Fauci and Collins have much to answer for, but they won't
/
charlatans, frauds, and crooks
ONE MORE SCANDAL FOR CLAUDINE GAY’S SUCCESSOR TO CONFRONT: Harvard Tramples the Truth. When the Covid pandemic began, Martin Kulldorff was a professor at Harvard Medical School and one of the world’s leading experts on vaccines. He had helped design the system used by the CDC and other agencies to monitor adverse effects from vaccines. But instead of drawing on his expertise, Harvard proceeded to fire him. Now, for the first time, Kulldorff reveals how he lost his job after co-authoring the Great Barrington Declaration and (correctly) challenging the Covid orthodoxy on lockdowns, natural immunity, and vaccine mandates (including “the science” promulgated by Rochelle Walensky, the Harvard professor who was a disaster as the CDC’s director during the pandemic).
Fauci and Collins set out to quash anyone questioning their dictatorial powers, and their willing lapdogs: corporate media; Facebook; Twitter; and once-respected academic institutions were only too happy to obey.
Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins shut down COVID-19 debate
Recent emails obtained by the American Institute for Economic Research show that Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Francis Collins, MD, former director of the National Institutes of Health, quashed dissenting views from top scientists about pandemic measures, according to an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal Dec. 21.
The emails were in response to "The Great Barrington Declaration," a statement against lockdown measures, favoring instead focused measures that would prioritize the medically vulnerable and high-risk population. The declaration was signed by thousands of scientists, including a Nobel Prize winner.
In an email to Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins said of the "Barrington Declaration," "There needs to be a quick and devastating published take-down of its premises."
Dr. Collins then spoke to The Washington Post, calling the declaration "a fringe component of epidemiology. This is not mainstream science. It's dangerous."
The Journal article argues that Dr. Fauci then angled himself as a representative of science itself, not allowing discourse or dissenting opinions, which were all too important to pandemic policy.
"Rather than try to manipulate public opinion, the job of health officials is to offer their best scientific advice. They shouldn't act like politicians or censors, and when they do, they squander the public's trust," write the editors of the Journal's opinion page.
