Recently, I was unexpectedly labeled as a Liberal online. As I read the comment, I instinctively clutched my necklace and nearly choked on my hot tea. How did I find myself in this situation?
Despite the headlines dominating the news, it was just another typical week in my medical practice: reading research articles, digesting new guidelines, and sharing recommendations. Coincidentally, last week’s guidelines had a direct impact on my child’s safety. In response, I collaborated with fellow physicians to draft a letter urging adherence to established medical protocols. Our message was clear: please follow the recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control. This layered approach aims to ensure that all children, especially the most vulnerable, can return to school safely by wearing masks indoors.
To my surprise, several physicians who signed the letter faced angry, anonymous backlash; some colleagues even criticized them for their involvement. As someone who typically steers clear of political discussions and prefers medical journals over news outlets, I found myself questioning whether it was naïve to think that evidence-based medicine stood apart from political affiliations.
As I pondered this while my carefully baked scones cooled, I wrestled with the notion: why has adhering to medical recommendations become associated with political ideologies?
Today’s landscape is flooded with guidelines and recommendations in the medical field, yet it seems we’re treated like athletes at the Olympics in the media spotlight. The treatment protocols for COVID-19 are not significantly older or better validated than the vaccines themselves. Beyond the accepted COVID protocols, how many patients have desperately sought any treatment—regardless of how experimental—once they fell ill? Were the critics suggesting that they would refuse any evidence-based treatment from a physician?
A childhood friend recently reached out for guidance regarding a concerning breast mass detected in her mother. While I could have recommended dubious treatments suggested by fringe “experts,” I instead consulted the appropriate guidelines and referred her to a respected surgeon at Dana-Farber. In that moment, was I acting as a liberal or simply fulfilling my role as a physician?
At Harvard, there’s a cheeky saying among internists: “If there are no side effects, does it even work?” This highlights the importance of weighing risks and benefits, which is why physicians rely on organizational recommendations and maintain their licenses through ongoing education.
The negative reaction to an evidence-based recommendation shouldn’t have surprised me. We possess straightforward, effective methods to safeguard our health and that of our community: masking and vaccination. Yet, some choose to reject these simple measures.
As I reflect on these events, I feel a sense of sadness—not just from the harsh criticism I received. Is being a rule-follower and writing recommendations indicative of a liberal mindset? Are we truly in a time where the age-old notion of caring for one another has become political?
For more insights on related topics, check out this blog post from our collection. Also, learn from the experts at Intracervical Insemination and explore the resources available at Hopkins Medicine for pregnancy and home insemination.
Potential Search Queries:
- home insemination kit
- home insemination syringe
- self insemination
- how to do home insemination
- pregnancy tips for home insemination
In summary, as a physician, I find it perplexing that following evidence-based medical guidelines has become entangled in political discourse. The focus should be on protecting public health through informed practices rather than ideologically driven narratives.