COVID cases on the brink of breaking 100k a day (Zoe Covid Study)

Whitewavemark2
You ask why the term nurse educator are used.
Those are his own words on his LinkedIn page.

maddyone

Alegrias1

I'm fed up "channelling my inner awareness" and trying to explain that a person with an advanced degree in learning methods isn't an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid.

That's all folks.

Quite! Well said Alegrias.
However much a person knows about education, and how to educate other people, that knowledge does not make the person an expert in anything other than how to educate people. In this case, a superior knowledge in how to educate nurses, and how to help to facilitate their learning.

Having got to the point that says the teacher is an expert in how to educate people you then seem to leave your first and accurate point and forget that this means a teacher should be able to teach about anything because what they are doing is teaching people how to learn.

In this case, a superior knowledge in how to educate nurses, and how to help to facilitate their learning.

I'm not sure why this is relevant. Of course, we understand Dr Campbell can and has done this. However, after saying teaching is unlimited in it's scope you now seem to be saying educating nurses is all this poor man can ever be capable of. What a put down! I would be very upset if I was a nurse.

Alegrias1

I'm fed up "channelling my inner awareness" and trying to explain that a person with an advanced degree in learning methods isn't an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid.

That's all folks.

The very fact that he:

Started with a BA in 1990
Went on to a BSc in Biology and Health in 1991
Post Graduate Certificate in Pharmacology in 1997 and an
MSC in Health Science in 1998
Topping it all with a Doctorate in Philosophy in 2013

... tells me he is interested in acquiring and passing on knowledge.

As far as I can see, no one believes he is an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid. Alegrais. He is not telling us about Covid. He is just putting forward some of the information readily available in a way that doesn't treat people as idiots or "less than". He is not an "I'm always right" man by any means. That he isn't you is something we will all have to live with.

maddyone

Alegrias1

I'm fed up "channelling my inner awareness" and trying to explain that a person with an advanced degree in learning methods isn't an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid.

That's all folks.

Quite! Well said Alegrias.
However much a person knows about education, and how to educate other people, that knowledge does not make the person an expert in anything other than how to educate people. In this case, a superior knowledge in how to educate nurses, and how to help to facilitate their learning.

So, the research papers, scientific articles, data from around the world etc etc?, that is used as the basis for the videos, are you suggesting that they should be ignored because the person bringing them to our attention is a teacher????

Bang goes all education?

Well, I think we should all get our information from Alegrias instead of wasting our time listening to Dr John or Spector. So I would like Alegrias to start a daily information thread to keep us updated with all the correct facts and figures.

Alegrias1

I'm fed up "channelling my inner awareness" and trying to explain that a person with an advanced degree in learning methods isn't an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid.

That's all folks.

Quite! Well said Alegrias.
However much a person knows about education, and how to educate other people, that knowledge does not make the person an expert in anything other than how to educate people. In this case, a superior knowledge in how to educate nurses, and how to help to facilitate their learning.

Just imagine if the only information we had were government figures??

Campbell isn’t “telling us all about covid” though is he? What he is doing is bringing awareness of all the research papers publicly available.

He is the channel through which those watching his videos are educating themselves about all the scientific research and public data that inform our decision making.

I'm fed up "channelling my inner awareness" and trying to explain that a person with an advanced degree in learning methods isn't an unimpeachable academic who can tell us all about Covid.

That's all folks.

“He's still a nurse educator though”

You have used this sentence a couple of times in your posts, but make it unclear what you mean by it?

Are you saying that a nurse educator part of who’s job it is to relay the latest research to clinicians is not the right person to go to for information?

Or are you saying that a Doctor of Nursing (PhD) with a teaching and research orientated degree is eminently suitable to disseminate the latest information relating to a pandemic.

In fact I would think it was right up his street.

I will continue to listen to Dr John Campbell for clear concise and balanced information.

growstuff

Alegrias1

I started a thread once about the difference between fact and opinion.

Not many got it, really....

What an arrogant post!

I have just seen this as it’s where I left off last night.

??? really alegrais if you can’t see what is so wrong with that then you need to channel your inner awareness a tad.

But I think really it is best put to one side and I’ll pretend you didn’t say it.

Alegrias1

I started a thread once about the difference between fact and opinion.

Not many got it, really....

What an arrogant post!

But don’t you understand why I found the first half of the blog interesting and reassuring?

You can be right about some things and wrong about others.

The trick for the viewer is to know the difference.

And remember, I always refer to him as Dr Campbell, because that is his name and title. I have never, ever questioned his right to be addressed as Dr. Campbell. He's still a nurse educator though.

Just saying Dr Johns latest blog about breakthrough infection is very interesting especially as I, like a lot of people are worrying about the chances of catching covid after we’ve been vaccinated. I’d quite like Algerias to watch that part of the blog (obviously not the bit about aspirating the needle ) to tell me what is wrong with what Dr. John has just said. I suppose I’ve just been coerced into watching a blog about something sensible so I can be brainwashed with his needle aspiration theory though . He’s a sneaky blighter that nurse that pretends he’s a doctor. Anyways, I really am going to sleep now.

We don't know who you are is certainly a valid argument when you presumed greater knowledge in this field while offering no evidence.

I have never claimed greater knowledge in this field, you have completely made that up, sorry. I've never said anything like it. I present my analysis of what public individuals say, same as anybody else can.

GN is an online forum for sharing our thoughts. My thoughts are that people on here are misunderstanding the comments made by public academics and extrapolating that to blame the government for things they've never done. I don't support this government at all, but there are many things to complain about without inventing more.

I don't cite authority because I present facts to show why the things said by these public people aren't always true. You can make of that what you will.

No wonder they didn't get it Alegrias. I really like DrJohn did not appear to me to be offered as an argument. It is a simple statement of fact that comforts another human being.

We don't know who you are is certainly a valid argument when you presumed greater knowledge in this field while offering no evidence. Not that anyone expects anyone on here to do that. Of course there is a difference between fact and opinion but I am not sure that in every or even any case, you could be that alternative authority to prove or disprove a fact. We all need credible alternative authority to do that - or be able to show similar knowledge. We would also need it to be a trusted and verified source.

You say If the authority has got something wrong, you tell them., but you are not telling the "authority" they are wrong as you say you feel you must. GN is a forum they will never read. The GN member/s sees as a person they find an acceptable, knowledgeable source who cites a recognised authority. A source which does not propose themselves as an authority only a facilitator.

What you are doing is telling those who chose to use that person as one of their sources of information is that they - the GN member - are wrong. Not because you cite any contrary authority but simply because you say so.

I started a thread once about the difference between fact and opinion.

Not many got it, really....

Your posts do not constitute critique they only constitute an opinion!

Of course you are, as we all are entitled to an opinion, but that all it is and no more or less valid than every other poster.

But I’m off to read now.

But unless you can prove their argument, theory etc is wrong with evidence, then criticism is based on nothing but hot air.

My posts today, 11:26 and 16:54.

If you want a discussion about why I could be wrong, I'm happy to have that discussion.

"We don't know who you are" and "I really like Dr John" aren't valid arguments.

MayBee70

Are any of the figures taking asymptomatic cases into account? Might they be showing up more on the Spector one if people on it are testing themselves more often?

Yes that’s true.

Alegrias1

My point? That it is quite acceptable - necessary in fact - to point out when academics and popularisers of scientific studies may be mistaken in their thinking. Even if they have always been right in the past, and even if you don't think I'm qualified. And its pretty off when people say you can't criticise them. They're not the Pope.

But unless you can prove their argument, theory etc is wrong with evidence, then criticism is based on nothing but hot air.

Are any of the figures taking asymptomatic cases into account? Might they be showing up more on the Spector one if people on it are testing themselves more often?

My point? That it is quite acceptable - necessary in fact - to point out when academics and popularisers of scientific studies may be mistaken in their thinking. Even if they have always been right in the past, and even if you don't think I'm qualified. And its pretty off when people say you can't criticise them. They're not the Pope.

Err yes, self evident I would have thought. And your point?