Another MAGA Doctor Breaks with Trump Over 'Stupid' Tylenol Rant

In a surprising development that underscores a growing fissure within his medical support base, another prominent "MAGA doctor" has publicly broken ranks with former President Donald Trump. Dr. William Grace, a respected oncologist and long-time supporter, has vehemently condemned Trump’s recent tirade against the common pain reliever, Tylenol, labeling his remarks as "stupid" and "unscientific." This outspoken criticism marks a significant moment, highlighting a pushback against medical misinformation even from those who once stood firmly by the former president.

Dr.

Grace, known for his work in oncology and for having served as a physician for various high-profile figures, including members of the diplomatic community, has a history of publicly backing Donald Trump. His past endorsements and appearances have aligned him with the conservative movement, making his current condemnation all the more striking.

His break follows a similar public rebuke from Dr. Janette Nesheiwat, another physician who gained prominence during the Trump administration and also expressed deep concern over Trump's Tylenol remarks.

The controversy stems from comments made by Donald Trump, where he questioned the efficacy and safety of Tylenol, suggesting it has "bad stuff" and implies it is not a beneficial medication.

Such statements, lacking any scientific basis and contradicting established medical consensus, immediately drew fire from the medical community. Dr. Grace did not mince words, directly stating, "It's a stupid, unscientific statement to say that Tylenol has bad stuff. It doesn't." His firm stance underscores the medical profession's commitment to evidence-based health information, regardless of political affiliations.

The significance of Dr.

Grace and Dr. Nesheiwat's criticisms cannot be overstated. These are not merely anonymous medical professionals; they are figures who have, in various capacities, lent their credibility to the former president's platform. Their willingness to now challenge Trump on matters of public health speaks volumes about the perceived danger of spreading unfounded medical claims.

It suggests that for some, the integrity of scientific fact and public well-being supersedes political loyalty.

This evolving narrative points to a broader tension between political rhetoric and scientific accuracy. As medical professionals, doctors like Grace and Nesheiwat are bound by ethical codes to prioritize health and provide accurate information.

When political leaders, even those they support, disseminate misleading health advice, it places these professionals in a difficult position. Their public dissent serves as a stark reminder that even within a dedicated political base, there are lines that, when crossed in the realm of public health, cannot be ignored.