Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Dr John Campbell YouTube videos - what happened?

318 replies

SchnitzelVonCrummsTum · 10/10/2021 19:34

Can anyone who's watched his videos more regularly than I have explain this to me? Seems to have gone from mainstream to pro-ivermectin in the space of a few months.

OP posts:
SantaClawsServiette · 04/02/2022 15:15

1Week

It shouldn't take FOI requests though.It shouldn't take YouTube amateurs sensationalising.It should be mainstream news outlets analysing.17k 17k + n; where n = directly applicable side effects 17k + n + y, where y = common co morbidity.

Those are obvious follow on questions which should be extensively covered.

Yeah, the media massively failed around this. Part of their job is to question the government and hold them to account. They've failed to do so and so lost the trust of readers. The state has attempted to avoid criticism of policy by pointing to science which is obviously complete bollocks, science doesn't tell us what policies to pursue.

It leaves a huge gap that will be filled one way or another.

westjes · 14/02/2022 18:45

Hello everyone, never been here before but found this thread by searching on John Campbell. Having read all of the thread I'm pretty dumbfounded by many of the comments and feel like I'm living in a parallel universe to some of you! Anyway, just want to make a few points, in no particular order.
I came across John's YouTube channel around April 2021. Since then I've watched his talks almost daily, and wish I'd found them earlier.
I'm not suggesting he is for everyone (clearly not ;)) but, for me, he is a source of information on Covid and other health matters, which is accessible, and trustworthy, which he delivers in a calm, engaging manner. He obviously knows his way around the scientific papers after years of practice and is able to “translate” them for the benefit of the layperson.
I do wonder if some of his critics think of themselves as “pure” scientists and, as such, consider his presentations to be somewhat dumbing-down?
To the people who say he has gone full “QAnon conspiracy theorist/down the rabbit hole”... that is such a lazy, cliched epithet that I won't even dignify it with a response. He regularly interviews medics and scientists (as well as others) on his videos, from all around the world – I doubt very much if they would want to associate with him if they considered him a conspiracy theorist, disreputable or a spreader of disinformation.
Regarding his channel, he has produced a huge body of work, covering a fairly comprehensive area. It doesn't surprise me that he occasionally gets things wrong, but, from what I've seen, he admits when he does and corrects his errors. I've seen his subscribers increase from less than a million to over two million in the time I've been watching. His videos are viewed by huge numbers as soon as he uploads them. (Given the number of people trying to make money from YouTube videos, I wonder if there is some jealousy going on here...?)
His commenters, from all across the world, certainly aren't unanimous in their praise but, on the whole, he has earned a huge amount of respect and gratitude during the course of the pandemic. Numerous people say they trust his information more than that of their own governments and that he has kept them sane! This doesn't seem to have gone to his head but who knows...
Regarding Ivermectin, he was initially neutral on its efficacy. Then he conducted an in-depth interview with Dr Tess Lawrie, following her meta-analysis of small-scale studies. He was persuaded. He mentions ivermectin from time to time, mainly to bemoan the fact that there haven't been any major studies to either prove or disprove its efficacy.
He has been consistently pro-vaccine AND pro-treatment. Now that vaccination is being proposed for very young children, he isn't necessarily in favour, instead saying there should be a cost/benefit analysis.
Regarding the “17,000” video, yes, I was left confused by what, if anything, he was implying. However, when the BBC seemed to lump him in with those who want to minimise the death figures in the UK, he was genuinely upset and was at pains to point out that he wasn't belitting the deaths amongst people with co-morbidities. I took that in good faith.
Regarding the “mice” video – I think that was him considering someone's theory about the origin of Omicron (ie where has it been lurking?) – he wasn't agreeing with the theory but was simply examining it out of interest.
I could continue but this is probably now TL;DR so I'll stop.
Yes, you could call me a “fan” and I've recommended him to many people... while also asking them what are their trusted sources of information. No one has come up with anything better...

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 19:26

Interesting first post @westjes

I'd suggest you have a read of the thread - it adresses all of your points & explains the issues with John Campbell's videos (many, many times over)

westjes · 14/02/2022 21:47

As mentioned at the top of my post @riveted1, I've read the whole thread. To me, it seemed unfairly negative towards John Campbell. I was trying to give my own (more positive) perspective.

May I ask you two questions? 1) In what way can John Campbell be classed as QAnon? 2) What is your main source of information on Covid?

Iggly · 14/02/2022 21:51

@westjes

As mentioned at the top of my post *@riveted1*, I've read the whole thread. To me, it seemed unfairly negative towards John Campbell. I was trying to give my own (more positive) perspective.

May I ask you two questions? 1) In what way can John Campbell be classed as QAnon? 2) What is your main source of information on Covid?

Why on earth would you rely on one source of information @westjes

Madness. Cast your net wider and read widely from credible sources.

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 22:02

@westjes

As mentioned at the top of my post *@riveted1*, I've read the whole thread. To me, it seemed unfairly negative towards John Campbell. I was trying to give my own (more positive) perspective.

May I ask you two questions? 1) In what way can John Campbell be classed as QAnon? 2) What is your main source of information on Covid?

It isn't "unfairly negative"

Posters have repeatedly explained the issues, including specific examples of John Campbell making very basic errors, referencing retracted papers, makings statements that are incorrect, and saying things that are conspiracy theories.

Added to this is the fact that he is not an expert - he has no relevant training or experience that gives his disagreements legitimacy. This is problem part of the reason he makes mistakes.

I am a scientist, so get my information from sources like journals & colleagues who work in the area. But if I wasn't I would hope I'd be able to spot the million red flags in his youtube videos.

There are many actual scientists including epidemiologists and virologists who you can follow for information. I'm not sure why you feel a retired nurse with a phd in teaching somehow has legitimacy over them.

bunfighters · 14/02/2022 22:05

westjes Campbell should have been far more circumspect about the studies on Ivermectin. There have now been numerous analyses of various trials (e.g. academic.oup.com/ofid/article/9/2/ofab645/6509922) which highlight multiple issues with fraudulent records etc.

There are are also ongoing studies into Ivermectin including the PRINCIPLE one at Oxford. (www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/96194 although it is currently paused).

Other older medicines like Budesonide have been repurposed (well had some promising results initially). Do you really think if those Ivermectin trials were really good quality that it wouldn't be being prescribed now?

None of this is difficult to find online, read and to make a considered decision about... just not as easy as listening to Campbell.

Good quality research should be the only 'trusted' source, not an interview with one other Dr.

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 22:11

@bunfighters

Yes - once the fraudlent ivermectin literature is disgarded, there is no good quality evidence it is effective. John Campbell, Tess Lawrie and FLCCC keep referencing them though.

Since then, two well powered, well designed RCTs of ivermectin demonstrated no effect. I expect PRINCIPLE to replicate this null finding.

John Campbell seems unable to keep up with the literature (or evaluate it), tried to claim that someone recommending ivermectin caused cases to drop in Japan, and that Pfizers novel therapeutic is actually ivermectin in disguise for profits.

It is ridiculous because he is disagreeing with actual epidemiologists who have systematically reviewed the evidence, and making loads of money out of it.

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 22:14

This entire thread is actually pretty ridiculous, now I've looked back at it Grin

Every couple of weeks a new poster with no history comes along, revives it, makes all same claims about John Campbell being unfairly maligned. And then when people point out the actual evidence demonstrating Campbell is a charlatan, they disappear.

Repeat to infinity.

westjes · 14/02/2022 22:31

Why are you assuming I rely on only one source of information, @Iggly; I asked about a main source. And, in your view, which are the credible sources? – just give me one. Thanks. And can you explain why John has been classed as QAnon on this thread? (It's OK, I'm not expecting an early response to the latter question ;))
PS Sorry, I don't know how this forum works, so could be replying in the wrong place!

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 22:36

@westjes

Why are you assuming I rely on only one source of information, *@Iggly*; I asked about a main source. And, in your view, which are the credible sources? – just give me one. Thanks. And can you explain why John has been classed as QAnon on this thread? (It's OK, I'm not expecting an early response to the latter question ;)) PS Sorry, I don't know how this forum works, so could be replying in the wrong place!
Why are you ignoring all the points explained as to why John Campbell is an incorrect and biased source @westjes?

I think this is far more relevant that trying decide whether Campbell's level of misinformation would be equivalent to QAnon. It's not really important given that you have actually information regarding the issues with his youtube videos.

riveted1 · 14/02/2022 22:42

And, in your view, which are the credible sources? – just give me one.

Not sure what exactly you're looking for but Dr Stuart Ritchie consistently gives a balanced view on coronavirus and does a lot of sci comms and journalistic work.

Adem · 15/02/2022 07:33

@westjes

Why are you assuming I rely on only one source of information, *@Iggly*; I asked about a main source. And, in your view, which are the credible sources? – just give me one. Thanks. And can you explain why John has been classed as QAnon on this thread? (It's OK, I'm not expecting an early response to the latter question ;)) PS Sorry, I don't know how this forum works, so could be replying in the wrong place!
You claim to have read the thread which is littered with many credible sources, and yet you still ask for more credible sources? Seems like you’re looking for (mis)information to confirm your beliefs.

I was an early Campbell fan and thought he did excellent content early on until he started hinting at conspiracies. His assertions are rebutted time and again by many scientists actually qualified in these fields of study, some of whom have even posted in this thread. Get your head out of your confirmation bias, read this thread again and look and read the linked material. Campbell is a dangerous unqualified quack, or perhaps worse, a mercenary motivated by the enormous amounts of money his channel is generating.

Halloweenrainbow · 15/02/2022 09:12

Lately he seems to be actively encouraging people to get infected which I think is a dangerous message and could lead to people being harmed. Omicron is still a nasty infection for many.

Iggly · 15/02/2022 10:05

@westjes

Why are you assuming I rely on only one source of information, *@Iggly*; I asked about a main source. And, in your view, which are the credible sources? – just give me one. Thanks. And can you explain why John has been classed as QAnon on this thread? (It's OK, I'm not expecting an early response to the latter question ;)) PS Sorry, I don't know how this forum works, so could be replying in the wrong place!
I don’t believe in one “main” source. I assume you do because I interpret a “main” source as your only source if you place it above all others.

John Campbell is not an epidemiologist. He’s a nurse.

I follow the WHO, the CMO, Zoe Study and various scientists on Twitter.

But ultimately, I respect those who are clearly more qualified than me. I don’t think it’s a good idea for the likes of John Campbell and others online to act as if they’re experts by reinterpreting what has already been interpreted.

The nonsense about the covid deaths for a start and death certificates. John Campbell was pretty awful really not explaining how death certificates are completed. It’s created this appalling myth that numbers are being inflated.

This is why I hate the internet sometimes. Makes people think they’re experts with their degree from skimming random shite.

Iggly · 15/02/2022 10:07

@Halloweenrainbow

Lately he seems to be actively encouraging people to get infected which I think is a dangerous message and could lead to people being harmed. Omicron is still a nasty infection for many.
Yep. I watched a bit of it as my friend raves about him and was stunned.

My boss at work also said similar - he wants to catch it now.

Notwithstanding the recent research which highlights the impact of covid on the heart, even if you’ve had a mild infection and regardless of the severity of your infection.

This is a novel virus. Yes, its symptoms present as respiratory but I think the research is showing is that it attacks more than just your lungs. Ffs why would people take that risk.

riveted1 · 15/02/2022 10:40

@Halloweenrainbow

Lately he seems to be actively encouraging people to get infected which I think is a dangerous message and could lead to people being harmed. Omicron is still a nasty infection for many.
It's just ridiculous

You wouldn't actively try and get infected with something like 'flu or norovirus, and would take basic measures to try and limit the chances of you catching it from a family member/friend/collegue.

bunfighters · 15/02/2022 11:23

Completely nuts to want to get infected. Mild here and now being investigated for heart issues.

Flaxmeadow · 15/02/2022 16:55

He has repeatedly been pulled up about misinformation and by much more qualified scientists, on many YouTube videos and yet he STILL refuses to reply to any of the important points they make.

Flaxmeadow · 19/02/2022 15:05

It gets worse.
His latest upload is a discussion with a young man who appears to be suffering from anxiety. Has been to A&E a number of times, been told he has no physical problems but he is still convinced he has lingering symptoms due to the vaccine. JC is saying to him quote "terrifying, I'm shaking just listening to you" and diagnosing him over skype because the NHS has been making "fundamental medical mistakes"!

WTAF is he doing !

Adem · 19/02/2022 15:27

“ WTAF is he doing !”

Making a lot of money apparently.

Halloweenrainbow · 20/02/2022 21:20

@Flaxmeadow

It gets worse. His latest upload is a discussion with a young man who appears to be suffering from anxiety. Has been to A&E a number of times, been told he has no physical problems but he is still convinced he has lingering symptoms due to the vaccine. JC is saying to him quote "terrifying, I'm shaking just listening to you" and diagnosing him over skype because the NHS has been making "fundamental medical mistakes"!

WTAF is he doing !

That video was bizarre - and I say that as someone who had intense and long lasting side effects from the vaccine!

JC is not a good interviewer - he asks too many leading questions. Adam is clearly dissatisfied with the care he got at A&E, and the focus of the discussion seems to be the hospital's alleged failure to diagnose and treat him rather than to discuss any specific concerns about the vaccine or Pfizer.

Adem · 22/02/2022 20:37

Another great Campbell debunking video by Dr Oliver;

Vtcan · 14/03/2022 13:13

Sometimes he just present state it but then he starts drawing conclusions he is he is a real danger because he has 2 million followers you ask why he does this my understanding is every million views generates about 2500 US is made significant make significant dollars overtime from posting these videos he speaks well and comes across as credible because he just shares other peoples data but the reality is he’s not qualified to review it at all and he draws very dangerous conclusions I would not listen to a thing he says somebody needs to have him delisted from YouTube I don’t know how to make that happen

rhizobium · 14/03/2022 14:53

On his latest (nonsense) video, he chuckles and wryly says "I'm glad I wasn't asked to peer review this paper"

There's no chance of a journal asking him to be a reviewer! Why on earth would they?

He has no existing research publications himself, isn't even a scientist, and knows nothing about epidemiology. And he thinks the Lancet would find his contributions useful? Delusions of gradeur indeed Grin

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.