As physicians, we need to speak up and have open discussions around the Covid vaccine now. Who better than us, as practicing physicians, to have this discussion? In my opinion, as a practicing orthopedic surgeon, we do not have clinical consensus around many aspects of the Covid vaccines yet. I am working with our medical center and our state medical society to put together a CME medical journal club to look at both sides of various Covid vaccine topics. If successful, there will be a protected space for all physicians/PAs/NPs to interpret the published articles, and give their views as well. If anybody is interested in this type of professional medical educational event, please reach out to me at DavidBCarmack@me.com. This will help bring back our "Medical Freedoms". Thanks!
I said this over and over again during the worst of the lockdowns and mandates. Where was the meeting of the minds? Where was the debate on what policy was best? No, we didn't get any of that. Just a "shut up, stay home, and put on your mask." I lost friends over my stance. The powers that be gave (mostly) leftists on social media permission to be as nasty as possible to those of us that pushed back. I am still amazed and disgusted by the last couple years. How did we, as Americans, come to this?
“Write to Cornell’s board?” Do you think they give a flying flip what I think? My own administration doesn’t give two shakes about what I think. Why would Cornell care? I’d be wasting my time and breath.
Absolutely they should all be fired. Although I would never favor adding anyone or any institution to the tax roles as a punishment, I am tempted to make an exception for universities and other institutions that claim to foster "free expression" in seeking the truth.
For those who fear infectious pandemics and think that the "public health" industry is useful in combatting them I urge you to read the initial paper out of Wuhan that claimed to have isolated a "novel virus"---especially the methods section that describes how an in silico genome was crafted out of a very small sample of base pairs.
Thanks for another excellent post. The pandemic has revealed so many structural failures of our society - the failure of universities to rise to the challenge of the times is one of the greatest. I am glad that Dr. Harrington apologized, but there needs to be many more public apologies from academic leaders, recognition of the failure, and determination to reform. If universities cannot embrace freedom of speech, thought, inquiry, and discussion when it is hard to do so, one can question why they exist. Perhaps they should be taxed as profit-driven multinational corporations.
The link below is an interview with Jay. The comment section is interesting. People will listen to him ,they clearly get his concerns and has earned a fair amount of trust
I agree that universities should be bastions of academic freedom, and that disagreements should be settled with debates based on valid data and logic, not intimidation. Having said that, I understand that pandemics generate fear, and fear is not the friend of decency or logic. Even more so because a pandemic generates constant death reminders, and death reminders increase tribal behaviors as demonstrated by the hundreds of studies supporting Terror Management Theory (link below). Learning lessons from the pandemic is important, and I just hope we can do it in a way that doesn't involve nasty finger pointing, because that only leads to defensiveness, and then people don't admit mistakes, much less learn from them (i.e., Vinay, I love you man, but please learn to tone it down a bit - I'm not censoring you, just asking you to re-phrase some things! 😬) I also have a genuine question so that we can be prepared for the next pandemic: Assuming we have accurate data about fatality rate, at what IFR/CFR would you consider lockdowns to be appropriate? Or do you think they would be inappropriate in a free society no matter how high the death rate? Thanks.
My question would be: if the people who violate the basic tenets of the profession while serving as its leaders were rightfully disciplined, and if necessary, fired or removed from the profession entirely, what would the rest of us have lost?
As for the buying medical centers, the small family owned practice where I work is the only one in the area that hadn’t been taken over by a hospital system this century! Every other one got bought out… and shockingly all their policies on masking, vaxxing, etc are identical to the big hospital systems that own them… the directives come from the corporate Borg queen. More on what this means practically for our patients’ daily lives (with sensible med style study skepticism) at my substack later today:
I believe you are on to the deeper motivation as to why no universities debated unfounded and harmful covid policies. Normally, debate would be their prime purpose. I think fear of the mob response is likely a minor factor, and more likely financial/corporate motivation, as you've outlined, possibly aided by arm twisting by the USG. -perhaps threat of withdrawal of research funding, and such.
It might be a bit of both. The universities have already caved on free-speech in other areas to the point where department chairs can't invite a speaker come and speak on non-controversial topics because their personal views on some completely different topic.
The fact is that free speech on college campuses has already gone away, and there's a move by some universities to actively bring it back by articulating policies that protect unpopular viewpoints.
As physicians, we need to speak up and have open discussions around the Covid vaccine now. Who better than us, as practicing physicians, to have this discussion? In my opinion, as a practicing orthopedic surgeon, we do not have clinical consensus around many aspects of the Covid vaccines yet. I am working with our medical center and our state medical society to put together a CME medical journal club to look at both sides of various Covid vaccine topics. If successful, there will be a protected space for all physicians/PAs/NPs to interpret the published articles, and give their views as well. If anybody is interested in this type of professional medical educational event, please reach out to me at DavidBCarmack@me.com. This will help bring back our "Medical Freedoms". Thanks!
Yes.
“If universities refuse to defend academic freedom, they should be taxed like any other corporation whose mission is to grow their revenue.”
I said this over and over again during the worst of the lockdowns and mandates. Where was the meeting of the minds? Where was the debate on what policy was best? No, we didn't get any of that. Just a "shut up, stay home, and put on your mask." I lost friends over my stance. The powers that be gave (mostly) leftists on social media permission to be as nasty as possible to those of us that pushed back. I am still amazed and disgusted by the last couple years. How did we, as Americans, come to this?
“Write to Cornell’s board?” Do you think they give a flying flip what I think? My own administration doesn’t give two shakes about what I think. Why would Cornell care? I’d be wasting my time and breath.
It was clear at our faculty meetings that only certain people could speak and only certain opinions could be communicated publicly... or else.
Absolutely they should all be fired. Although I would never favor adding anyone or any institution to the tax roles as a punishment, I am tempted to make an exception for universities and other institutions that claim to foster "free expression" in seeking the truth.
For those who fear infectious pandemics and think that the "public health" industry is useful in combatting them I urge you to read the initial paper out of Wuhan that claimed to have isolated a "novel virus"---especially the methods section that describes how an in silico genome was crafted out of a very small sample of base pairs.
Where were all these voices questioning the narrative 2-3 years ago?
Thanks for another excellent post. The pandemic has revealed so many structural failures of our society - the failure of universities to rise to the challenge of the times is one of the greatest. I am glad that Dr. Harrington apologized, but there needs to be many more public apologies from academic leaders, recognition of the failure, and determination to reform. If universities cannot embrace freedom of speech, thought, inquiry, and discussion when it is hard to do so, one can question why they exist. Perhaps they should be taxed as profit-driven multinational corporations.
The creep always rises to the top.
Henderson opposed the idea on public health grounds not libertarian grounds by my read. He recognized the massive downstream effects that would occur
The link below is an interview with Jay. The comment section is interesting. People will listen to him ,they clearly get his concerns and has earned a fair amount of trust
https://youtu.be/M1CjQjLYdsA?si=KMD671TwSjbFHGVR
I agree that universities should be bastions of academic freedom, and that disagreements should be settled with debates based on valid data and logic, not intimidation. Having said that, I understand that pandemics generate fear, and fear is not the friend of decency or logic. Even more so because a pandemic generates constant death reminders, and death reminders increase tribal behaviors as demonstrated by the hundreds of studies supporting Terror Management Theory (link below). Learning lessons from the pandemic is important, and I just hope we can do it in a way that doesn't involve nasty finger pointing, because that only leads to defensiveness, and then people don't admit mistakes, much less learn from them (i.e., Vinay, I love you man, but please learn to tone it down a bit - I'm not censoring you, just asking you to re-phrase some things! 😬) I also have a genuine question so that we can be prepared for the next pandemic: Assuming we have accurate data about fatality rate, at what IFR/CFR would you consider lockdowns to be appropriate? Or do you think they would be inappropriate in a free society no matter how high the death rate? Thanks.
http://www.sydneysymposium.unsw.edu.au/2023/chapters/PyszczynskiSSSP2023.pdf
Incredible. When people ask, who is in this "medical establishment" that you refer to, here's a prime example.
My question would be: if the people who violate the basic tenets of the profession while serving as its leaders were rightfully disciplined, and if necessary, fired or removed from the profession entirely, what would the rest of us have lost?
Nothing that couldn't be replaced, in my view.
Your Op-Ed with Dr. Hoeg in the NYPost yesterday was fantastic, thank you!
“ The primary goals are buying or merging with local medical centers, and public private partnerships.”
To be even more blunt, public private partnerships = multimillion dollar contracts with Big Pharma.
https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/02/big-pharma-is-unopposed-in-its-domination-of-medical-education/
As for the buying medical centers, the small family owned practice where I work is the only one in the area that hadn’t been taken over by a hospital system this century! Every other one got bought out… and shockingly all their policies on masking, vaxxing, etc are identical to the big hospital systems that own them… the directives come from the corporate Borg queen. More on what this means practically for our patients’ daily lives (with sensible med style study skepticism) at my substack later today:
Gaty.substack.com
As promised:
https://gaty.substack.com/p/uncuriouser-and-uncuriouser
This was very helpful, thank you. I have so many questions now about all vaccines. I will never rely on our PH or FDA again.
Adrian,
I believe you are on to the deeper motivation as to why no universities debated unfounded and harmful covid policies. Normally, debate would be their prime purpose. I think fear of the mob response is likely a minor factor, and more likely financial/corporate motivation, as you've outlined, possibly aided by arm twisting by the USG. -perhaps threat of withdrawal of research funding, and such.
It might be a bit of both. The universities have already caved on free-speech in other areas to the point where department chairs can't invite a speaker come and speak on non-controversial topics because their personal views on some completely different topic.
The fact is that free speech on college campuses has already gone away, and there's a move by some universities to actively bring it back by articulating policies that protect unpopular viewpoints.