When it was posted on Facebook, the following prompts came up….

We’re to unconditionally accept and believe “fact checkers” with no names or credentials provided because they say so.

Independent fact-checkers on Facebook are signatories to the non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network Code of Principles. Independent fact-checkers investigate stories in a journalistic process meant to result in establishing the truth or falsity of the story.
— Facebook

That “International Fact-Checking Network” is Poynter.org and we’ve discussed them before.

So, how does Facebook counter Dr. McCullough’s claims?

With selective, partial information.

Apparently, the “fact checkers” at Facebook have consciously decided to blow off opposing opinions from actual doctors and scientists.

NIH: Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19
Israeli Researchers: Study: Natural immunity ‘stronger, longer’ than vaccine immunity
Natural Immunity After COVID-19 Found Durable and Robust
Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections
U.S. official finally acknowledges Covid-19 natural immunity: ‘As good as vaccine’
Emory University: COVID-19 survivors may possess wide-ranging resistance to the disease
MedPage Today: Quit Ignoring Natural COVID Immunity
Washington Post: Natural immunity to covid is powerful. Policymakers seem afraid to say so.
Fauci lacks ‘firm answer’ on COVID-19 natural immunity question
‘Ignore The CDC’: Johns Hopkins Professor Says Half Of Americans Have ‘Natural Immunity’

To be fair, there are many doctors and scientists who claim that the vaccines are superior to natural immunity. But for Facebook’s anonymous “fact checkers” whose credentials are withheld and then selectively label alternative medical and/or scientific opposing opinions signed by doctors and scientists as “false” is irresponsible.

That is, if forcing people to do something they don’t want is really the purpose.