The Brownstone Institute provides many original and profound points of views
including one that I have lately made my ‘Delende Carthago’:
The People are at war not (only) with the private psychopath individuals and the entities they mastermind
but the States !!! (here)
Another powerful text concerning our children is this:
The Tribe that Wants
Kids Forever Masked
Brownstone Institute’s
scientific director is former Harvard Prof. Martin Kulldorff, one of the most qualified
public health pandemic experts in the United States but, to the narrative-shapers,
he’s become a pariah. Here’s why …
'Science and Public Health Are Broken'
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, FEB 18, 2022 -
04:40 AM
Authored by Charlotte Cuthbertson via The Epoch Times
(excerpts)
As a prominent epidemiologist and statistician, Kulldorff has worked on detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks for two decades. His methods are widely used around the world and by almost every state health department in the United States, as well as by hundreds of people at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Kulldorff has also
worked on vaccine safety for decades, developing globally used methods for
monitoring adverse reactions in new vaccines.
His résumé on the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) website is 45 pages long and includes a list of
201 peer-reviewed published journal papers. His work has been cited more than
27,000 times.
Since 2003, Kulldorff
worked at Harvard Medical School, first as an associate professor of population
medicine and later as a professor of medicine.
In November, Harvard
and Kulldorff abruptly parted ways.
Kulldorff prefers to
keep the reasons private, but it’s hard to ignore that he placed himself in the
crosshairs of the pandemic narrative early on in the “15 days to slow the
spread” lockdown and has since paid the price.
It’s quite something
for a public health scientist at the top of his game to admit that “both
science and public health are broken.”
(…)
The Great Barrington
Declaration
His early efforts
culminated in the Great Barrington Declaration, published with Dr. Sunetra
Gupta and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya in October 2020. The declaration called for a
more nuanced approach to the one-size-fits-all restrictions that had been
imposed on much of Western society.
“The most
compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd
immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their
lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection,
while better protecting those who are at highest risk,” the declaration states.
The two other authors
are also amply qualified in the field. Gupta is a professor at Oxford
University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine
development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases. Bhattacharya is
a professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist,
health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious
diseases and vulnerable populations.
Kulldorff said the
Great Barrington Declaration proposed nothing new.
“It’s just the basic
fundamental principles of public health that existed in the pandemic
preparedness plan that was prepared many years before,” he said. “It’s sort of
astonishing that it wasn’t followed from the very beginning of the pandemic.”
Conventional public
health science had deemed it unnecessary and potentially harmful to close
schools and small businesses, to impose masking on the general public, and to
quarantine healthy people.
Kulldorff said the
document wasn’t for the politicians, or scientists, or even the
doctors—although thousands of each signed it.
“The most important
audience was the public,” he said, “because it’s the public that ultimately
will end these misguided public health policies. It’s the public, regular
people, who are suffering the consequences.”
He said the authors
wanted to advise the average person that their intuition was correct, that the
restrictions weren’t based on public health science—”so when you oppose them,
you’re standing on firm scientific ground.”
“The key thing was to
break the pretense that there was scientific consensus for these
lockdowns—which there wasn’t.”
The appearance of a
scientific consensus was formed through high-profile public health officials
such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins, and Dr. Deborah Birx, as well
as corporate media along with the
stifling of opposing viewpoints.
“There’s really no
public health arguments against the declaration. So if you want to criticize
it, you have to … make up lies about it and then attack that, as well as
slander the people behind it. And they did both of those things,” Kulldorff
said.
(…)
Collateral Damage
One of the major
precepts behind the Great Barrington Declaration is that public health is
wide-ranging and needs a long-term view, yet many influential scientists had a
singular focus on COVID-19 outcomes.
“One of the principles
of public health is, it’s not about one disease, like COVID, it’s about all of
public health,” Kulldorff said.
That singular focus
resulted in government officials filling skateboard parks in California with
sand and locking up children’s playgrounds with chains and yellow police tape.
Millions of children were sent home from school and for almost two years were
forced to learn virtually from home.
Meanwhile, teen
suicide rates have increased, drug and alcohol abuse has increased, domestic
violence has risen, while childhood vaccinations decreased and cancer
screenings plummeted.
Health experts warned
in May 2020 that as pandemic-driven hardship puts added strain on the mental
health of Americans, as many as 154,000 extra lives may be lost due to drug or
alcohol abuse and suicide, or “deaths of despair.”
People were dying from
cardiovascular diseases that, in normal circumstances, they would have survived,
Kulldorff said,”because maybe they were afraid to go to the hospital, or they
went too late.”
“So these are all
tragic consequences, collateral damage, of these COVID measures, restrictions
that were imposed,” he said. “And you can’t just do that for a whole year or
two and expect that it doesn’t have other enormously bad outcomes on public
health.”
Kulldorff anticipates
that many of the ancillary health impacts have yet to surface.
In January, a Johns
Hopkins meta-analysis of lockdown data concluded that lockdowns didn’t save
lives.
(…)
What’s Next ?
Kulldorff is
dedicating his next chapter to helping restore trust in science and public
health—both of which he calls “broken.”
“So it’s the heads of
the funding agencies, the heads of the big journals, and the university
presidents and deans who all went into the same bubble thinking that they knew
what was right, and which turned out to be wrong,” Kulldorff said.
“But all scientists
now are going to have to suffer from that, because, for good reasons, the
public won’t trust scientists anymore.”
He’s working with the
Brownstone Institute as the scientific director to navigate how to shore up
public health again. He’s also part of Hillsdale College’s new Academy for
Science and Freedom, which he says will promote and defend the importance of
open, free scientific discourse.
“It’s very clear that
if we want to have vibrant science, and a vibrant scientific community, we have
to reform the way science operates and the way public health operates,” he
said.
But, Kulldorff said,
it’s up to the public—the truckers, farmers, nurses, pilots, and parents—as
well as rank-and-file scientists to effect real change.
It’s also time to
compassionately help each other heal from the psychological and mental wounds,
he said, especially those still living in constant fear of COVID and those who
have been self-isolating for two years now.
“I think we shouldn’t
blame those who were afraid, because they were major victims of this pandemic
strategy,” he said.
“We shouldn’t blame
people for believing Anthony Fauci and the CDC—that was the natural thing to
do. We just have to help them realize that these measures were misguided so
that never happens again.”
No comments:
Post a Comment