Complaints have been lodged with the physician's medical board by other physicians because of her stated positions on COVID-19, including recommending the use of HCQ and not recommending vaccination. The complaining physicians say that her statements are a danger to their medical practice. What do you think of this? Is this dangerous? Does the Medical Board have the power and right to control a physician's speech?
Does the accused physician have the right to make statements that are obviously against Public Health guidelines? Other complaining physicians state that her statements are a danger to their practices and patients. What do you think?
The accused physician runs an organization that gives internet opinions on COID-19, among other things. Apparently, this physician has thousands of followers. The first point of contention is that HCQ is useful for COVID-19; this is still controversial, so I think we can allow that. The second point is that the "lock-down" is not necessary; this obviously violates the Public Health Department recommendations. The third is that we should not get vaccinated; this is definitely against Public Health recommendations and general medical practice principles. The accused physician argues that medical science only evolves through contrary opinions and discussion. I agree this may be somewhat true, but in this current case the opinion should have been lodged 250 years ago. Vaccines has saved much of the world on multiple occasions. The isolation practices were proven over a hundred years ago, including in 1918. What do you think?
Doctor subject of complaints after COVID-19 tweets
Ontario doctor K K G has been criticized by fellow physicians and others after a series of tweets that they say spread misinformation about COVID-19.
CBC has reviewed two email complaints about G's tweets, including one by a family doctor to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, which sets regulatory standards for doctors in the province.
One of her tweets, from Aug. 6, stated: "#Humanity's existing effective defenses against #COVID19 to safely return to normal life now includes: -Truth, -T-cell Immunity, -Hydroxychloroquine."
That tweet has since been taken down for violating Twitter's rules. Twitter doesn't confirm what rules a specific tweet may have violated when it has been taken down. Many doctors also replied critically to G's tweet.
Hydroxychloroquine is a drug used to treat malaria and some autoimmune diseases, such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. It has been touted by U.S. President D T as a potential fix for COVID-19. However, the drug has been shown to be ineffective in combating the virus, according to a major study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Medical bodies such as the Canadian Pediatric Society say hydroxychloroquine has no significant benefit in fighting COVID-19. Health Canada has not authorized hydroxychloroquine to treat or cure COVID-19 and has warned Canadians about products making false and misleading claims. It says hydroxychloroquine can have serious side effects. Only recently did Health Canada authorize, with conditions, remdesivir to treat severe cases of COVID-19.
On Aug. 4, G tweeted "If you have not yet figured out that we don't need a vaccine, you are not paying attention," adding the hashtag #FactsNotFear. G identifies herself as K K on her Twitter profile.
Another of G's tweets on the same day states, "There is absolutely no medical or scientific reason for this prolonged, harmful, and illogical lockdown."
G operates a clinic in Brampton, Ont., and she has over 22,000 followers on Twitter. She is also the president and co-founder of Concerned Ontario Doctors, a self-described grassroots group that has been critical of the Ontario Medical Association, the organization that represents 34,000 of the province's doctors.
All practicing physicians in the province are legally mandated to pay dues to the OMA, though they do not have to be members of the group. The Concerned Doctors of Ontario did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
G and others have said the OMA attempts to muzzle doctors, and it refuses to be financially transparent and accountable to its members.
According to the CPSO, G's specialty is pediatrics.
G did not respond to CBC News's multiple requests for comment. On Twitter, she said, "There are always opposing views in medicine — historically many have led to some of the most significant medical advances.
"In a democratic society: there must always be open, constructive, public debate. Voices of Physicians & Scientists must never be attacked, censored or silenced."
G has also retweeted another doctor, S G, who claimed there was a financial incentive to discredit hydroxychloroquine as a treatment. S G's tweet was taken down for violating Twitter rules, but not G's retweet.
S G was one of the doctors in a 40-minute long video that went viral at the end of July, which promoted hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. At least 17 million people saw one version of the video, though both Facebook and Twitter removed copies from their platforms.
Twitter temporarily suspended the account of D T Jr. for posting the video until he deleted the tweet.
Please comment?
Looks Like Just a "Stern" Warning:
Ontario doctor cautioned by regulators for spreading COVID-19 misinformation
Stewart Bell and Andrew Russell, Global News: March 04, 2021.
An Ontario doctor has been cautioned by the College of Physicians and Surgeons for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines and lockdowns that could put the public at risk. Provided by Global News Dr. Kulvinder Gill, a Brampton, Ont. physician, has been cautioned for spreading COVID-19 misinformation.
Dr. Kulvinder Gill was issued three cautions for “inappropriate” and “unprofessional” statements she posted on social media claiming that neither lockdowns nor vaccines were necessary.
On Twitter, the Brampton doctor had claimed there was “absolutely no medical or scientific reason for this prolonged, harmful and illogical lockdown,” the college wrote in its decision.
She had also written “we don’t need a vaccine” and shared a Tweet claiming that contact tracing, testing and isolation were “ineffective, naive & counter-productive against COVID-19.”
The college’s complaints committee ruled that the comments, posted last year, were factually incorrect and likely to be taken seriously by non-medical members of the public because she is a physician.
Gill was cautioned for “lack of professionalism and failure to exercise caution in her posts on social media, which is irresponsible behaviour for a member of the profession and presents a possible risk to public health.”
No Hoax: Fighting COVID-19 has meant tackling conspiracy theories, even within families
The first of its type, the decision comes as Canada’s doctors are growing increasingly concerned about misinformation and conspiracy theories about COVID-19 that have become pervasive online.
A Global News investigation found that an assortment of far-right, anti-government and anti-vaccine groups, as well as China, Russia and Iran, have been spreading COVID-19 misinformation.
In its decisions, the college said that while it was valid to point out that lockdowns had drawbacks and to question if they were working or whether the costs outweighed the benefits, Gill had gone beyond that.
“She stated unequivocally and without providing any evidence that there is no medical or scientific reason for the lockdown," the college wrote.
"Her statement does not align with the information coming from public health, and moreover, it is not accurate,” according to the ruling.
Misinformation is spreading as fast as coronavirus. It will ‘take a village’ to fight it
Lockdowns in China and South Korea were evidence they reduced the spread of COVID-19, the college wrote.
“For the respondent to state otherwise is misinformed and misleading and furthermore an irresponsible statement to make on social medial during a pandemic,” the decision read.
Video: Concerns about third wave and getting back to normal
Gill is the co-founder of the advocacy group Concerned Ontario Doctors. Her Twitter account has more than 56,000 followers. She could not be reached for comment.
Her claim that vaccinations were not needed was also deemed inappropriate by the college, which said vaccines had been tested and approved in Canada and were the best way to end the pandemic.
“While it is possible for a return to ‘normal life’ without vaccinating the public, this is a high-risk strategy and one that could potentially take years to achieve,” the college wrote.
According to the decision, Gill provided no evidence to support the statement that vaccines were not necessary.
“It would be expected and understandable if a certain proportion of the general public who read this statement decided to decline the vaccine with the assurance that they were acting on the guidance of a physician.”
“For this reason, the Committee considered it irresponsible, and a potential risk to public health, for the respondent to have made this statement in the middle of a pandemic.”
The college complaints committee additionally took Gill to task for retweeting that contact tracing, testing and isolation were counter-productive, a view it called “indefensible.”
“The committee would expect a certain proportion of the non-medically trained public who read this post to subsequently decide not to follow government and public health rules and recommendations regarding contact tracing, testing and isolation," the ruling read.
“This could have significant negative consequences for public health. The Respondent’s comments in this regard are irresponsible and careless in the current context and climate."
While Gill had argued her tweets were taken out of context, the college said that tweets by nature had “limited context.” Nor did the college accept that her tweets were made on a personal account.
“The respondent’s Twitter biography makes it very clear that she is a physician and also identifies her as the leader of a group of physicians, Concerned Ontario Doctors," it said.
“The respondent’s tweets are accessible by the public. Moreover, members of the public who are not healthcare professionals are likely to attribute significant weight and authority to the respondent’s tweets, given her profession.”