The blurred line between free speech and medical misinformation

{"text":[[{"start":null,"text":"

"}],[{"start":8.78,"text":"The writer is a science commentator"}],[{"start":11.86,"text":"It started off promisingly enough. Dr Aseem Malhotra, a charismatic British cardiologist invited to address the Reform UK party conference at the weekend, spoke persuasively of how the medical world is rife with conflicts of interest and biases among researchers, journals and regulators."}],[{"start":33.59,"text":"He favoured evidence-based medicine but, he railed, Big Pharma’s need to maximise shareholder returns burdens society with treatments of questionable efficacy. Lifestyle factors such as poor diet, meanwhile, have stoked a healthcare crisis but, again, powerful vested interests, including Big Food, stymie action."}],[{"start":61.07000000000001,"text":"So far, so robust. But then came some astonishing talking points: the World Health Organization has been captured by Bill Gates; mRNA Covid vaccines are, in effect, a form of gene therapy that has killed or harmed millions; the mainstream media won’t touch the story. Malhotra cited the suspicions of others that the jabs were a “significant factor” in cancers among British royals."}],[{"start":92.60000000000001,"text":"Reform, a pro-Brexit, anti-immigration party led by Nigel Farage, later distanced itself from the presentation but defended Malhotra’s right to free speech. And that neatly illustrates an urgent challenge in health and science: how to combat possible misinformation in a febrile political environment without being accused of censorship or paternalism."}],[{"start":118.70000000000002,"text":"The UK health security agency said the mRNA vaccines were proven to be safe and effective, and “ultimately helped to save many thousands of lives” in the UK. The charity Cancer Research UK says there is no good evidence linking the jabs to cancer."}],[{"start":140.09000000000003,"text":"Several respected medical commentators also expressed strongly dissenting opinions. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet medical journal, said that the benefits of mRNA vaccines massively outweigh their harms. Brian Ferguson, a professor of viral immunology at Cambridge university, accused Malhotra of spreading “anti-vax tropes that have been extensively disproven”."}],[{"start":168.82000000000002,"text":"Dr Rachel Clarke, an NHS palliative care doctor, author and medical commentator, told me that inaction by medical authorities was allowing Malhotra to “scaremonger with impunity”. Spreading misinformation, she said, could incite people to act in ways that harm their health, such as rejecting vaccination out of hand: “That is deeply wrong . . . Malhotra’s free speech as an individual is irrelevant to what he can and can’t say as a doctor, which should be curtailed by his duty to do no harm.”  "}],[{"start":206.75000000000003,"text":"Malhotra is used to controversy: he disputes the benefits of statins and questions the role of saturated fats in heart health. A General Medical Council spokesperson said: “We are aware of comments made by Dr Aseem Malhotra and we will consider them with care before deciding what action, if any, may be necessary.”"}],[{"start":232.09000000000003,"text":"Malhotra denied peddling misinformation and defended his speech, telling the FT it was intended “to highlight that commercial distortions of the scientific evidence (including biased reporting in the media) are at the root of the healthcare crisis. I’m pro drug and vaccine safety in keeping with the principles of ethical evidence-based medical practice.” Malhotra said his speech was in keeping with GMC rules and the Nolan principles of public life. He added: “I think use of the word ‘anti-vax’ as a form of abuse should be considered a hate crime.” "}],[{"start":275.64000000000004,"text":"Reform is closely allied to the Maga movement and Malhotra, an adviser to US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, helped with the party’s “Make Britain Healthy Again” health policy. Kennedy’s impact on American public health has been brutal: diminishing or dismantling health agencies, cancelling research, sacking experts and promoting vaccine sceptics. Last month, Kennedy cancelled $500mn of research into future mRNA vaccines."}],[{"start":313.18000000000006,"text":"The public is not at fault for falling for pseudoscience, Clarke argues, because “they are floundering in an unregulated morass of claim and counterclaim on social media”. The starting point is always to understand people’s concerns, she says, and move to calm and respectful discussion."}],[{"start":333.9200000000001,"text":"Tech companies, meanwhile, surely bear some responsibility for any misinformation on their platforms; people in power have a duty to call it out. “Prebunking” myths ahead of time can help: mRNA technology did not come from nowhere but had been in development for decades. Transparency is key: no drug or medicine is completely free of adverse effects and what matters is weighing the benefits against possible harms."}],[{"start":363.9600000000001,"text":"This is no time for scientists to be timid. It would be a mistake to think the chaos unfolding in US labs and research institutes could not happen elsewhere."}],[{"start":385.8500000000001,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftmailbox.cn/album/a_1758009709_6363.mp3"}