playbook 922 pages, PROJECT 2025 PURPOSE ...U HAVE BEEN WARNED

www.medpagetoday.com/washington-watch/wa...InvestigateMD_Active


Project 2025's Blueprint for Healthcare Is Now Trump's Playbook
— Trump acolytes have for years quietly laid the groundwork to disrupt the national health system

AGAIN , I WILL POST...WAKE UP....PROJECT 2025 IS ALIVE AND WELL AND U R IN GREAT DANGER....

homeagain wrote: www.medpagetoday.com/washington-watch/wa...InvestigateMD_Active


Project 2025's Blueprint for Healthcare Is Now Trump's Playbook
— Trump acolytes have for years quietly laid the groundwork to disrupt the national health system

AGAIN , I WILL POST...WAKE UP....PROJECT 2025 IS ALIVE AND WELL AND U R IN GREAT DANGER....

GREAT DANGER!!??? OH NO!!! LO

Again, what is your take on this long article you expect us to read and believe? For as much money as we dump into the NIH, can you tell us if we have been getting our money's worth? Of course you can't. All you can do is copy and paste another article full of opinion, accusations, and unproven unknowns.

I know that young single women have the highest rate of mental illness by a mile, but I'm beginning to wonder if the older women in this country are suffering from a similar fate, especially since Trump was elected. Maybe the NIH can do something productive and come up with a long term strategy to end this tragic reality...

homeagain wrote: AGAIN , I WILL POST...WAKE UP....PROJECT 2025 IS ALIVE AND WELL AND U R IN GREAT DANGER....

Tell me HA, have you read the 922 pages of Project 2025 yourself or are you entirely relying on the parsed portions of it that opponents have removed from all context in which it is offered in order to perpetuate their efforts to spread the propaganda of fear and doubt . . .

PER RICK

wonder if the older women in this country are suffering from a similar fate, especially since Trump was elected. Maybe the NIH can do something productive and come up with a long term strategy to end this tragic reality...

i AM NOT EVEN GOING TO QUALIFY THAT WITH A COHESIVE RESPONSE......the statement reflects a concerted bias

PrintSmith wrote:

homeagain wrote: AGAIN , I WILL POST...WAKE UP....PROJECT 2025 IS ALIVE AND WELL AND U R IN GREAT DANGER....

Tell me HA, have you read the 922 pages of Project 2025 yourself or are you entirely relying on the parsed portions of it that opponents have removed from all context in which it is offered in order to perpetuate their efforts to spread the propaganda of fear and doubt . . .

the source....is extremely credible....I would say...NO BULLSHIT FOUND HERE.....


mediabiasfactcheck.com/medpage-today/

alysis / Bias

In review, Medpage Today has sections covering numerous specialties such as cardiology, dermatology, orthopedics, etc. The website covers healthcare policy stories, clinical research, general health, medical news, and scientific breakthroughs. Articles and headlines do not use loaded emotional language such as this Can PARP Inhibitor Eligibility Expand in Pancreatic Cancer? and this MRI With Targeted Biopsy Matches Current Standard for ID’ing Prostate Cancer. Further, all articles are sourced from either peer-reviewed studies or credible media outlets such as The Atlantic and Reuters.

Editorially, they do not produce op-eds; however, they cover politics related to healthcare, such as this COVID Relief Bill Contains Lots of Healthcare Provisions. In general, political coverage is low-biased, and all information is factual.

Failed Fact Checks

None in the Last 5 years

Overall, we rate Medpage Today a Pro-Science source based on the publication of peer-reviewed studies and well-sourced medical news that is factual. (D. Van Zandt 3/6/2021)

Source: www.medpagetoday.com/

Last Updated on June 5, 2023 by Media Bias Fact Check

The Democrats have held the White House twelve out of the last 16 years to create this current unsustainable mess.

Maybe it is time to let Heritage run the nation for awhile

If it isn't working out, you can always dethrone them in the Midterms. Margins are razor thin.

homeagain wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

homeagain wrote: AGAIN , I WILL POST...WAKE UP....PROJECT 2025 IS ALIVE AND WELL AND U R IN GREAT DANGER....

Tell me HA, have you read the 922 pages of Project 2025 yourself or are you entirely relying on the parsed portions of it that opponents have removed from all context in which it is offered in order to perpetuate their efforts to spread the propaganda of fear and doubt . . .

the source....is extremely credible....I would say...NO BULLSHIT FOUND HERE.....

This is sourced from MedPage's own "About" page . . .

...We also publish Perspectives/Opinions...

An important part of our mission is to report on what people in healthcare are thinking, saying, and doing, for the benefit of others who want to know. Does that sometimes reflect one point or another on the political spectrum? Yes.

Does every article we publish need to express viewpoints from every part of the spectrum? No.

You can have factually correct information and still steep the article with a bias tea HA. We went over this same issue a while back, and I provided quotes from Medpage's own "reporting" that demonstrated the infused bias within the article that was published. That you reject the actual documentation accompanying my challenge to your premise doesn't mean it doesn't actually exist. I get it, we all do, that you believe Medpage is 100% bias free . . . which is a position that, quite frankly, the people at Medpage themselves don't lay claim to. They are very transparent that their "reporting" includes the biased opinions that exist in the thoughts, actions, and writings of the people in healthcare and that their "reporting" won't generally contain the counterarguments of those who may have a different opinion than the one held by the person whose voice they are amplifying in their "reporting". By their own admission, they consider this to be an "important part" of their mission.

WELL THEN..according to your theory there is no media source that u can trust to relate the TRUTH.


SO-O, from my calculations u do a shot gun scattered approach,attempt to find the LEAST BIASED INFO AND GO WITH IT.. U HAVE TO CONNECT THE DOTS.....OTHERWISE U R AFLOAT IN A SEA OF BULLSHIT.

Nope, you simply need to understand the means by which bias is infused into what is offered for consumption so that it may be filtered out. The same filter works for collectivist propaganda and individualist propaganda. Know what filters out the largest chunks? Rational thought and common sense.

When someone (Medpage Today?) tries to tell you that a mask constructed of a couple layers of woven cloth covering your nose and mouth is going to reduce the spread of a virus, you know that someone is trying to feed you a road apple when you apply those two filters to the information. Same thing for most of the hysteria about Project 2025, Trump is a fascist, deficit spending is an investment, racism is rampant in these United States and a whole host of other topics.

And how much of the anti-Trump press coverage that HA trusts was bought by USAID tax dollars?

And how many of the rallies are financed by billionaire George Soros? What is his true agenda? Does he want to see America and Trump fail and he sells the nation short?

He has done that to the UK and other nations.