The Toronto Star has made several corrections to an opinion piece on Dr. Matt Strauss, which the retiring medical officer of health for Haldimand-Norfolk called a "hit piece."."My thanks to [Public Editor] Donovan Vincent at the Toronto Star. He was thoughtful and efficient in responding to my complaints regarding Bruce Arthur's hit piece on me," Strauss said on Twitter on Thursday. "I am pleased to see the article was significantly reworked and these corrections published.".The original article, written by columnist Bruce Arthur, was critical of Strauss' time as Haldimand-Norfolk's interim medical officer of health. It claimed Strauss compared mask and vaccine mandates to the MeToo movement, claimed he wouldn't "miss public health," compared missing prom to a "living death," and said that "only randomized control trials are sufficient evidence for pandemic policy.".READ MORE: Former medical officer slams Toronto Star reporter for 'mistruths' .After the article was published, Strauss took to Twitter to claim those statements were false. "I wish the Toronto Star would acknowledge its mistakes, rather than double down by misrepresenting the facts of the matter and my views," he said..On Thursday, the article's original headline, 'Dr. Matt Strauss won’t miss public health — and vice versa,' was changed to 'Dr. Matt Strauss: wrong man, wrong crisis?' The article also contains a correction that Strauss did not compare vaccine mandates to the MeToo movement, and a clarification that Strauss didn't say that only randomized control trials are sufficient evidence for pandemic policy..On Twitter, Arthur admitted he made a "mistake" by saying Strauss compared mask mandates to the MeToo movement. Arthur also clarified Strauss' stance on randomized controlled trials, saying "he merely likes using them as an impossibly high evidentiary standard in his arguments against pandemic policy, but doesn't insist on them for everything.."Both those are my fault: I was imprecise," Arthur said.."I also wrote he believes vaccines were the only justified intervention," Arthur said. "Strauss disagreed, citing support for Pavloxid and monoclonal antibodies. I consider those treatments; we don't call supplementary O2 an intervention. But we clarified that, because he asked.".Arthur also acknowledged the headline change, but said that wasn't his area of focus. "He might miss public health, I guess, though I don't think it goes the other way," he said..The Toronto Star reporter said he worked with Vincent and others to "make sure we were as fair as we could be.".Strauss added that one of Arthur's tweets, where he said Canadians who agreed with Strauss are "mostly distrustful of the media and angry about COVID-19 restrictions," was "really bizarre."."Bruce, when you don't get your facts straight, there is no reason they should trust you," Strauss said.."How to build public trust: Step 1: Tell the truth," Strauss added. "That's all the steps I know. Seems to work.".Due to a high level of spam content being posted in our comment section below, all comments undergo manual approval by a staff member during regular business hours (Monday - Friday). Your patience is appreciated.
