Category Archives: Vaccine

C&C. Canada. mRNA. Snowden. Breast-milk. Raid.

Source: C&C NEWS ☙ Tuesday, September 27, 2022 ☙ RAMMING

🗞*WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 🗞

💉 It’s the end of an era. Canada’s last remaining covid restrictions are falling. As of this Friday, rules about mandatory vaccines, testing, and quarantines for international travelers will be dropped, and travel will be back to pre-pandemic normal.

I remember — almost exactly one year ago — meeting a large group of Canadian border-crossers at the Covid Summit in Ocala. It was a sobering moment. They described how they’d left all their property and in a harrowing night-time tale of underground railroads, planes, trains, and automobiles, they managed to slip across the U.S.’s northern border and made their way immediately to the Free State of Florida.

It was a jarring reminder of how we Floridians were taking things for granted, and encouraged me to broaden the fight and start trying to help, however we could, our blue state friends and northern neighbors.

I wonder sometimes, when these stories appear, if the folks I met in Ocala are ready to head home, or if they are now here to stay.

💉 A blockbuster new JAMA Pediatrics study found mRNA particles in breast milk — you know, exactly what they swore on a Bible would never, ever happen.

The good thing though is that at least no expecting mothers lost their jobs over the jabs or anything.

Oh, wait. Nevermind.

Anyway, don’t worry, the CDC still says the shots are totally safe for pregnant women:

Dr. Naomi Wolf says the Pfizer documents show that four women’s breast milk turned blue-green, which doesn’t sound too good, and one breastfeeding infant in the Pfizer clinical trials DIED.

Twitter avatar for @liz_churchill1_Liz Churchill ™ 🇨🇦 @liz_churchill1_

“Breast milk…turned blue-green” -Dr. Naomi Wolf

Image

But it’s okay! You can trust everything ELSE they told us about the safety and efficacy of the shots because … science! Shut up!

💉 The Epoch Times ran a quiet but profoundly important story yesterday headlined, “Doctor Turns Against Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccines, Calls for Global Pause.”

This is the missing link we’ve been waiting for: Medical professionals who previously supported the jabs now admitting they were wrong and doing the right thing, which takes almost as much courage as opposing the shots in the first place.

Think about this: none of the doctors who initially opposed the shots have changed their minds.

The story explains that Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a telegenic British cardiologist who sits on the board of the Journal of Insulin Resistance, just published a peer-reviewed article in that journal critical of the mRNA shots, in which he called for a worldwide halt of the jabs. His paper is titled, “Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine.”

The Epoch Times drily added, “Pfizer and Moderna did not return requests for comment.” Haha, I bet they didn’t.

Dr. Malhotra was all-in. He took the jabs himself in January 2021, and the handsome, well-spoken doctor even went on British TV to push the shots. He was 100% convinced the mRNA shots were safe and effective.

It took his father dying.

About six months after getting the Pfizer vaccine, Dr. Malhotra’s fit and healthy father died at home of a sudden and unexpected heart attack. Dr. Malhotra asked for an autopsy, which showed two of his father’s major arteries severely blocked.

So, the doctor began researching post-vaccination injuries, including a study published in the journal Circulation, which showed a higher risk of hear attackd after the mRNA jabs, and a study of Nordic counties showing an elevated risk of myocarditis.

Dr. Malhotra now believes his father’s death was caused by the vaccine.

It is truly tragic that takes the deaths of people who doctors love to get us to this point. But note that it wasn’t just his father’s death, it was also the two studies he mentioned. Like the JAMA Pediatrics study I reported above about mRNA in breast milk, a critical mass of scientific consensus is building over the jab’s risks.

The word is getting out. Legitimate consensus is building. And the building consensus is getting strong enough, and loud enough, to convince at least one doctor to publicly change his position. There will be more.

Believe me, we’re getting there.

🔥 The Washington Post ran a story yesterday headlined, “Putin Grants Citizenship To Edward Snowden, Who Exposed U.S. Surveillance.” Snowden has been living in Russia since 2013, applied for Russian citizenship back in 2020, but his permanent citizenship status was just approved yesterday, by a decree signed by president Putin.

Curious timing, isn’t it?

The WaPo slyly says Snowden just “considers himself a whistleblower,” but later the article admitted that Snowden “disclosed the existence of the NSA’s collection of millions of Americans’ phone records, a program later found by a federal appeals court to be unlawful and since shuttered.”

Unlawful. Shuttered.

WaPo also quoted Jameel Jaffer, executive director of Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, who tweeted yesterday, “{Snowden] did an immense public service by exposing mass surveillance programs that multiple courts later found to be unconstitutional.”

So.

Government actors quoted for the story were not quite so charitable. Sue Gordon, a former principal deputy director of national intelligence, said Snowden’s new Russian citizenship “takes away any illusion that what he was doing [through his disclosures] was to help America.”

Jim Clapper, former director of national intelligence, criticized Snowden, but admitted that the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ phone records was something “we probably should have been more transparent” about. Ya think?

“Probably should have been more transparent.” These people kill me. If you love transparency so much, how about not waiting till you get caught, and go ahead and apply that love of transparency to whatever you’re up to right now? How about to the Ukraine bio-labs?

Regardless of how you feel about Snowden, the real story is how his new Russian citizenship is the fruit of Biden’s sanctions program.

🔥 The takes on Snowden’s citizenship vary, of course, largely depending on whether the pundit is part of the political party controlling the intelligence agencies or not.

Matt Gaetz says Biden should just go ahead and pardon Snowden:

Twitter avatar for @mattgaetzMatt Gaetz @mattgaetz

Joe Biden should PARDON @Snowden

Biden delegate, Princeton grad, and lefty social media influencer Lindy Li says Snowden is obviously a Russian secret agent, just like President Trump:

For his part, for some reason, Snowden doesn’t seem like much of a CIA fan. So the feeling is mutual.

🔥 Snowden just published a Substack article titled, “The CIA Is Not Your Friend.” In the article, Snowden made some pretty incredible claims about the CIA:

Within a year [of its founding], the young agency had already slipped the leash of its intended role of intelligence collection and analysis to establish a covert operations division. Within a decade, the CIA was directing the coverage of American news organizations, overthrowing democratically elected governments (at times merely to benefit a favored corporation), establishing propaganda outfits to manipulate public sentiment, launching a long-running series of mind-control experiments on unwitting human subjects (purportedly contributing to the creation of the Unabomber), and — gasp — interfering with foreign elections. From there, it was a short hop to wiretapping journalists and compiling files on Americans who opposed its wars.

What nonsense! How dare he! That’s slander! That’s totally defamatory! (None of it’s true, is it?)

There were a lot of ways the Snowden disclosures could’ve been prevented. Our intelligence agencies could have, for example, simply refrained from spying on Americans. Then there would have been nothing for Snowden to reveal.

Or, as another totally random example, they could stop doing stuff like helping political parties manufacture fake dossiers against sitting presidents and blaming everything on Russia.

I’m just saying. A smidgen of self-restraint. And a crumb of morality. That’s all we’re asking for.

🔥 The Epoch Times reported on some developments in the Biden Raid case. Although blocked by the 11th Circuit from viewing the classified materials, Judge Dearie has been issuing orders and trying to do his job the best he can.

Judge Dearie has agreed the DOJ should provides copies of everything to Trump’s legal team. He entered a confidentiality order, requiring Trump’s lawyers and professionals to keep private the copies of what was seized. The DOJ wanted the names of everyone who’d be viewing the material, which sounds sinister, but was probably more because they want to be able to enforce leaks.

Given the political stakes, Judge Dearie refused to make Trump’s team list the names of reviewers, which was the right call. Having served on the FISA court, Judge Dearie knows full well just how easy it is for the government to listen in on someone’s calls and read their emails.

Another order required the DOJ to swear in an affidavit that everything they told the court so far is complete and true. This obviously isn’t Judge Dearie’s first rodeo with the government. The order resulted in the DOJ “updating” its list to add 64 new documents that weren’t previously disclosed. It also removed a handful of items (a couple magazines and empty file folders).

Uh huh.

Finally, in a darkly hilarious development, Judge Dearie had to move back the deadline for the DOJ to scan all the documents for turnover, because out of six scanning vendors the DOJ and Trump’s team contacted, only ONE returned their phone calls. Of the other five, only one even bothered to say, “no thanks.”

The rest were like “oh no, nuh-uhn, nope.”

I guess the one remaining scanner can now name its price. They’d better budget in enough to cover all the media harassment they are going to get.

🔥 Is President Trump reading Coffee & Covid? Last week on Thursday (September 22), President Trump told Sean Hannity that as president he has broad declassification powers, and he said stuff that was right out of that morning’s C&C post.

Here’s what Trump said: “Different people say different things but as I understand it, if you’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.”

Trump explained, “because you’re sending it to Mar-a-Lago or wherever you’re sending it. There doesn’t have to be a process. There can be a process, but there doesn’t have to be.” Trump continued, “you’re the president … you make that decision.”

Now here’s what I posted on the morning of the same day, September 22:

My reading of the applicable law is that Trump needn’t do anything at all to declassify a document. In my view, all he has to do is DECIDE, and then act in conformity with that decision. So, I believe that if President Trump moves a classified document twelve inches, say moving it one foot out of the secured area into the common area, that’s all he has to do to declassify.

Taking the documents to Mar-a-Lago is an act in conformity with his decision to declassify. To me, it’s that easy.

Compare them. Our summaries are eerily similar. Or, maybe we were just on the same wavelength last Thursday. What do you guys think?

🔥 Giving you an idea where we’re at these days, when a group of Brazilian cross fitters ran past a sidewalk restaurant yesterday, it caused a panic:

With the way things have been for two years, can you blame them? They were like, that’s good enough for me, we’re out of here.

🔥 Yesterday, NASA completed a mission to ram a fabulously expensive spacecraft right into a football-stadium-sized asteroid named Dimorphos.

Is it just me, or does that asteroid look like a computer model of a lump of cement? Plus, right before impact, I could swear I saw part of Hilary’s email server in there. Weird.

🌪️ For those of you outside Florida, I’m sure you’ll be flooded with dramatic Hurricane Ian storm images all week, but here are a couple of early ones.

The new projections now show the storm making a right turn and driving right up the middle of Florida:

Coffee & Covid and its author are located right in northern part of the expected path. The good news for me is, by the time it gets to my part of the state, it will have degraded into a tropical storm. Still, we could expect power problems, flooding, trees down, and so forth.

As of last night, storm surge was already affecting Miami — on the other side of the state:

Twitter avatar for @coweddleCody Weddle @coweddle

Water is already overwhelming storm drains in Downtown Miami. #Ian

Image

With two days left to go, there is still a lot that could happen. But folks in west Florida should be focusing on prep at this point.

For all you new Floridians, welcome to your first hurricane! With all the water, you might get to meet your first alligator, too.

Have a terrific Tuesday, and good luck with your Hurricane hoarding! I’ll be back tomorrow with more.

Share

C&C is moving the needle and changing minds. If you can, I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-learn-how-to-get-involved-

Twitter: @jchilders98
Truth Social: @jchilders98
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com
Emailed Daily Newsletter: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com

Share

Doctor Turns Against Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccines, Calls for Global Pause

Source: Doctor Turns Against Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccines, Calls for Global Pause

By Zachary Stieber and Jan Jekielek
September 26, 2022 Updated: September 26, 2022

A doctor who promoted COVID-19 vaccines is now calling for health authorities around the world to pause administration of two of the most-widely utilized COVID-19 vaccines, asserting that the benefits from the vaccines may not outweigh the risks.

“There is more than enough evidence—I would say the evidence is overwhelming—to pause the rollout of the vaccine,” Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist and evidence-based medicine expert, told The Epoch Times.

A paper from Malhotra was published on Sept. 26 detailing the evidence.

Among the citations is a recent reanalysis of the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials that concluded vaccinated trial participants were at higher risk of serious adverse events. Malhotra called the study a “smoking gun.”

Malhotra also pointed to the lack of reduction in mortality or severe disease in the trials, which were completed in 2020.

Taking into account death rates and other figures since then, the number of people who need to be vaccinated to prevent a single COVID-19 death ranges from 93,000 for people aged 18 to 29 to 230 for people aged 80 and above, according to an analysis of UK safety and effectiveness data by the Health Advisory & Recovery Team.

The author also noted that serious side effects have been detected after the trials, such as myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation.

Overall, looking at the absolute benefits and drawbacks of the vaccines, it’s time to halt their usage and allow authorities and other experts to closely examine the data to see if the vaccines should be used again down the road, according to Malhotra.

The paper was published in the Journal of Insulin Resistance in two parts following peer review.

Pfizer and Moderna did not return requests for comment.

Reversal

Malhotra received the Pfizer primary series in January 2021. He became a promoter of the vaccine, even appearing on “Good Morning Britain” to advise Indian film director Gurinder Chadha to get the shot. Chadha did so shortly after.

Malhotra said he began digging into vaccine data after his father, Dr. Kailash Chand, suffered a cardiac arrest at home approximately six months after receiving Pfizer’s vaccine.

The post-mortem showed two of Chand’s major arteries were severely blocked, even though Malhotra described his father as a fit person who did not have any significant heart problems.

Malhotra began reading about post-vaccination issues, including a study abstract in the journal Circulation that identified a higher risk of a heart attack following vaccination with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and a study from Nordic counties that identified a higher risk of myocarditis. While authorities have claimed that myocarditis is more common after COVID-19 than vaccination, many studies have found otherwise, at least for certain age groups. Some papers have found no increased incidence of heart inflammation for COVID-19 patients.

Malhotra has come to believe his father’s death was linked to the vaccine.

“I’ve always approached medicine and science with uncertainties because things constantly evolve. And the information I had at the time is completely different to the information I have now,” Malhotra told The Epoch Times. “And in fact, it is my duty and responsibility as the information has changed to act on that information. And that’s what I’m doing.”

Response to Criticism

After the new paper was published, critics noted that Malhotra is a board member of the Journal of Insulin Resistance.

Malhotra acknowledged the position but said that the article went through an independent peer review process and that he has no financial links to the journal.

The doctor encouraged people to view his publication history, which includes articles in the British Medical Journal and the Journal of the American Medical Association.

He said he chose to submit the paper to the insulin journal for several reasons, including it being “one of the few journals that doesn’t take money from the pharmaceutical industry.”

“I don’t think that there’s any validity to question the integrity of the piece,” he said. “People can argue I’ve got an intellectual bias. We all have intellectual biases, but there’s certainly no financial bias for me.”

Gains Support

Leading scientists say the new paper is important.

“We fully believe that vaccines are one of the great discoveries in medicine that has improved life expectancy dramatically, however, mRNA genetic vaccines are different, as long-term safety evaluation is lacking but mandatory to ensure public safety,” Sherif Sultan, president of the International Vascular Society, said in a statement, adding that the findings “raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side effects and underscore the established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals.”

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at the University of Stanford, added that Malhotra “makes a good case that there is considerable heterogeneity across age groups and other comorbid conditions in the expected benefits and expected side effect profiles of the vaccine” and “finds that while there may be a case for older people to take the vaccine because the benefits may outweigh expected harm that may not be the case for younger people.”

Dr. Campbell Murdoch, who advises the Royal College of General Practitioners, said that the study “describes multiple systemic failures in the provision of safe and effective evidence-based medicine,” and that the situation has made it “impossible for patients and the public to make an informed choice about what is best for their health and life.”

Some others criticized the paper, including Dr. Victoria Male, an immunologist at Imperial College London.

Male wrote on Twitter that the table in the paper outlining the number of people in each age group estimated to need a vaccination to prevent a COVID-19 death “is quite in favour of vaccination.”

Zachary Stieber covers U.S. and world news. He is based in Maryland.
Share

Double standards: The Atlantic Tells the Story of a Doctor Whose Cancer Got Worse After Vaccination, but No Legacy Media Outlet Will Cover the Aftermath of a Boy Who Had Myocarditis

Source: Double standards: The Atlantic Tells the Story of a Doctor Whose Cancer Got Worse After Vaccination, but No Legacy Media Outlet Will Cover the Aftermath of a Boy Who Had Myocarditis

Why are we treating possible adverse events more seriously than a proven one?

Sep 25, 2022

This week the Atlantic published a long essay about a doctor: Michel Goldman, who has lymphoma, and who noticed that his cancer seemed to worsen after COVID19 mRNA boosting. Was the vaccine responsible?

Let me be clear: Is it possible his cancer got worse because of the booster? Absolutely, it is possible. Is it possible the cancer would have gotten worse without the booster? Absolutely, that often happens with lymphoma. Many patients experience what feels like a change in tempo, and it is hard to know what, if anything, precipitated it.

Imagine you put a gun to my head, and ask me to make the call. Is it related or unrelated? But you are a kind, and say you will give me 1 month, and allow me to use any data sources. I would do something very simple. I would go to a large electronic medical record with images. I would pick an incurable lymphoma where there is often repeat imagining— such as follicular lymphoma. I would extract images from patients (let us say 500). Some patients would have gotten boosters and others not— and it will not be random— this is a limitation. But, I can’t make excuses, I have a gun to my head.

I would use the raw images to calculate the g- or growth rate coefficient before COVID vaccination, and the g or growth rate after COVID vaccination (using established methods, see Fojo, et al.).

As a falsification test— (Learn about that here)— I would use the patients’ birthday to define a g before a birthday and a g after a birth day.

Here is the hypothesis: if the vaccine accelerates growth, the growth rate will change after boosting, but— let us be clear— it would not change at time of patient’s birthday. That’s the purpose of the falsification test— to serve as a negative control. You could also use a random day of the year for your falsification test. And you need a group of people to get a sense of the distribution.

With access to a nice dataset and omnibus IRB, a project like this could be done in 3 weeks. If I was allowed to involve Logan Powell— a Texas medical student who has done ~20 papers with me— we would be done in 2 weeks, because that kid doesn’t sleep. And, honestly, with Logan’s help (again, dude doesn’t sleep), I can think of 5 different studies to run to complement this analysis.

Do you know what I wouldn’t do? I wouldn’t extensively pour over the story of the individual Michel Goldman— because nothing can be found in one anecdote to help me. The yield will be low. And do you know what I really would not do: I wouldn’t broadcast this story in the Atlantic before I had strong evidence the link might be real!

Meanwhile, there is a proven safety signal I don’t hear much about in the legacy media. Myocarditis for boys after mRNA vaccination. It occurs as often as 1 in 3,000 after primary vaccination and 1 in 10,000 after boosting. It has very rarely but really resulted in young people ending up on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. It could be lowered (surely) if we banned Moderna in men <40, (possibly) if we lowered doses, (likely) if we spaced doses apart, and (surely) if we minimized doses in young men who already had COVID19. And yet, we have done nearly none of these things! The CDC only spread doses after a year of inaction, and we haven’t taken natural immunity seriously.

Vaccination means trying to maximize efficacy and minimize harm, but when it comes to young men, we haven’t taken the harm seriously and haven’t tried to minimize it. Yet, I don’t read this in the pages of the Atlantic. I just read about a famous old doctor who thinks the vaccine made his cancer grow faster. What is going on?

The entire episode led me to several conclusions:

  1. If he wasn’t a rich doctor; this would not be in the news. How sad is it that the experience of everyday Americans is not considered acceptable for news coverage. Many people have felt a range of medical issues were triggered or worsened by vaccination, but the media steadfastly refuses to cover those stories. Yet, in this case, they make an exemption because the individual is famous. I find this problematic. I prefer to not cover any anecdote, but this idea that if it happens to an electrician- it is anti-vax, but if it happens to a doctor- it is news— that’s problematic.
  2. Cancer accelerating after vaccination is not yet established as linked to COVID19 vaccination, but 2 things are fully established. Blood clots and runaway platelet activation after J&J vaccination is fully proven to be linked to the shot. And myocarditis, particularly in young men, has been linked to mRNA vaccines. And yet: I have never seen coverage of the human cost of either of these in any major news outlet!
  3. The news media could easily cover a poor young man who was forced to be boosted by his college or university, and experienced myocarditis. This occurs at the rate of 1 in 10k. One news story like this would be powerful— and strongly discourage these mid level managers from mandating novel medical products. And yet the media is silent on these stories. Why does the doctor get special treatment for a side effect that has not yet been vetted?
  4. What about this story of a 14 year old boy? Why is this (or a similar story) not in the Atlantic? Instead a doctor gets his unproven anecdote widely broadcast? 

     

  5. What about the young woman who had clot and brain damage from J&J? What about her family? Why no coverage of that? The news could also note that some (dim) scientists on Twitter compared runaway platelet activation after J&J to a blood clot in the leg after oral contraceptives. This was a deceptive and ignorant comparison that furthered preventable harm. Why does the media not cover this story? Why only a possible side effect— unproven— in a famous scientist?
  6. Consider the risk gradient here. Young people have far less to gain from each additional dose of vaccine, and even rare risks become salient. Older people who suffer from cancers that often lead to (or therapies lead to) b-cell inhibition face much higher risks of COVID19. Why are we covering an anecdote that might lead a higher risk population to forgo vaccination vs. lead colleges to consider that a lower risk population ought not be compelled? The whole thing is backwards.
  7. The White House is doing massive damage to our institutions— particularly the FDA— as they push a new booster based solely on mouse data. Their unethical pressure led Gruber and Krause to resign. They could have compelled Pfizer to run RCTs, but chose not to. The legacy media is largely complicit with this, writing many articles defending this choice, but it is entirely unprecedented. And yet, instead, they are happy to cover a putative side effect that might not even be related?
  8. I have no doubt there may be adverse events attributable to vaccines that are not yet established, but we don’t need to profile the people who have these (not yet), we need careful epidemiological studies. I agree the CDC’s passive collection is suboptimal, and I also no longer trust them, as I believe they have been captured by political winds, but the solution is better systems and independence, rather than covering anecdotes in the media.
  9. The Atlantic coverage is balanced and fair, but that’s not the point. The mere act of covering the anecdote to millions of readers, elevates it to something intensely plausible or true. No matter how much confidence you place in it, the truth is mycocarditis is more plausible and more true and should be preferentially covered. And yet there is no story of a boy who lost a football scholarship because he can’t play. Or a kid still ravaged with late gad enhancement after surviving mycocarditis. This discrepancy is fundamentally unfair.

The media coverage of vaccines and side effects is awful. They lack a philosophical framework and are unmoored. This article nicely shows how that is the case. Whether they choose to improve is beyond me. They have too much allegiance to the Biden administration, and have failed American boys as a result.

Like CommentComment ShareShare

If you liked this post from Sensible Medicine, why not share it?

Share

Anthony Fauci still won’t admit that prolonged school closures- fueled by his rhetoric- was bad policy

Source: Anthony Fauci still won’t admit that prolonged school closures- fueled by his rhetoric- was bad policy

Vinay Prasad Recently in a television interview, outgoing Dr. Anthony Fauci defended the decision to close schools. He says that it made sense prior to adult vaccination— and once teachers were vaccinated, shutdowns were not prolonged.
Image

First, let me be clear: I think that it was forgivable to have closed schools for 4-6 weeks in March 2020. It wasn’t the right call, but it was forgivable because of uncertainty. The correct call was to keep elementary schools open, as Sweden did, but I don’t blame the Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland, and the US for closing school briefly. Of course, the story doesn’t end there.

Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

A few weeks later it became clear: schools could be run safety (largely through Sweden’s experience), the risks to children were low, teachers did not have vastly elevated risks of death, and, by late summer, a German study proved that opening school did not drive substantive community transmission.

Many European nations reopened after 6 weeks (e.g. Switzerland) in the spring of 2020, while nearly all reopened by the fall of 2020. Some US states managed to reopen rapidly too, such as Florida, Texas and Rhode Island. But many cities remained closed: DC, Chicago, SF, Portland, Los Angeles.

During these months, Fauci went on television stirring up fear that reopening schools was dangerous. This would be disastrous advocacy. Even now, in 2022, with the benefit of hindsight, Fauci comments remain full of errors. He still doesn’t not get it— He was wrong; Spectacularly wrong; Once in a century error sort of wrong.

Let’s consider the errors in the quote.

  1. Fauci says it was OK to wait till you had “vaccines available for the general population” to reopen schools. This is profound ignorance. It is contradicted by the experience of nearly all European nations, as well as many US states (FL/ RI/ TX). The truth is that adult vaccines were not necessary to reopen schools, and many places on earth did not wait— to the benefit of their children.
  2. Fauci says shutdowns weren’t prolonged. This is false. Cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles closed schools to kids from March 2020, until the Fall of 2021. They did not reopen in the Spring of 2021—even after vaccines were prioritized to teachers (who took them, but whose unions still resisted return to school). Fauci appears to be ignorant of recent events.

Fauci elaborates in the interview to further fear-monger about the harms to children, but many of his statistics and comments are inaccurate.

Image

Here are some errors. Fauci laments the loss of 1400 kids, but the CDC tracker as of 9/21/22 says 1282, but more to point: it is unclear which deaths are due to COVID and which are from COVID. Fauci also doesn’t distinguish the risks to elementary kids which are profoundly different than teenagers. He doesn’t distinguish risks to health kids vs. those with co-morbidities. Finally, he has no evidence that school closure lowered this number! The best studies shows that closure did nearly nothing to alter it.

Fauci talks about long covid in kids, but this relies almost entirely on low quality research. Hirt and colleagues performed a systematic review of long-covid in kids and they find, “The reported proportion of children with post-COVID syndrome was up to 66.5% in children with and 53.3% in children without SARS-CoV-2 infection. All studies had seriously limited validity due to critical and serious risk of bias in multiple domains.”

In conclusion, Anthony Fauci did position himself initially as a forceful defender of school closure. When much of Western Europe and Ron DeSantis reopened— Fauci went on TV to criticize the Florida governor. Even now, 2 years later, Fauci clings to delusional ideas to justify closures. He denies the reality that many US cities—with strong allegiance to him— closed the longest. Fauci’s comments show a person not capable admitting error. I suspect these comments will not age well in history.

Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Like CommentComment ShareShare

You’re a free subscriber to Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts. For the full experience, become a paid subscriber.

Share