First, I think discourse on COVID-19 is a prime example of why free speech is critical because when legitimate opinions from medical professionals and researchers are silenced, informed consent isn't possible. As a result, many patients made decisions based on information that they assumed was correct, but wasn't. Had they been able to hear other perspectives, they might have made different decisions about their health care choices.
Second, let's address the concept of "correct information."
Are you taking the position that the COVID-19 vaccines prevent infection and transmission? If so, I note that the NJEM study you cite is from December 2020 and is based on Pfizer's trial data for a period of 3 months. However, regardless of what Pfizer's data looked like then, we have since learned that the vaccine's ability to prevent infection is extremely weak.
We got our first clue of this phenomenon in July 2021 when we learned that 3/4 of the Provincetown "breakthrough" cases were among the vaccinated:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/07/30/provincetown-covid-outbreak-vaccinated/
This wasn't just happening int he U.S. Gibraltar was 100% vaccinated, yet COVID-19 cases exploded in November 2021. So whatever papers were showing became meaningless in the real world:
In fact, most COVID-19 deaths are now among the vaccinated. This means that many vaccinated people are not only getting infected with the virus, but that the vaccine is failing at its now-primary goal of preventing severe illness and death:
Of course, one could argue that this is happening because 70% of the population is vaccinated, so statistically speaking "more people who die of COVID-19 are likely to be vaccinated." But this real world data flies in the face of Pfizer's data, which showed 95% efficacy with respect to infection. If Pfizer's data was accurate, only a small portion of COVID-19 deaths would be among the vaccinated, just as only a small portion of smallpox deaths are among those vaccinated for smallpox. In other words, something is obviously "off" with Pfizer's data.
It's also concerning that we were initially told the COVID-19 vaccine would end the pandemic, yet we learned from Pfizer a few months ago that the vaccine was never even tested for its ability to stop transmission:
Many doctors and scientists who did a deep dive into Pfizer's clinical trial data apparently already knew this, but they were silenced/suspended/banned from social media when they attempted to convey what was then deemed misinformation (but is now taken as fact). As a result, millions of Americans were vaccinated based on the faulty assumption that they would not transmit the virus to those around them.
Fact checkers have since "debunked' this claim by insisting that Pfizer never asserted that the vaccine's prevented transmission. Yet this is grossly misleading because public health officials and governments, from President Biden to CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, used transmission prevention as a driver for mandates. Think about it: why force Americans be vaccinated for work and travel -- to protect others -- IF the vaccines had never been tested for transmission? It makes no sense. And how many people would have complied with mandates if they had been aware that the vaccines weren't tested for transmission prevention?
"At best, it's an example of why we want misconceptions aired so other people with free speech can explain why it's wrong."
I agree, and the when institutions fight so hard to prevent "misconceptions" from being discussed, it calls into question of the validity of the information they're compelling us to accept. The history of modern science and medicine has been one of open debate and inquiry; the recent introduction of the concept of "misinformation" to silence debate is unprecedented and will ultimately compromise global public health.
The COVID-19 story is still being written, and the latest Twitter Files drop on COVID-19 makes it clear that social media platforms were, in fact, censoring "correct information."
This should be deeply disturbing to all Americans, and certainly anyone in the medical and scientific professions. I am 100% confident that in the not-so-distant future many other inconvenient and disturbing truths about the flow of information during the pandemic will come to light. There will be a reckoning, and it won't be pretty.
