Fringe elements
Which ones shapes Covid19 policy
It's clear there are irrational beliefs on both extremes of the COVID 19 policy debate. On the zero covid side: many want to wear n95s with no clear stopping rule. They want to compel others and even very young children to mask (2 year olds NYC). They cheerlead for booster authorizarions and mandates without credible data. 4th dose in a healthy 51 year old, or 3rd in a healthy 16 year old. As recently as Omicron they called for circuit breakers (aka lockdowns).
On the other side, we hear rhetoric that vaccines have microchips in them to track you. This is often said by someone who carries their phone with them everywhere. Some are categorically opposed to vaccination. They think a healthy 65 year old is better off meeting the virus than the vaccine. Gulp!
I think both extremes are not correct, but there is a key difference between them….
The second group might disproportionately affect other people by serving as a reservoir to spread virus. However the moment we learned that breakthrough was inevitable for all people, this argument vanished. Everyone can spread.
Perhaps the second group disproportionately affects others by potentially using hospital resources. However, when it comes to reinfection, the many who have natural immunity are far less likely to use hospital resources than those who are merely vaccinated. This too must be factored in. If anything it is only a first pass disproportionate use.
The first group (zerocovid) has affected others in numerous ways. They have implemented an ONLY toddler mask mandate in NYC. Forcing kids to wear the mask, even when their parents don't want them too. They pushed for illogical booster mandates by colleges and hospitals and other jobs. They are the ones that are calling for mandatory 5-18yo vaccination as a precondition to attend public school. A terrible policy. They have repeatedly pushed on FDA to lower the regulatory bar to approve vaccines for kids <5. This will surely be followed by mandates in private preschools.
In other words, the first group uses existing institutions to push their agenda, even when it is absurd. Like toddler masking or forcing a 20 year old man who has already had 2 doses and Omicron to be boosted 30 days after having had Covid19 or be pushed out of college. The second group does not appear to do they equivalent: they don't ban a 65 yo from getting a vaccine. They merely make the poor choice themselves.
I think this difference is relevant. Bad ideas and poor thinking will always exist, and there are many, varied ways of being foolish and illogical. But what should trouble us all is when the illogical people force others to participate in their delusion.
As a (I hope) thoughtful physician, once it was clear (and it did not take long) that there was no restriction in transmissibility resulting from the spikeshots, any mandate was utterly and completely indefensible. This just added another element to my from-the-beginning objections to mask (including N95) and lockdown requirements that have been well demonstrated (via RCT and otherwise) in dozens of studies to be utterly worthless, whether or not they meet someone's "bioplausible" criteria. (Remember that the sun circling the earth was long considered "geoplausible" -- it was just utterly wrong.)
Vinay is correct that the promoters of virtually everything bad are generally far-left, "do as I say" types; this still surprises me. Most of those on the right, even those that believe there are microchips in the spikeshots, are happy to tell you but generally are fine if you want to get the shot anyway.
The mandating of things that are utterly one's personal choice regarding their body without any evidence is reprehensible to most of us that think on both sides of the aisle. (It has also destroyed the "my body, my choice" arguments of several decades of the abortion proponents. It either is "your body your choice" or it is not. Both options cannot be true and the cognitive dissonance is not able to be hidden.) So there are many dominoes to fall.
The beauty of America is that as a truly (sort of) federated group of states, there are lots of laboratories. EVERYONE can see there is no difference between places that have mandated N95s for everyone and those who have and never will wear a mask. The spikeshot sequelae are just beginning to be seen but are also becoming too large to ignore -- and 1/3 of the country is not vaccinated so there is a large control group.
Interesting times to come. I have been telling my patients that spikeshots are a personal choice -- for some it is still (in my opinion) the lesser of two evils. For the vast majority, avoid them like the plague -- but if you want them anyway, that is your choice. Just understand the risks/rewards.
I expect that heads will eventually roll...it will just take a little more time for the absurdity of much of what has been happening to be unavoidably obvious. I am waiting with bated breath until then.
Thank you for your thoughtful writings, Dr. Prasad. I have a lot of respect for you. The only part I question in this piece is this line: 'They think a healthy 65 year old is better off meeting the virus than the vaccine. Gulp!" From what I've read, the Pfizer trial data did not prove that overall deaths were reduced in the vaxxed cohort compared to the placebo group. In fact, one extra person died overall in the vaxxed group, including 4 cardiac arrests in the vaxxed group (1 cardiac arrest in the placebo group) plus 1 covid pneumonia death in vaxxed group (2 covid deaths in the placebo group). I feel like we really need to look at this trial data in understanding whether the vaccine helps or harms overall, since the real world data is so confounded (as you've said repeatedly). If I have anything wrong, I'd truly like to know.
Thanks again for all you do, and please keep going.