http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/jIiw7wmAcEU/two-questions-about-the-rolling-stone-story.php

Steve wrote about the latest Rolling Stone fiasco here. Basically, Rolling Stone picked up a local TV news story out of Oklahoma to the effect that large numbers of Oklahomans were overdosing on Ivermectin, to the point where hospitals were turning away gunshot victims and there were no ambulances to be had. Other leftists like Rachel Maddow picked up the story and ran with it, even though it was laughable on its face. Kyle Smith also has a good review of the story, and Iowahawk and others have fun at Rolling Stone’s expense at Twitchy. I think this is pretty funny:

For me, this episode prompts two questions. The first is, did anyone actually believe the Oklahoma story? In its original version, the TV news station quoted a single doctor but did not identify any of the hospitals that allegedly were turning away patients because of the supposed throng of Oklahomans overdosing on Ivermectin. Many have suggested that Rolling Stone must be thoroughly humiliated at being exposed peddling fake news, and that the magazine should have known better after the University of Virginia rape fiasco.

I’m not so sure. The lesson Rolling Stone could have taken away from the Virginia case is that it should be careful about libeling identifiable people who may sue. In the Ivermectin story, there is no potential for defamation. And do leftists like Rolling Stone’s journalists and Rachel Maddow really care about getting facts straight? I question whether they are embarrassed at all. (For what it is worth, at last word Maddow had not deleted her tweet promoting the Rolling Stone story.) I wonder whether, instead, they are proud of being Liars For the Cause. After all, anyone can tell the truth, but to lie for leftism requires a higher level of commitment.

This is a big topic, but another, more major instance is the Russia collusion hoax. Have any of the reporters or editors at publications like the New York Times and the Washington Post, along with many others, apologized for promoting a wholly made-up story? Not that I know of. Are they sheepish about it? Has being so grotesquely wrong prompted any trend toward humility? I don’t think so. My guess is that most of those who promoted the Russia hoax are satisfied that, while false, the story successfully served its intended purpose.

My second question is, why has relatively little attention been paid to potential treatments for covid? The Rolling Stone story referred to “false claims [Ivermectin] could fight COVID-19.” Are such claims false? I don’t know, but I believe a number of practitioners have said that they got good results with Ivermectin. Similarly, early in the pandemic liberals violently denounced clinicians who reported that they saw good results with hydroxychloroquine when it was administered early, usually in combination with other drugs or supplements.

The only treatment for covid about which liberals have ever shown any enthusiasm was ventilators. Remember when there was talk about commandeering automobile companies’ production lines to produce vast numbers of ventilators? But a ventilator can’t cure anything; at best, it can keep a patient alive for a few days to give another treatment a chance to work. But what treatment?

Beyond ventilators, the only response to covid of which liberals seem to approve is vaccination. Liberals have tried to coerce everyone to be vaccinated, even in the face of evidence that the vaccines are not as effective as originally hoped. (For the record, I was among the first to be vaccinated and encourage others to do so as well.) Why the over-the-top insistence on vaccination, at the same time when little attention is being paid to treatment of the disease?

Further, why is it that we constantly hear from bureaucrats like Dr. Fauci who likely haven’t seen a patient in decades, while the voices of actual practicing doctors–the physicians who in some cases have treated hundreds of covid patients–are silenced? Especially when they try to report positive results from a course of treatment?

Granted, viruses are generally hard to cure or to treat. The conventional advice for covid is to treat it the same way you would a cold or the flu–a fact that seems revealing in itself. But I think the seeming disinterest in identifying practical remedies for covid, while we are awash in news stories about other aspects of the disease, is puzzling.

You Might Like
Learn more about RevenueStripe...