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.
Since the nomination of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya for NIH Director, I’ve been seeing a suggestion from certain contrarian doctors for a “randomized trial” of study sections vs. a “modified lottery” to determine which grant applications are funded by the NIH. Why do RFK Jr. apologists think this is a good idea?
It won’t be long before we’re treated to the spectacle of Senators grilling antivax nominees like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (HHS) and Dr. Dave Weldon (CDC). I exist to serve, which is why I’m suggesting some questions for Senators to ask all of Trump’s health picks.
He claims to be a “not antivax” expert in evidence-based medicine, but COVID-19 contrarian Dr. Vinay Prasad sure seems eager to kiss antivax conspiracy monger Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s posterior—and embrace his MAHA agenda.
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.
