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.
Martin Kulldorff, co-author of the eugenicist Great Barrington Declaration that advocated a “let ‘er rip” strategy to address the pandemic to achieve “natural herd immunity,” laments being “fired” from Harvard. Is it possible to know what really happened? Orac provides educated speculation. (NOTE ADDENDUM.)
Jeffrey Tucker recently bragged that “natural herd immunity” approaches to the pandemic like his Great Barrington Declaration had “changed everything.” Unfortunately, he wasn’t wrong and worse, these changes were not a good thing.
Gabrielle Bauer of the Brownstone Institute tacitly admits that the central premise of the Great Barrington Declaration was badly wrong, but brushes it off a just “details.”
The pandemic has brought scientists who have rejected science with respect to COVID-19 public health measures a disturbing level of influence. Recent research suggests reasons why and who among the public susceptible to such misinformation remains persuadable.
