You should actually listen to the things Dr. Ladapo has said instead of what the media has said about him. Sadly you are more fixated on the political nonsense that infiltrated medicine and public health.
I don't think you understand academia or tenure very well. A glowing letter like this more often than not means they are delighted to be getting rid of the person. This is pretty much the only way to do it. I've heard this joke 100s of times in academia. "Oh, Janet, I'd definitely give her a glowing recommendation" that means the speaker hates Janet. the 3 "best" letters I've ever written were for people I despised & who were despised by the whole dept (in 1 case the whole uni).
Yeah, there was a bit of a mini-scandal when I was in grad school because a Professor (at a different school) murdered his wife and two other people. Right afterwards, it came out that everybody who worked with him knew he was sexually harassing students for years. And his previous school wrote one of those letters to get rid of him.
You do. You just need for the woman to have the right justification, so you can stop pretending that you consider "the unborn's" lives to be equal to the born's.
You jogged my memory. The guy who was utterly hated had come from USF. We hired away a woman from USF a few years later & she told us USF was terrified of being stuck with him & hence, gave him glowing recs which, we in turn did also...word was out though, so our job was tough. I think he ended up at the U. of Auckland. I recall being at a conf. at a table with a woman from the U. of Auckland putting in a good word for him whilst throwing up in my mouth.
Yeah, I don't think I would ever take a letter of rec for a senior position seriously. If they really are great, the previous school doesn't want to lose them. If they are awful, the previous school has such an incentive to do whatever it takes to get rid of them.
Given the litigation that can come from a lackluster but truthful recommendation, most people won't give a bad recommendation even for those that richly deserve it. I kept a little booklet on my shelf titled: Lexicon of Intentionally Ambiguous Recommendations. I did reference it a few times for gems like these: You would be lucky to get him to work for you (lord knows we never could), or No one would be better for your position (literally, no one would be an improvement).
I've signed many rec letters that I did not write. Oddly, during the Trump years, I'd get a lot of letters from lawyers whose clients were former non-citizen students trying to stay in the US.
People are dying form that experimental "vaccine," and We The People have to right to know all the details about this drug. He wants to find out all the not yet divulged information that this drug company has and has not released it to the public. Don't you want to know why? Don't you think the general public should see that information? Why is this even a "thing" for you? Do you think drug companies should be allowed to hide information about their drugs?
Point me to a reputable source that enables you to make these allegations. I'll be happy to read it/them.
That is what this lawsuit is all about. In order to find out if these "allegations" are true DeSantis must force them to tell us... in court. It's funny, you think that this should just go on as if we conceded that the facts... ingredients...test results and all the possible dangerous side effects of this drug should remain hidden from the people? DeSantis has been stonewalled by this drug maker, and the only way to get the hidden facts about this vaccine, that is still being forced upon people, is to take them to court. You understand that, right?
Interesting. You don't say who made what allegations, what side effects, what hidden facts. I can only conclude it's all just made up in order to appeal to a certain type of person. I've an open mind, but you've presented nothing for my mind to consider.
Finding out if this, forced to take drug, is even safe to take is NOT PANDERING. It's fact finding. These companies are being forced to tell us the efficacy and safety of this rushed out drug. Again, NOT pandering. And as far as these allegations about the drug that mock. The people making those allegations are credentialed doctors, medical researchers and other healthcare professions and front line doctors. And my favorite is Dr. Robert Malone. Dr. 'Robert Malone' WARNS Something Strange Is Happening Worldwide, Tearing Our Movement Apart
In other words, there is no.factual basis for impugning the reputation of the world's leader in infectious diseases, only shameless pandering to folks who don't require facts, only an ideology.
you are so BIG GOV & so gullible. He's not going to do any investigation. It's like his election police & his constant attempts to create safe spaces. It's just BIG GOV BS paid for by the taxpayers. He's just creating layers & layers of corrupt BS bureaucracy to tackle problems that HE knows are fictional.
