It was really interesting to see this in the Medical Oath of the Imperial College of Medicine: "I will oppose policies in breach of human rights and will not participate in them." That would have been nice.
Do you happen to know whether these same oaths apply to "public health" practitioners?
I too noted the oath includes respecting human rights. It is difficult to know what we even mean by human rights anymore. Not so long ago it was a concept that we all tacitly understood, even if there was disagreement as to application. Now it means human rights are considered once one has been vaccinated.
The university system should be primarily, if not only, focused on education and accreditation. It needs to get out of the business of becoming a nanny-institution or virtue signalling centre. And public health has a serious credibility issue right now. Something is very broken. There needs to be a robust conversation and debate, and facts and data ought to be driving policy, but it seems as if something else is the main driver of public health. And I don’t think it is health and safety. A policy decision was made (vaxxine) at the beginning of the pandemic and there is no deviation from that policy.
Right, public health has a lot to answer for. And I found this, from the public-health oath you linked to, quite revealing: "Public health represents the collective actions necessary to protect the health of all people."
It was really interesting to see this in the Medical Oath of the Imperial College of Medicine: "I will oppose policies in breach of human rights and will not participate in them." That would have been nice.
Do you happen to know whether these same oaths apply to "public health" practitioners?
Apparently there are public health oaths. https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/about/mission-history/public-health-oath.
I too noted the oath includes respecting human rights. It is difficult to know what we even mean by human rights anymore. Not so long ago it was a concept that we all tacitly understood, even if there was disagreement as to application. Now it means human rights are considered once one has been vaccinated.
Good for the Ryerson students. It won't stop until people make it stop.
Universities should not be in the business of engaging in public health policy. Leave public health to the public health authorities.
The university system should be primarily, if not only, focused on education and accreditation. It needs to get out of the business of becoming a nanny-institution or virtue signalling centre. And public health has a serious credibility issue right now. Something is very broken. There needs to be a robust conversation and debate, and facts and data ought to be driving policy, but it seems as if something else is the main driver of public health. And I don’t think it is health and safety. A policy decision was made (vaxxine) at the beginning of the pandemic and there is no deviation from that policy.
Right, public health has a lot to answer for. And I found this, from the public-health oath you linked to, quite revealing: "Public health represents the collective actions necessary to protect the health of all people."