The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, the provincial regulatory body, has ordered Ottawa doctor Miklos Matyas to take remedial training in "ethics and boundaries" for saying things to patients that were "contrary to the information and directives provided by the public health agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic."
Ottawa surgeon not 'free' to share controversial COVID-19 views with patients: college | National Post | Andrew Duffy:
March 14, 2024 - "An Ottawa surgeon has been ordered to take a remedial course on ethics and boundaries after sharing with several patients his controversial opinions about the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Dr. Miklos Matyas, a head and neck surgeon, recently lost his appeal of the order issued by the complaints committee of the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons. Matyas argued the case cut to the heart of free speech rights for doctors with dissenting medical views.
"The complaints panel heard evidence Matyas cast doubt on the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, promoted the use of ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug, and suggested that surgical masks were ineffective at preventing the disease’s transmission. The committee ordered Matyas to appear before the panel for a verbal caution about his communication with patients and colleagues. A date for that appearance has yet to be set.
“'The committee was concerned about the potential impact of the respondent’s (Matyas’) conduct on patient safety and the public interest,' the panel said in its February 2023 decision. 'In the committee’s view, his statements were contrary to the information and directives provided by the public health agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic.'
"Matyas appealed that decision to the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board, arguing the college had no authority to investigate and punish him for expressing scientific opinions that challenged the 'official narrative' on COVID-19.
“'Protection of the public is made possible by protecting physicians’ autonomy and free expression of their honest professional opinions and interpretations of scientific data,' Matyas argued, adding: 'Promoting censorship of dissenting expert clinicians in a rapidly evolving public health crisis is not in the public’s interest.' Any suggestion he offered inappropriate COVID-19 information, Matyas told the review board, rested on the belief that public health officials were always right....
"Matyas’ arguments, however, were rejected earlier this month by the review board, which said the college was legally required to investigate patient complaints and to act when a physician’s conduct was unprofessional. In its decision, the review board said that, while physicians had a Charter-protected right to free speech, it was reasonably circumscribed because they held a unique position of public trust....
"'The board finds the committee’s conclusion to be reasonable on the inappropriateness of the applicant’s comments about COVID-19 vaccines and treatment,' the review panel wrote. 'The committee’s conclusion is grounded on public health information in the record, including from the National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.' The board upheld the committee’s order that Matyas enroll in a remedial ethics course and appear before the panel to be cautioned."
Andrew Duffy is a National Newspaper Award-winning reporter and long-form feature writer based in Ottawa. To support his work, including exclusive content for subscribers only, sign up here: ottawacitizen.com/subscribe
I made a comment today, on a Facebook discussion of the article, that i'd like to more permanently archive here:
ReplyDelete"I remember a time when there was only one "mainstream" point of view. Sure you'd hear different views now and then, as everyone could speak, from Communists to white supremacists, but those were firmly outside the Overton Window and no one else listened to them Now there is real freedom of speech - governments are realizing that they don't like it, and trying to use all forms of control - but in the process people are waking up to those forms of control. If you'd told people even 10 years ago that professional licensing was a threat to free speech, no one would have believed you - now that idea's being mainstreamed , and that's a good thing."