Medical College of Wisconsin hosts previously canceled Senator Ron Johnson
On May 28, 2025, United States Senator Ron Johnson appeared at the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) to participate in the Public Policy Speakers Series instituted by MCW President Dr. John Raymond to foster communication with elected officials. In many respects this event was an extension of the address by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya on May 2, 2025 which was co-hosted by the Wisconsin Association of Scholars and MCW (video available at the WAS blog: https://www.wisnas.org/blog/save-the-date-dr-jay-bhattacharya-to-speak-at-medical-college-of-wisconsin-may-2-2025).
Senator Johnson began his address with a personal reflection on his profound appreciation of and respect for the staff of Children’s Wisconsin, an MCW-affiliated hospital, which he credited with saving the life of his first child who was born with a congenital heart defect. He used this as a launching point for a three-part message: 1) his commitment for objective truth, even if it is uncomfortable; 2) the exploding deficit spending of the federal government as a threat to the long-term survival of healthcare; 3) the catastrophic erosion of trust in medicine because of the actions taken in COVID.
He backed up those concerns with objective facts: 1) the increasing percentage of GDP spent by the federal government: 11.4% in 1948 and 23.4% now; 2) the growth of the national debt, which was $13.64T in 2007 to $36.2T in April 2025 and projected to rise by an additional $2.2T every year for the next 10 years; 3) erosion of trust in physicians and hospitals from 71.5% in 2020 to 40.1% in 2024; 4) our failure to heed the warnings of President Eisenhower regarding: a) the danger of the Military Industrial Complex: b) a rise of the scientific-technological elite and potential negative implications; c) unchecked government power leading to tyranny; d) the need for a knowledgeable citizenry to counter these threats.
Senator Johnson continually stated he is committed to a small government approach to problems. He reminded the audience that control through government is the definition of power and of Lord Acton’s observation that “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. He also discussed the loss of informed consent (the ethical and legal obligation for a physician to discuss the risks, benefits and alternatives for any proposed therapy) during the COVID crisis. The lack of informed consent occurred both regarding early treatment with available pharmaceutical agents and simple things such as vitamin D as well as the pressure to undergo the mRNA injections, even when evidence available to public health officials at the time should have urged caution. He discussed the use of fear and shaming as agents of control in adherence to the exercise of power.
Murmurs of dissenting views from the audience punctuated many of his remarks, even before the formal question and answer session. Senator Johnson urged those to make sure to see reality and not resort to “whistling past the graveyard”.
The Q&A session was both instructive and profoundly discouraging. It was more an “accuse and demand” session based primarily on denial of the government’s fiscal unsustainability and the reasons for the loss of trust in the medical profession.
There was a deep divide between the Senator and the audience on just about everything. Any view that contradicted an official public health policy was dismissed by some in the audience as “misinformation”. Likewise, a commentator stated the mistrust in physicians and hospitals was caused by misinformation disseminated by people like the Senator.
There was little mention of conflicting evidence in the peer reviewed literature with assertions from the audience premised on personal anecdotal experience and appeal to authority. I was reminded of the quote from John Kenneth Galbraith: When faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof. (1971, A Contemporary Guide to Economics, Peace, and Laughter by John Kenneth Galbraith, Essays edited by Andrea D. Williams, Chapter 3: How Keynes Came to America, p. 50, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts.)
Views based upon political ideology permeated most of the audience questions with one even demanding that Senator Johnson proclaim exactly what he will do this week about a list of issues that are well outside of his control as a United States Senator. Senator Johnson repeatedly pointed out that many of the problems the questioners brought up were better handled by local officials rather than bureaucrats in Washington.
“Misinformation” is the spreading of false information that may not be known to be false. “Disinformation” is the spreading of false information that is known by the spreader to be false while “malinformation” is the spreading of information that may be true but removed from proper context for a malicious purpose. All of this is not an intrinsic property of the information itself but is introduced by another human’s judgment. For something to be deemed “misinformation,” someone other than the communicator of that information has to proclaim it to be “misinformation!” The determination is made by someone in whose personal opinion the information is deemed to be untrustworthy. In addition, when the prefix “dis” or “mal” is used, the intent of the publisher of the information must be known, and not merely surmised.
The history of “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation” is interesting. This time-line from Google Trends graphically documents the genesis the spikes in the use of these terms:
Google Trends history of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation.
Before COVID virtually all mentions of “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation” arose in the context of political contests. An explosion in usage began in March and April 2020, coinciding with President Trump favorably mentioning hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for COVID.
It seems clear that if anything constructive is to come about, there must be a return to real objective truth and the words “misinformation”, “disinformation” and “malinformation” need to be expunged forever from the vocabulary of true dialog. They are rhetorical devices aimed at silencing politically incorrect ideas and creating the ‘cancel culture’ now endemic on college campuses.
The Medical College of Wisconsin espoused cancel culture in May 2023 when it deplatformed a panel of speakers that included Senator Johnson. In the aftermath of this shameful episode, President Raymond launched an initiative to establish new freedom of expression principles and establish “a culture in which all members of the community feel free to question ideas, voice a diversity of personal opinions, and engage in discourse. To achieve such a culture, members of the MCW community shall exercise our values of integrity, curiosity, caring, collaboration, inclusivity and respect in expressing their individual views.”
Among the principles adopted by MCW’s board of trustees in June 2024 is a commitment to maintaining an atmosphere of civility when we “criticize, question and rigorously challenge the ideas and views expressed by others.” Likewise, “In accordance with our institutional Code of Conduct, we accept personal responsibility for our individual choices as to expression, civility toward others, and maintaining professional decorum appropriate to the environment.” The MCW code of conduct states that “Any expression meant to vilify, humiliate or incite hatred against an individual, group, or class of persons, or which is reasonably likely to have such effect, is prohibited.”
President Raymond took a step in the right direction by inviting Senator Johnson back to speak to the MCW community. Viewers can decide for themselves whether MCW’s faculty and students exhibited the culture of respect and civility for which it claims to strive. However, it is difficult to believe that the Senator sensed a culture of “curiosity, caring and collaboration” during his recent visit to MCW.