Hack conspiracy “journalist” and attack Chihuahua Paul Thacker defends Nominee for NIH Director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and his Great Barrington Declaration by rehashing the same old attacks on its critics. I appear to be living rent-free in their heads.
A proponent of the Great Barrington Declaration is comparing rejection of its “natural herd immunity” approach to the pandemic to the rejection of Ignaz Semmelweis and his findings (and Galileo, too). It’s a deceptive comparison beloved of all manner of scientific cranks.
A week and a half ago, Stanford University announced a conference on pandemic policy that features several of the usual suspects who spread misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Truly, Stanford has become the “respectable” academic face of efforts to undermine public health.
Kasper Kepp and John Ioannidis have published a preprint accusing The BMJ of “COVID advocacy” bias in its publications. Although The BMJ has been bad on COVID-19 and vaccines, in this case the “bias” is the rejection of COVID-19 minimization and “natural herd immunity.”
hack: adj.: 1. Working for hire especially with mediocre professional standards (a hack journalist); 2. performed by or suited to a person who works or writes purely for the purpose of earning money; 3. characteristic of a hack 4. MEDIOCRE (e.g.) hack writing, hackneyed, trite.
Thack: adj: All of the above, but in the style of Paul Thacker. Verb (transitive): To write hack hit pieces in the style of Paul Thacker.
I know I’ve written about Paul Thacker’s attacks on young physician Dr. Allison Neitzel three times now, but he just keeps going lower and demanding more not-so-Respectful Insolence. Orac is happy to oblige.
