First comment : "Hyperlocal control of public schools was a barrier to reopening them, because there was a leadership vacuum." This can cut both ways, centralized decision making does not gauruntee reopening... not at all. The fear continued to be reinforced and even amplified for many months.
Exactly. This is NOT about government levels. The corruption pervades all. This is about having transparency in science and public policy, THAT is where the big failure happened. Fear and hysteria should never guide public policy.
The Premier of Norway, last year, spoke publicly about admitting she had overreacted due to anti-science fear, and that she would not make that mistake again, and not re-lockdown Norway. One of the rare politicians that admitted to wrong-doing early on.
Yes, it does cut both ways. I experienced the opposite. I live in a small community outside of Seattle. When I emailed our district superintendent about reopening in the fall of 2020 and attached articles supporting this position, I was met with resistance and the simple response that they are following the guidance of the state superintendent and the state’s largest school district. This was there response multiple times when I would address specific policies like “Test to Stay” — which our district still hasn’t implemented. I live in a “purple” community and believe if there had been more community engagement and a focus on more local decision making it may have made a difference when it came to kids in school.
Also Harris County judge I guess I should call her that Lena Hildago would've kept our schools closed much longer several school districts opened regardless of what public officials wanted last year. So then the local schools were able to open because they were run again this cuts both ways until you think that that's the case you have to do some sort of numerical analysis and that would be pretty hard because everybody's gonna jump on the correct bandwagon in the next month.
Very Interesting. Both the right and left have those who care deeply both about the poor and the democracy, but this pandemic has shown how many prefer to mandate and control freedoms and not prioritize the vulnerable nor understand nuance.
so... mandating vaccination of elders is "ok" ?? How does one manage that?? Most are already locked down in care homes or senior homes or palliative homes. Should we do like Quebec and charge those seniors extra (above and beyond already paid for medicare) or accessing health services? Should we hold them down? Should we isolate them forever?
My thoughts in the spring of 2020 were that the pandemic has given every authoritarian in the world the playbook for how to shut down dissent. Remember that the news out of China pre-pandemic were the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.
"masks optional" is still problematic. Because performative fear is a foundational driver of fear. If a fool wishes to mask him/herself, then that person must obey generally socially accepted "do not cover face in public spaces" rule that Western societies live by. Masking does NOT prevent transmission, in either direction, therefore "optional masking" just gives credence to masking as having any value whatsoever.
Thank you for this. My take home from the discussion is: what is misinformation? Who is an expert? And are we headed toward totalitarian control? Or Fiefdom? If we do not speak up or vote for change. Any mention of mandates makes me cringe whether it is lockdown, masks, censoring “misinformation” or vaccination. At this point in the pandemic we need to reach some new less constrictive equilibrium. And stop shaming, cancelling or taking down people whose views differ from ours. That includes our bureaucratic public health leaders…..
Great interview! Anthony LaMesa is one of my favorite follows on Twitter-not just for his Covid insights but also his travel and transportation commentary. I would say Vinay, Anthony and Vladimir Kogan helped me the most frame arguments about why our schools should be open and use that info to fight to open schools in my ultra progressive town. Anthony shared great info on European schools and it was clear we could open schools in fall of 2020. I think all 3 of you deserve some special recognition or honor-maybe a school or 2 named after you! Thanks for all you’ve done to serve the kids in this country.
Schools should have been closed only for two weeks, ONLY long enough to adjust ventilation policy and get people to practice personal space allotments. Open windows at a minimum, and outdoor classes. We knew from March 2020 all the data we needed on age stratification of risk, and that children were NOT significant vectors, because they had so little shedding, even if they did catch it. We're in our THIRD season of c19 (winter 2019-2020, winter 2020-21, winter 2021-22), that's THREE years of consequences for kids, in order to obsess with longer lifespans.
Honestly, and no offense meant, I respect them.... but, not near enough was down early on by enough people, everyone shrunk with early opposition. It's scary, because things could have gone a bit worse and much longer with just a couple of things different. We're moved the goal post and folks know what to do to bring everyone into compliance for "emergency use". And the main objectives have been met, a broad scale agreement with annual genetic based vaccination.
Very insightful. Thanks for this VP. I think in the questions about mis-steps on both the Right and the Left pandemic-wise it would have been interesting to follow up with him as far as...would his own voting be influenced this spring because of many of these Draconian policies from the top down re: mandates, masking, etc etc? It would be interesting to know as a long standing Progressive Liberal would he be more influenced to move to an Independent standpoint vs. continue to vote for those making policies he very much disagrees with. It could be representative of many others like him who have always voted one way & their belief systems are very rooted...yet they feel very betrayed by their own in policy making positions & disagree strongly with decisions that have been made....will this move those folks more to the middle or middle/Right & how will that play out in elections? What about you VP....can you in good conscience vote for any local Cal. officials who perpetuate what you continue to be vocal about & stand in opposition to?
Dr. Prasad, I seldom miss an article or podcast of yours, but please leave politics out of this. I follow you for your message, not where you are on the political spectrum. As you yourself have mentioned in various outlets, there is no place for politics in public health policy. So why mention yours or LaMesa's "progressive or left of center" identification? In a generally great interview with him, why am I reading these words and the words republican/democrat?
Each political party has used the pandemic for their own purposes with we citizens left to suffer. The control of most media in favor of one political party has led to the other side creating an opposition and developing alternative media. That does little to develop an unbiased neutral understanding within the public. We have not been well served by the division. The effort to remove misinformation has led to some accepting most of it because the misinformation - such as the lab leak, really wasn't untrue, just unproven as were the alternatives. Then we come to the effectiveness of nearly all the pandemic control measure which have largely failed leading to mistrust of those who rigorously supported and enforced them. Expecting honesty on the part of politicians is foolish, but an apology might be nice.
With Omicron making fools out of most public health officials, we face a decline in public trust. Their inability to admit they were unsure strikes home. They along with the politicians who used this pandemic for their own gain need to be called out. The fall elections will not be a happy time for many. Whether either party can adjust remains to be seen.
Great questions and discussion. The guest seems to not appreciate the inherent corruption in large government institution's as opposed to small local governance. As the old mantra goes, "absolute power corrupts absolutely," which highlights the wisdom in our constitutional republic of federalism and checks and balances. Currently, most of this abuse of power is coming from the left, as well as the blatant casting away of civil liberties all across the west. If it weren't for local governance, I fear the US would look very much like Australia or Canada.
Vinay I have some data in an .xls file that I believe is important to review. It is regarding C-19 in Saskatachewan, Canada. What is the best way to send it to you?
Vinay — I have to ask a practical question. As a leftist who is pretty embedded in mainstream-liberal society (urban liberal class, LGBT advocates, other leftist demographics), I am now finding myself in an awfully difficult position: I am pretty much in lockstep with the position advocated in this article, as well as more centrist approaches to pandemic mandates that balance the harms vs. the benefits of various pandemic restrictions.
The question is, how do we start to make change, on the ground? Advocating for more centrist positions within homogenous leftist circles can be pretty scary, whether among friends, family, or community groups. And yet I feel myself having to push back, because it is considered "ableist" to ease lockdown measures (thus theoretically spreading the virus more to at-risk groups), but it isn't sexist to subject women to increased chances of domestic violence? It isn't cruel to subject recovered addicts to long, unpredictable waves of isolation, increasing their risk of relapse or overdose? It isn't cruel to cut depressed people off from community, increasing the risk of suicide?
I am finding myself in a bit of an internet bubble, and wondering how to bring these thoughts into the real world. -J
These questions were all asked and answered in the previous two decades. It's not a new question by any stretch. The ACLU had very strong anti-authoritarian policy recommendations, and all Pandemic Planning for contagions rejected all authoritarian measures.
Why suddenly are people so naïve! Is it age? Is it simply lack of historical knowledge?
There is nothing new here.
This was all settled, the problem is that politicians caved to public hysteria, which was FABRICATED by media/universities OWNED by the Medical Industrial Complex for the intent of profit. No cabal, no conspiracy theories, just profit.
Overall, a great interview with a lot of nuance. I think Mr. LaMesa is too charitable to the mistakes and excesses of the anti-NPI crowd - particularly in the first year of the pandemic when vaccines were not yet widely available - but who amongst us doesn't cut our ideological fellow travelers undue slack?
Attributing causality is tricky, and many Republican politicians (including Trump) have advocated for vaccination. But at the very least, there seems to be a clear parallel between the role the neurotic / anxious tendencies of COVID alarmists played in school closure, and the role the contrarian / conspiratorial tendencies of COVID denialists played in slow vaccine uptake on the right.
A simple look at https://ipv6.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us and sorting by deaths/1M show no solid connection to politics nor vaccination rates. I'd be very leery of using NPR selection of 3000 counties given known NPR bias. Given the lack of long term sterilizing ability of the current vaccines we need to revisit their utility. We have yet a lot to learn about how best to protect the vulnerable. Many of those who died had notable Vitamin D deficiency easily reduced by inexpensive supplements. We seem to have abandoned any real evaluation of repurposed medications in favor of proprietary drugs that have limited trial data. The vaccines depend on RNA activation to DNA which involves complex genetic responses within the immune system that we have an real inability to assess in a population.
First comment : "Hyperlocal control of public schools was a barrier to reopening them, because there was a leadership vacuum." This can cut both ways, centralized decision making does not gauruntee reopening... not at all. The fear continued to be reinforced and even amplified for many months.
Exactly. This is NOT about government levels. The corruption pervades all. This is about having transparency in science and public policy, THAT is where the big failure happened. Fear and hysteria should never guide public policy.
The Premier of Norway, last year, spoke publicly about admitting she had overreacted due to anti-science fear, and that she would not make that mistake again, and not re-lockdown Norway. One of the rare politicians that admitted to wrong-doing early on.
Yes, it does cut both ways. I experienced the opposite. I live in a small community outside of Seattle. When I emailed our district superintendent about reopening in the fall of 2020 and attached articles supporting this position, I was met with resistance and the simple response that they are following the guidance of the state superintendent and the state’s largest school district. This was there response multiple times when I would address specific policies like “Test to Stay” — which our district still hasn’t implemented. I live in a “purple” community and believe if there had been more community engagement and a focus on more local decision making it may have made a difference when it came to kids in school.
Also Harris County judge I guess I should call her that Lena Hildago would've kept our schools closed much longer several school districts opened regardless of what public officials wanted last year. So then the local schools were able to open because they were run again this cuts both ways until you think that that's the case you have to do some sort of numerical analysis and that would be pretty hard because everybody's gonna jump on the correct bandwagon in the next month.
Very Interesting. Both the right and left have those who care deeply both about the poor and the democracy, but this pandemic has shown how many prefer to mandate and control freedoms and not prioritize the vulnerable nor understand nuance.
so... mandating vaccination of elders is "ok" ?? How does one manage that?? Most are already locked down in care homes or senior homes or palliative homes. Should we do like Quebec and charge those seniors extra (above and beyond already paid for medicare) or accessing health services? Should we hold them down? Should we isolate them forever?
No mandate is humane. Not a single one.
My thoughts in the spring of 2020 were that the pandemic has given every authoritarian in the world the playbook for how to shut down dissent. Remember that the news out of China pre-pandemic were the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.
"masks optional" is still problematic. Because performative fear is a foundational driver of fear. If a fool wishes to mask him/herself, then that person must obey generally socially accepted "do not cover face in public spaces" rule that Western societies live by. Masking does NOT prevent transmission, in either direction, therefore "optional masking" just gives credence to masking as having any value whatsoever.
We should never promote un-science.
Thank you for this. My take home from the discussion is: what is misinformation? Who is an expert? And are we headed toward totalitarian control? Or Fiefdom? If we do not speak up or vote for change. Any mention of mandates makes me cringe whether it is lockdown, masks, censoring “misinformation” or vaccination. At this point in the pandemic we need to reach some new less constrictive equilibrium. And stop shaming, cancelling or taking down people whose views differ from ours. That includes our bureaucratic public health leaders…..
Great interview! Anthony LaMesa is one of my favorite follows on Twitter-not just for his Covid insights but also his travel and transportation commentary. I would say Vinay, Anthony and Vladimir Kogan helped me the most frame arguments about why our schools should be open and use that info to fight to open schools in my ultra progressive town. Anthony shared great info on European schools and it was clear we could open schools in fall of 2020. I think all 3 of you deserve some special recognition or honor-maybe a school or 2 named after you! Thanks for all you’ve done to serve the kids in this country.
Schools should have been closed only for two weeks, ONLY long enough to adjust ventilation policy and get people to practice personal space allotments. Open windows at a minimum, and outdoor classes. We knew from March 2020 all the data we needed on age stratification of risk, and that children were NOT significant vectors, because they had so little shedding, even if they did catch it. We're in our THIRD season of c19 (winter 2019-2020, winter 2020-21, winter 2021-22), that's THREE years of consequences for kids, in order to obsess with longer lifespans.
It's ritual sacrifice akin to Inca sacrifices.
Honestly, and no offense meant, I respect them.... but, not near enough was down early on by enough people, everyone shrunk with early opposition. It's scary, because things could have gone a bit worse and much longer with just a couple of things different. We're moved the goal post and folks know what to do to bring everyone into compliance for "emergency use". And the main objectives have been met, a broad scale agreement with annual genetic based vaccination.
Very insightful. Thanks for this VP. I think in the questions about mis-steps on both the Right and the Left pandemic-wise it would have been interesting to follow up with him as far as...would his own voting be influenced this spring because of many of these Draconian policies from the top down re: mandates, masking, etc etc? It would be interesting to know as a long standing Progressive Liberal would he be more influenced to move to an Independent standpoint vs. continue to vote for those making policies he very much disagrees with. It could be representative of many others like him who have always voted one way & their belief systems are very rooted...yet they feel very betrayed by their own in policy making positions & disagree strongly with decisions that have been made....will this move those folks more to the middle or middle/Right & how will that play out in elections? What about you VP....can you in good conscience vote for any local Cal. officials who perpetuate what you continue to be vocal about & stand in opposition to?
Dr. Prasad, I seldom miss an article or podcast of yours, but please leave politics out of this. I follow you for your message, not where you are on the political spectrum. As you yourself have mentioned in various outlets, there is no place for politics in public health policy. So why mention yours or LaMesa's "progressive or left of center" identification? In a generally great interview with him, why am I reading these words and the words republican/democrat?
Each political party has used the pandemic for their own purposes with we citizens left to suffer. The control of most media in favor of one political party has led to the other side creating an opposition and developing alternative media. That does little to develop an unbiased neutral understanding within the public. We have not been well served by the division. The effort to remove misinformation has led to some accepting most of it because the misinformation - such as the lab leak, really wasn't untrue, just unproven as were the alternatives. Then we come to the effectiveness of nearly all the pandemic control measure which have largely failed leading to mistrust of those who rigorously supported and enforced them. Expecting honesty on the part of politicians is foolish, but an apology might be nice.
With Omicron making fools out of most public health officials, we face a decline in public trust. Their inability to admit they were unsure strikes home. They along with the politicians who used this pandemic for their own gain need to be called out. The fall elections will not be a happy time for many. Whether either party can adjust remains to be seen.
Great questions and discussion. The guest seems to not appreciate the inherent corruption in large government institution's as opposed to small local governance. As the old mantra goes, "absolute power corrupts absolutely," which highlights the wisdom in our constitutional republic of federalism and checks and balances. Currently, most of this abuse of power is coming from the left, as well as the blatant casting away of civil liberties all across the west. If it weren't for local governance, I fear the US would look very much like Australia or Canada.
Thank you Vinay for another insightful thought provoking piece.
Vinay I have some data in an .xls file that I believe is important to review. It is regarding C-19 in Saskatachewan, Canada. What is the best way to send it to you?
Vinay — I have to ask a practical question. As a leftist who is pretty embedded in mainstream-liberal society (urban liberal class, LGBT advocates, other leftist demographics), I am now finding myself in an awfully difficult position: I am pretty much in lockstep with the position advocated in this article, as well as more centrist approaches to pandemic mandates that balance the harms vs. the benefits of various pandemic restrictions.
The question is, how do we start to make change, on the ground? Advocating for more centrist positions within homogenous leftist circles can be pretty scary, whether among friends, family, or community groups. And yet I feel myself having to push back, because it is considered "ableist" to ease lockdown measures (thus theoretically spreading the virus more to at-risk groups), but it isn't sexist to subject women to increased chances of domestic violence? It isn't cruel to subject recovered addicts to long, unpredictable waves of isolation, increasing their risk of relapse or overdose? It isn't cruel to cut depressed people off from community, increasing the risk of suicide?
I am finding myself in a bit of an internet bubble, and wondering how to bring these thoughts into the real world. -J
These questions were all asked and answered in the previous two decades. It's not a new question by any stretch. The ACLU had very strong anti-authoritarian policy recommendations, and all Pandemic Planning for contagions rejected all authoritarian measures.
Why suddenly are people so naïve! Is it age? Is it simply lack of historical knowledge?
There is nothing new here.
This was all settled, the problem is that politicians caved to public hysteria, which was FABRICATED by media/universities OWNED by the Medical Industrial Complex for the intent of profit. No cabal, no conspiracy theories, just profit.
Overall, a great interview with a lot of nuance. I think Mr. LaMesa is too charitable to the mistakes and excesses of the anti-NPI crowd - particularly in the first year of the pandemic when vaccines were not yet widely available - but who amongst us doesn't cut our ideological fellow travelers undue slack?
But my biggest gripe is that Mr. LaMesa doesn't mention anti-vaccine rhetoric as the single biggest failing by the right. In fall of '21, 92% of Democrats had been vaccinated, while only 56% of Republicans had received the shot, with 40% claiming they "don't plan" to get vaccinated; in other words, most of these folks are not cautious young men who are simply waiting for Pfizer to avoid the myocarditis risk of Moderna (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/10/01/for-covid-19-vaccinations-party-affiliation-matters-more-than-race-and-ethnicity/). These numbers are having real world consequences - the excess COVID mortality in Trump-voting counties in 2021 was staggering (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate).
Attributing causality is tricky, and many Republican politicians (including Trump) have advocated for vaccination. But at the very least, there seems to be a clear parallel between the role the neurotic / anxious tendencies of COVID alarmists played in school closure, and the role the contrarian / conspiratorial tendencies of COVID denialists played in slow vaccine uptake on the right.
We don't NEED vaccine uptake among the under 60s. The risk level is simply not significantly more than any previous contagion.
As the interview states.
We needed to focus on those who truly needed it.
Hysteria is antithetical to science.
A simple look at https://ipv6.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us and sorting by deaths/1M show no solid connection to politics nor vaccination rates. I'd be very leery of using NPR selection of 3000 counties given known NPR bias. Given the lack of long term sterilizing ability of the current vaccines we need to revisit their utility. We have yet a lot to learn about how best to protect the vulnerable. Many of those who died had notable Vitamin D deficiency easily reduced by inexpensive supplements. We seem to have abandoned any real evaluation of repurposed medications in favor of proprietary drugs that have limited trial data. The vaccines depend on RNA activation to DNA which involves complex genetic responses within the immune system that we have an real inability to assess in a population.