Inaccuracies, irresponsible coverage, & conflicts of interest in The New Yorker
fast.ai
fast.ai
> Both Khullar and one of his sources, Vinay Prasad, have venture capital funding from Arnold Venture for projects that help hospitals reduce costs by cutting care. Thus, they stand to gain financially by minimizing the reality of long covid.
That’s an absurd definition of conflict of interest. It’s like someone writing an article about fruit and noting that the person holds stock in an insulin manufacturer.
The piece doesn’t say long COVID isn’t real. It examines one side of patient advocacy, specifically a huge Facebook group that’s whipped people up into a frenzy; now they’re blaming pretty much anything on long COVID and the head of it has made some obviously silly assertions such as there being no mild COVID cases.
Have criticism about journalism, fine, but this response is reaching as hard as it can to find things to complain about. Clearly the New Yorker article struck a nerve.
The article in question, since the post does not link to it.
Medicine, like all of science, is political:
- which questions get asked
- which projects get funded
- how debates get framed
- who the researchers are
- context of data (what categories, what labels, which biases, what is left out)
- whose suffering is counted 1/
There is a world of difference between 'sadly, there is a degree of corruption in the system' and 'the system is corruption'.