to have this authority.” He said there is a national call to address the misinformation problem. “We only want to help the medical board do its job.”
Senator Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh (R-Yucaipa) said in 2020, doctors made statements about what they knew, and months later that science changed. “Science is always evolving,” Ochoa Bogh said. “Doctors need space to try new things without a ‘disinformation’ label.” She said no doctor should be penalized for research or differing opinions. She then suggested to Low, where do doctors who do medical research outside of the medical board fit in. “Is that malicious intent?”
“Would that be considered under the malicious intent before it is scientific truth?”
“If there is harm to patients,” Low answered. “That’s gross negligence.”
“We do know people are getting COVID who are vaccinated and boosted three times,” noted Senator Pat Bates (R-Laguna Niguel).
Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Roth (D-Riverside) shared his skepticism over AB 2098. “In order to take action against a doctor, ‘contemporary scientific consensus is scientific agreement. Is there scientific agreement?”
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. oppose AB 2098: “We believe it is unethical for physicians to participate in any process that impedes the free exchange of scientific and clinical ideas through public allegations of misconduct or threats of punishment. Use of the stigmatizing label ‘misinformation’ in a medical disciplinary environment is anti-scientific and unethical.”
The California Medical Association sponsored AB 2098.
Despite admitting the bill needs much more work, the committee Democrats passed Low’s AB 2098 with no Republican votes, 9-4. It heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee next.
