Ashish Jha was Dean of the School of Public Health at Brown, not Harvard. He covered up Brown students’ vax injuries after mandating the jabs and then became COVID czar. Now he is back at his plum position at Brown.
It's maddening that there have been zero consequences. It's because the left controls academia do they support the narrative. There was a death recently of an sf police officer, in his early 30's , during a sporting event. I found out he had been out on disability for years as he had struggled since he was vaccinated.
Is there a way to tell which doctors and scientists are more likely to be honest? Presumably they are ones who can AFFORD to be honest and/or don't need the wealth and power that Fauci thinks he needs. The problem is even your random, but quality family practice doctor is hemmed in by professional, cultural, and legal constraints. The doctor may honestly feel the patient doesn't need a colonoscopy, but the medical standard requires he prescribe it. He may honestly think other medical tests are unwarranted, but knows he would be putting himself at legal risk if he doesn't advise them.
Thank you, Vinay, for this article. I only trust a handful of scientists these days, and most are ones I have come across due to your excellent reporting.
It's great Vinay specifically calls out Pete Buttigieg, Ashish Jha, and Fauci for their specific lies. But if you confronted Buttigieg point blank, he would respond, "What do you mean? Everyone else was saying Biden was fine too." . . .
"But did you think he was fine?"
"Yes, and so did everyone else." To him the "political convenient" answer has more "truth" for him than the actual specific physical truth. The fact that everyone else was saying Biden was fine, and that he was on the 'Biden team' and he felt he could not physically stand out--was a higher truth for him than whether the President was competent to carry out his duties.
"Sadly, there few of them. Probably most scientists in leadership positions are closer to politicians than pure, impartial actors." If the last few years are representative, it seems to me that the VAST majority of the medical establishment puts politics above patient care. I don't know how else to explain how these prof organizations that are SO OBVIOUSLY political with no push back nor revolt from the general members.
No, it has always been. It is simply that in our nascent new post-WW2 order, the fractures in the general approach to science based on its cultural context had not appeared.
It means the monopoly on power (thus how "science" is produced, what institutions give it blessing and meaning, etc.) is being undermined. Times of peace, times of war. This is what it looks like when empires fall.
Some excellent points. Corruption has always been with us. So too have the efforts of the rich, powerful, and well-connected to control the narrative. Remember, FDR was paralyzed below the waist, but this fact was hid from the public by a conspiracy of censorship by journalists and publishers.
What is new is that with the internet we got a taste of freedom. You could get information that didn't go through the "authoratative" sources, Sure, a lot of this unfiltered information is false or misleading, but there is a lot of true information that needs to be known by free citizens in a free democracy.
If the appearance of a free and open internet was a revolution, what we see now is a counter-revolution, with the attempts to control speech on the internet by corpoations, polictical lobby groups, and our Federal government.
This ought to concern all decent people, regardless of political affiliation. All systems tend towards corruption, and we always need to be reforming systems to correct this tendency to corruption. You can't do any of this without freedom of speech to call out the corrupt actors. That is a major reason why we in America have the First Amendment.
The Left uses the language of reform, but the "reforms" are done in the intersts of the powerful. The Right does much the same. The difference is that now the Left proposes "reforms" that supress freedom of speech. This would prevent any future reform of the corruption that inevitably follows. That is a dead-end of any meaningful democracy. Sure you can vote but you will won't ever know what you are voting for.
"Only a tiny handful have principles." Well said. Of course, this is the expectation in an overwhelmingly secular age. If these scientists aren't accountable to God, they are only accountable to themselves. They are gods unto themselves. They create their own moral standards, so doing anything to get ahead is what they "ought" to do according to their moral framework. All of human conflict is ultimately theological.
YOU never take on the BIGGEST-- pun intended-- LIE about the fraudulent BMI whereby a 5'6" female is NOT obese at 185 pounds but in 1984she was obese at 160 pounds . The CDC fixed the Shop BUY EAT REPEAT issue by grading on the curve when they got rid of the HAMWI formula and substituted the most permissive BMI that any fat person and marketer will love. All of the COVID policies were to cover up the huge fatness of the US population. PLEASE HELP EXPOSE THIS FRAUD.
Thank you for coming out and saying that. I started medical school in 1978 and finished my residency in 1987. At the time only plastic surgeons advertised and when I retired early in 2021 almost every peer I had was not only advertising but had some type of extra income in medicine besides just patient care. I had started my career secure in the belief that the government agencies were like me only interested in the truth and what is best for the patient. Sadly that notion was soon tarnished by one thing after the other until I quit in frustration. Little did I know that the powers that be were not done stripping me of any dilutions I may have had that fueled my altruism, COVID and the government’s response. If Trump is somehow able to regain the presidency he will need to head the FDA, CDC and NIH with retired unpublished and unvaccinated doctors who are thus immune to other government agencies, know science without the need to embellish their name with senseless articles but still understand the scientific method enough to have figured out that the government’s COVID response was horseshit!
The answer is a resounding yes. In addition the whole federal support for scientific is poisoned by the dictum: If we don't spend all the money possible we will not get as much next year! I was reminded of this yesterday when an associate in pain management, who has an arrangement with TCU for mentoring/clinical training of fellows, recounted efforts that the training program had made to spend available grant money in order not to lose it. His remarks initially were supportive, until I berated him for the thought that this grant money comes out of thin air. It's our tax dollars being wasted.
Ashish Jha was Dean of the School of Public Health at Brown, not Harvard. He covered up Brown students’ vax injuries after mandating the jabs and then became COVID czar. Now he is back at his plum position at Brown.
Brownstone and Bostom exposed his lies. Will he be held accountable? https://brownstone.org/articles/brown-universitys-silence-on-post-vaccine-myocarditis/
It's maddening that there have been zero consequences. It's because the left controls academia do they support the narrative. There was a death recently of an sf police officer, in his early 30's , during a sporting event. I found out he had been out on disability for years as he had struggled since he was vaccinated.
Seems like the left controls nearly everything anymore.
Note: Vinay is correct. Jha is also a professor at Harvard, as well as holding positions at Brown.
"There is no truth in medicine."
The almost daily comment texted amongst my small friend group of senior science based physicians crossing 4 completely different specialties.
It is politics and money first, with a race to last place for patient care and science.
Sensible Medicine and its authors remain a beacon of truth in fractured system.
Is there a way to tell which doctors and scientists are more likely to be honest? Presumably they are ones who can AFFORD to be honest and/or don't need the wealth and power that Fauci thinks he needs. The problem is even your random, but quality family practice doctor is hemmed in by professional, cultural, and legal constraints. The doctor may honestly feel the patient doesn't need a colonoscopy, but the medical standard requires he prescribe it. He may honestly think other medical tests are unwarranted, but knows he would be putting himself at legal risk if he doesn't advise them.
Truth. Well said Vinay.
Thank you, Vinay, for this article. I only trust a handful of scientists these days, and most are ones I have come across due to your excellent reporting.
Same.
It's great Vinay specifically calls out Pete Buttigieg, Ashish Jha, and Fauci for their specific lies. But if you confronted Buttigieg point blank, he would respond, "What do you mean? Everyone else was saying Biden was fine too." . . .
"But did you think he was fine?"
"Yes, and so did everyone else." To him the "political convenient" answer has more "truth" for him than the actual specific physical truth. The fact that everyone else was saying Biden was fine, and that he was on the 'Biden team' and he felt he could not physically stand out--was a higher truth for him than whether the President was competent to carry out his duties.
Perfect descriptor of more evenly spreading the self guilt of the lie. “Everyone else was saying Biden was fine, too”
The emperor’s new clothes was written very very long ago; it’s just sad that / again / history rhymes.
"Sadly, there few of them. Probably most scientists in leadership positions are closer to politicians than pure, impartial actors." If the last few years are representative, it seems to me that the VAST majority of the medical establishment puts politics above patient care. I don't know how else to explain how these prof organizations that are SO OBVIOUSLY political with no push back nor revolt from the general members.
All medicine is politics. So is science. This is not new or news.
It didn’t used to be. So it is both new and news. And there are still a few honest scientists and doctors, like Vinay.
No, it has always been. It is simply that in our nascent new post-WW2 order, the fractures in the general approach to science based on its cultural context had not appeared.
What on earth does that even mean??
It means the monopoly on power (thus how "science" is produced, what institutions give it blessing and meaning, etc.) is being undermined. Times of peace, times of war. This is what it looks like when empires fall.
Some excellent points. Corruption has always been with us. So too have the efforts of the rich, powerful, and well-connected to control the narrative. Remember, FDR was paralyzed below the waist, but this fact was hid from the public by a conspiracy of censorship by journalists and publishers.
What is new is that with the internet we got a taste of freedom. You could get information that didn't go through the "authoratative" sources, Sure, a lot of this unfiltered information is false or misleading, but there is a lot of true information that needs to be known by free citizens in a free democracy.
If the appearance of a free and open internet was a revolution, what we see now is a counter-revolution, with the attempts to control speech on the internet by corpoations, polictical lobby groups, and our Federal government.
This ought to concern all decent people, regardless of political affiliation. All systems tend towards corruption, and we always need to be reforming systems to correct this tendency to corruption. You can't do any of this without freedom of speech to call out the corrupt actors. That is a major reason why we in America have the First Amendment.
The Left uses the language of reform, but the "reforms" are done in the intersts of the powerful. The Right does much the same. The difference is that now the Left proposes "reforms" that supress freedom of speech. This would prevent any future reform of the corruption that inevitably follows. That is a dead-end of any meaningful democracy. Sure you can vote but you will won't ever know what you are voting for.
I agree completely. Thanks for the great comment.
"Only a tiny handful have principles." Well said. Of course, this is the expectation in an overwhelmingly secular age. If these scientists aren't accountable to God, they are only accountable to themselves. They are gods unto themselves. They create their own moral standards, so doing anything to get ahead is what they "ought" to do according to their moral framework. All of human conflict is ultimately theological.
I’m so happy VP keeps hammering at integrity and ethics in science 😊
And ok with me if it spills over into every area of our crumbling culture 😑
Well soon enough the media will say that Jha was NOT a COVID czar but was supposed to just kinda see what’s up.
YOU never take on the BIGGEST-- pun intended-- LIE about the fraudulent BMI whereby a 5'6" female is NOT obese at 185 pounds but in 1984she was obese at 160 pounds . The CDC fixed the Shop BUY EAT REPEAT issue by grading on the curve when they got rid of the HAMWI formula and substituted the most permissive BMI that any fat person and marketer will love. All of the COVID policies were to cover up the huge fatness of the US population. PLEASE HELP EXPOSE THIS FRAUD.
Great piece. Thank you.
Thank you for coming out and saying that. I started medical school in 1978 and finished my residency in 1987. At the time only plastic surgeons advertised and when I retired early in 2021 almost every peer I had was not only advertising but had some type of extra income in medicine besides just patient care. I had started my career secure in the belief that the government agencies were like me only interested in the truth and what is best for the patient. Sadly that notion was soon tarnished by one thing after the other until I quit in frustration. Little did I know that the powers that be were not done stripping me of any dilutions I may have had that fueled my altruism, COVID and the government’s response. If Trump is somehow able to regain the presidency he will need to head the FDA, CDC and NIH with retired unpublished and unvaccinated doctors who are thus immune to other government agencies, know science without the need to embellish their name with senseless articles but still understand the scientific method enough to have figured out that the government’s COVID response was horseshit!
The answer is a resounding yes. In addition the whole federal support for scientific is poisoned by the dictum: If we don't spend all the money possible we will not get as much next year! I was reminded of this yesterday when an associate in pain management, who has an arrangement with TCU for mentoring/clinical training of fellows, recounted efforts that the training program had made to spend available grant money in order not to lose it. His remarks initially were supportive, until I berated him for the thought that this grant money comes out of thin air. It's our tax dollars being wasted.
yep, scientist are people too. bent by all the same concerns and influences as everyone else.