It is not “balanced” to give people false faith about the pandemic – it is dangerous


Thanks to his viral tweets, Professor Karol Sikora, an oncologist at the private University of Buckingham, has become a social media celebrity and a regular on TV screens. It is easy to understand why the “Positive Professor” has built such a broad following: he gives desperate – sometimes vulnerable – people what they need most in a time of death, sickness, economic uncertainty and suspended freedoms: hope. His formula is simple: the policies strangling our economic and personal lives may actually be needless, unlike the misery peddled by prophets of doom. But nothing is as cruel as false hope, and it can be risky during a pandemic when people’s lives rely on adherence to measures of social distance.

Sikora is not a virologist or epidemiologist: he is a specialist in the field of cancer. Newspapers and TV shows are full of non-specialists debating the government’s response to the crisis, as it should be in a democracy. That should not preclude him from speaking on the coronavirus. “got it wrong too often”got it wrong too often”need a ‘denier’ to balance the debate.”need a “other side” to balance the debate. Panic and fear will only make it worse,”Panic and fear will only make the situation worse,” “If the government’s rules are followed, we will return to normal by June. “By May, Sikora felt vindicated, and hubris had set in. “Some laughed at my prediction at the end of March that we would return to normalcy in the second week of May – it was correct,” he explained. “I think things will be virtually back to normal by August, maybe even sooner.” He added a weak caveat: “We should still prepare for the worst, but hope for the best!” He started to stretch his optimism and experience as the fall began.

He supported the prediction in an interview with the BBC that “it will just fizzle out, cause very few deaths and hospitalizations” and “gradually turn into something like the flu or a cold.”

It was an idea condemned as “very dangerous” by one leading scientist; another claimed that “this is in no way fizzling out.”

If you downplay the magnitude of this disorder, you are at risk of resurgence on an alarming scale,’ said Sikora.

When a circuit shutdown to prevent a “catastrophe” was proposed by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), Sikora signed a letter calling for the abandonment of the current method in favor of targeted measures for the elderly and vulnerable, which one scientist characterized as a “thinly veiled return to a strategy of herd immunity.”

And yet, as I write this, Sikora appears as a knowledgeable guest on BBC Radio 2. Why was Sikora so systematically spotlighted in this crisis by the media? It should have set alarm bells ringing for any superficial inspection.

“This person has been warned by the college before for claiming to be employed by us.”This individual was previously cautioned by the college for claiming to be employed by us.”lost control of their own destiny in the health care system”lost control of th


Leave A Reply