Public Health Articles at Brownstone feature opinion and analysis of global public health policy including impacts on economics, public dialog, and social life. Public Health articles are translated into multiple languages.
Public health inverted the risk-benefit equation, leading to widespread miscalculation of potential benefit and harm. For the broad population, health officials and Pharma told us Covid was high-risk and genetic transfection was low-risk. It appears now just the reverse was true.
Bottom line—there’s not going to be a fungal apocalypse. I say this as a fungal immunologist that would certainly benefit from making the case for a fungal apocalypse, but I think we’ve had enough fearmongering the last few years for many lifetimes, and fearmongering ultimately further erodes public trust in scientists and public health “experts.”
Every American is a sovereign individual with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a sack of meat to be treated as a profit opportunity. Informed consent must be revived from the grave if Americans are to have a fighting chance against powerful financial interests allied against them.
Despite Fauci’s wishes, the most extreme aspects of lockdowns gradually faded away in time, most anointed experts can pretend as if the vaccine ended the worst aspects of the pandemic (that’s why the mandates became necessary, if only to maximize uptake and confound the science), and Fauci keeps going on national television, despite his age and wealth, to dial back his responsibility for any aspect of it, including the lockdowns he is on record backing from February 26, 2020, onward.
Taking a new Covid shot every winter has no empirical basis. The burden of proving effectiveness against death squarely rests on public health officials and anything short of a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial is unacceptable. And that applies to the flu shot as well.
The Royal Society review shows that some academics are losing their ability to think critically. Instead of retrofitting evidence to preconceived conclusions, it would be much better to report the uncertainties and set out those questions that need addressing. Refusal to acknowledge uncertainties does a disservice to society and undermines public trust in research.
Lockdowns were the most successful state/corporate policy in world history for convincing the population to give up volition, liberty, and money to the biomedical cartels and all its associated parts. Something that is this monstrously successful for them becomes a model for the future, which they try and try until the population gets utterly and completely sick of it, as they did with the religious wars of old.
All of the “Covid Relief” numbers are far too big to understand unless one has a good numbers sense and sits quietly in a room with some blank paper and does some ciphering. People thought it was a good idea to spend limitlessly and futilely on Grandma without considering the costs to her adult children and grandkids. Hey, Grandma used to make us cookies; she’s worth whatever we’ve got. And even what we don’t got. Even if we can’t, through the full range of “mitigation,” keep her alive for another two months in a nursing home, where she’s seldom visited. If she has to live in isolation and die alone to “stop the spread,” so be it.
If everything can be blamed on Long COVID, then nothing can be blamed on Long COVID. It’s all confirmation studies from here on out. But since the COVID pandemic has ended and HIV continues to threaten at-risk populations without access to medicine, the actual need for HIV research will remain greater, while concerns about Long COVID among the public will fade.
