On social media, the “right answer” is the moralizing one. Vaccines are good. People who don’t get them are bad. We should fire bad people, etc. etc.. This narrative bores me as it is superficial and not very rigorous.
While wearing a mask, I feel anonymous and inhuman. Few people are willing to approach me for conversation, compounding the difficulties I already face due to my disabilities. My disabilities made people nervous about including me in activities because they were afraid to approach.
Where is Russia going and why has it embraced such dubious, civilization-transforming COVID measures, in near-lockstep with its so-called Western rivals?
This is the moment in which we find ourselves: a ruling class terrified of being found out, called out, and held accountable, and therefore incentivized to generate an endless series of excuses, scapegoats, and distractions (“You need another shot!”).
Who Will Be Held Responsible for this Devastation? Read More
There is much to dislike in Spiegelhalter and Masters’ book on the plague year, but considering the partisan and authoritarian nonsense, garbage advice, and terrible statistical blunders we’ve grown used to, the book comes across as fairly balanced. They have some clear blind spots (vaccines, effectiveness of lockdowns, Vitamin D) but there are much worse things to read than Covid by Numbers.
Blinded by a Blizzard of Numbers: A Review of Spiegelhalter and Masters Read More
Whenever applied, the precautionary principle needs to be challenged and stand scrutiny, to help us make decisions when there is uncertainty, and the situation is in flux as is typical in a pandemic. These alternatives emphasize seeking new facts, being rigorously honest about the evidence, being open to being wrong, adjusting our actions as we come to understand more, and communicating with trust, not fear.
It’s essential we debrief on the harm we caused – the epidemiological harm we simply displaced and converted to economic harm that, at the end of the chain, has caused equally real people to suffer and die at higher rates than they would’ve had we acted differently. It’s irresponsible and unscientific to suppress discussions on the inconvenient truth that our response to the pandemic likely indirectly killed people.
Why Were They So Obtuse about the Terrible Harms They Would Inflict? Read More
Given these overall randomized trial findings regarding covid-19 vaccine boosters—absence of even a short- term reduction in mild covid-19 infections in those with natural immunity, and no data establishing that boosters prevent covid-19 hospitalizations, deaths, or SARS-CoV-2 transmission—there is no rational, evidence-based justification for covid-19 vaccine “booster mandates.”
The Paucity of Evidence for Mandated Covid-19 Vaccine Boosters Read More
The response to Biden’s infection should give us all hope that we can get back to normal, stop stigmatizing the sick, stop calling people who recover from Covid “survivors,” stop avoiding each other as if the human person is nothing but a vector of disease spread, and stop with this incredible cruel demand that every person separate from everyone else in the name of controlling a virus.
The political establishment is so devoted to this cause that it is hard to see how we can extricate ourselves. Accepting the first lockdown was the decisive point. We sacrificed our rights due to fear, and nearly two years later, we still don’t have them back. It was as obvious then as it is now: power is never seized and then voluntarily returned.
The control of COVID-19 spread, even to vulnerable people, is undoubtedly good – but it is not the only good. Some things in life – and death – are more important than COVID-19, and our public health authorities would do well to remember that fact.
What Does Focused Protection Mean for Nursing Homes? Read More
If these rules are strenuously enforced, millions of videos, interviews, television shows, lectures, press conferences, and scientific presentations will disappear. Maybe tens of millions actually. And all in the name of protecting “science” against its corruption, as if YouTube should be the determinant of what constitutes good science.
Is YouTube Now Presuming to be in Charge of Science? Read More
