There may be an ongoing, aggressive means of writing the historical past of the pandemic.
In a previous article a few cancelled speak of mine, I’ve Been Silenced, Censored, and Cancelled. The Purpose Why Issues, a commentator named Squirrelelite mentioned the next:
To step again only a bit in perspective, I feel there’s an unstated narrative right here. One thing alongside the traces of, “why is Physician Howard nonetheless writing all these articles about these similar folks? Isn’t that previous information now?”
And I feel the primary is that there’s an ongoing, aggressive means of writing the historical past of the pandemic. What occurred? How did it go? What did we do proper? What went mistaken? What ought to we do the subsequent time? A few of that is taking place within the traditional scientific channels, the place researchers proceed to check the virus, the way it impacts the physique and the vaccines and medicines we developed to stop or deal with it. However a lot of it’s now taking place in non-traditional channels, like substack articles, YouTube movies, Congressional hearings and even this weblog.
And the most of the similar folks whom Dr Howard wrote about in his e book are main members in that course of. So it’s vital to take a look at what are they saying now? Does it make sense? How does it mesh with what they mentioned beforehand?
The second ingredient is the side of self-assessment that ought to occur when issues get actually tousled. Did I make any errors? Was there one thing I missed in my pondering or decisions? What ought to I alter to do higher subsequent time?… However these articles present that virtually everybody on his checklist is doubling down on their positions, or at greatest attempting to disregard them, whereas persevering with to argue in opposition to public well being measures.
That’s one of the crucial insightful feedback I’ve obtained. There’s so much to unpack there. Each phrase of it’s proper. There may be an ongoing, aggressive means of writing the historical past of the pandemic.
Although it’s each current and well-documented, lots of my articles explicitly talk about makes an attempt to blatantly rewrite the historical past of the pandemic:
The core premise of pandemic revisionism is that mitigation measures have been an avoidable resolution, regardless that no nation on the earth, together with Sweden, prevented them. Advocates of herd immunity by means of mass an infection declare that “weak” populations might have been completely shielded from the virus and that faculties and companies might have functioned largely with out interruption if solely politicians and public well being leaders had made higher decisions. These medical doctors insist that every part would have been simply high-quality in 2020 had we let 230 million unvaccinated, “not weak” Individuals contract COVID concurrently, although they gained’t say this outright like they did in 2020. They blame lockdowns that ended way back for practically each unhealthy factor that’s occurred on the earth since, whereas they painting they virus a innocent chilly for everybody however grandma.
Nonetheless, whereas pro-infection medical doctors insist they have been proper about every part, their 2024 rhetoric is very totally different from their 2020 rhetoric. They knew that mitigation measures prevented infections, and so their opposition to them has been constant. That hasn’t modified. However they not discuss pure immunity because the surefire path to herd immunity. As a substitute, they declare that from the day COVID arrived, their solely concern was the well-being of youngsters and poor folks.
Let me refresh everybody’s reminiscence about what they truly mentioned.
NEJM Posts A Perspective Saying Stanford Ought to Have Corrected Scott Atlas: Why? To Look Silly? B/C Atlas Was Appropriate & His Critics Have been Flawed.
However first, let’s talk about why your reminiscence may have to be refreshed within the first place.
Although we ought to bear in mind these nightmarish scenes from 2020, everybody desires to neglect them and a few medical doctors are desperate to ease that course of alongside. There’s a motion to encourage collective amnesia about what the virus did when it was allowed to unfold uncontrolled. Some prolific pandemic pontificators by no means point out what occurred when the virus washed over us 2020, after which once more in 2021, after which once more in 2022. They need us to consider we drastically overreacted at each level, and for that purpose, they by no means point out headlines that implicate the virus, comparable to Surprising Video Exhibits The Our bodies Of NYC Coronavirus Victims Being Forklifted Into A Refrigerated Truck Used As A Momentary Morgue or Faculty Closures Reported In 5 Florida Counties; Districts ‘Drowning’ In COVID. Equally, these medical doctors need us to neglect what they really mentioned in 2020, and so they lob juvenille insults at anybody who reminds them.
Nonetheless, I feel it’s vital to recollect what truly occurred and what medical doctors truly mentioned. COVID is not going to be the final pandemic, and we should always not let its historical past be so simply erased by medical doctors who unfold misinformation about it.
I used to be reminded of pandemic revisionism by observing the response to a current editorial within the the NEJM titled Tutorial Freedom in America — In Assist of Institutional Voices. which mentioned Stanford’s response to Dr. Scott Atlas, an anti-vaccine neuroradiologist who suggested President Trump and promoted “a coverage of permitting the virus to unfold to generate pure herd immunity.” Although 98 college members revealed a public letter that mentioned Dr. Atlas unfold “falsehoods and misrepresentations of science”, Stanford’s president on the time, Dr. Marc Tessier-Lavigne, defined his resolution to observe self-censorship by saying:
The college should present a spot the place college can interact in unconstrained, even heated debate. It’s central to what we do, and the explanation for our coverage on educational freedom. That operate of the college could be critically eroded if we have been to publicly take sides both to disavow or to help the particular positions of a college member engaged in such a debate. What we do help is the proper of college members to specific their views.
Based on Dr. Atlas and his defenders, nonetheless, Stanford had no proper to right Dr. Atlas as a result of he was proper about every part. Dr. Martin Kulldorff, mentioned, “Public well being coverage professional @ScottAtlas_IT was right in regards to the pandemic whereas the 98 @Stanford college and@EricTopol have been mistaken.” Dr. Tracy Hoeg equally wrote, “I’m left questioning what precisely @ScottAtlas_IT bought mistaken.”
Dr. Vinay Prasad, an anti-vaccine, pro-infection physician, even authored a rebuttal titled NEJM Posts A Perspective Saying Stanford Ought to Have Corrected Scott Atlas: Why? To Look Silly? B/C Atlas Was Appropriate & His Critics Have been Flawed. It started by saying:
Through the COVID19 pandemic, Scott Atlas made many controversial statements. Group material masking doesn’t gradual the unfold of COVID19. Children must be at school. Lockdowns haven’t any proof of efficacy. In different phrases, Atlas was fairly good. Randomized knowledge would later present conclusively material masking doesn’t work. Faculty closure is now considered a catastrophic error, and even Anthony Fauci regrets how lengthy they lasted…Based on them Stanford ought to have issued statements saying that Atlas was mistaken. Actually? Why? To look silly later? The concept within the commentary is laughable.
In Dr. Prasad’s telling of occasions, Dr. Atlas was a sensible, kindhearted spirit who cared deeply about scientific proof and schooling. Based on Dr. Prasad, time has vindicated Dr. Atlas. Unsurprising, Dr. Atlas agreed. He mentioned that he was “100% right” about every part and that he was solely involved in regards to the destiny of the “kids & the poor.”
Notably, Dr. Prasad refused to instantly quote Dr. Atlas. I’m not so timid.
Actually? Let’s see.
We like the truth that there’s quite a lot of instances in low- threat populations, as a result of that’s precisely how we’re going to get herd immunity.
On condition that Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare he was proper, it’s vital to recollect precisely what they suppose he was proper about.
Based on the Home Report, The Atlas Dogma:
Dr. Atlas reached out to Facilities for Medicare & Medicaid Providers (CMS) Administrator Seema Verma on March 21, 2020, arguing that the federal authorities’s pandemic response was “a large overreaction” that was “inciting irrational worry” in Individuals. Dr. Atlas estimated that the coronavirus “would trigger about 10,000 deaths”—a quantity he claimed “could be unnoticed” in a traditional flu season—and mentioned, “The panic must be stopped.”
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Dr. Atlas’s first article this pandemic, Rentry After The Panic: Paying The Well being Value Of Excessive Isolation, was revealed on April thirteenth, 2020. In it, Dr. Atlas wrote:
With a world-wide sense of aid, progress continues in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Projections have been revised downward for nearly each main adverse consequence of the illness. Few doubt that the unprecedented isolation insurance policies and near-total financial lockdowns adopted by most nations had a major impression on lowering deaths from the virus. And except for New York, the place virtually half of the whole nation’s deaths and instances have occurred, the overwhelming majority of American hospitals weren’t overwhelmed past capability. All of that is terrific information….
However an even bigger worth may now be paid from selecting excessive isolation. Within the absence of immunization, society wants circulation of the virus, assuming high-risk folks could be remoted. An infection itself permits folks to generate an immune response — pure antibodies. Given the estimated contagiousness of COVID-19, about 60 p.c of individuals locally have to have antibodies to cease the unfold by “herd immunity”…However the near-total isolation of everybody and the lockdown on most well being care unrelated to COVID-19 should finish, as a result of it’s dangerous to eradicating the illness…
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Dr. Atlas additionally wrote one other article in April 2020 titled The Information Is In — Cease The Panic And Finish The Complete Isolation during which he mentioned:
The tragedy of the COVID-19 pandemic seems to be coming into the containment part… We all know from many years of medical science that an infection itself permits folks to generate an immune response — antibodies — in order that the an infection is managed all through the inhabitants by “herd immunity”… Contaminated folks with out extreme sickness are the instantly accessible automobile for establishing widespread immunity. By transmitting the virus to others within the low-risk group who then generate antibodies, they block the community of pathways towards essentially the most weak folks, finally ending the risk. Extending whole-population isolation would instantly stop that widespread immunity from creating.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Throughout an interview from April 2020, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
We will enable lots of people to get contaminated. Those that usually are not in danger to die or have a severe hospital-requiring sickness, we must be high-quality with letting them get contaminated, producing immunity on their very own, and the extra immunity locally, the higher we will eradicate the specter of the virus, together with the risk to people who find themselves weak. That’s what herd immunity is. That’s a fundamental precept.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Throughout an interview from June 2020, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
We anticipated extra instances with extra social mingling… However the truth is the overwhelming majority of those instances are in youthful more healthy folks. These folks should not have a major downside. They don’t have the intense issues. They don’t die. And so it’s incredible information that we now have quite a lot of instances, however we don’t see deaths going up, and what meaning is A: we’re are doing a greater job of defending the weak, B: We’re in good condition right here.
We like the truth that there’s quite a lot of instances in low- threat populations, as a result of that’s precisely how we’re going to get herd immunity, inhabitants immunity, when low-risk folks, with no important downside dealing with this virus, which is principally 99% of individuals get this, they change into immune and so they block the pathway of connectivity of contagiousness for older sicker folks…Kids have nearly zero threat of getting a severe complication, nearly a zero threat of dying…Kids solely hardly ever if ever transmit the illness.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Throughout an interview from July 2020, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
When youthful, more healthy folks get the illness, they don’t have an issue with the illness. I’m unsure why that’s so tough for everybody to acknowledge. These folks getting the an infection shouldn’t be actually an issue, and actually, as we mentioned months in the past, while you isolate everybody, together with all of the wholesome folks, you’re prolonging the issue since you’re stopping inhabitants immunity. Low-risk teams getting the an infection shouldn’t be an issue.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Throughout an interview from July 2020, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
It doesn’t matter if youthful, more healthy folks get contaminated. I don’t understand how typically that needs to be mentioned. They’ve practically zero threat of an issue from this. When youthful, more healthy folks get contaminated, that’s factor as a result of that’s precisely the way in which that inhabitants immunity develops.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
Throughout Congressional testimony in September 2020, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
Immunity to the an infection shouldn’t be solely decided by the p.c of people that have antibodies. In case you take a look at the analysis — and there’s been about 24 papers a minimum of on the immunity from T-cells — that’s a special sort of immunity than antibodies. And with out being boring, the truth is that — in line with the papers from Sweden, Singapore and elsewhere — there’s cross-immunity, extremely seemingly from different infections, and there’s additionally T-cell immunity. And the mixture of these makes the antibodies a small fraction of the folks that have immunity. So the reply is not any, it’s not 90% of individuals which might be vulnerable to the an infection.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
A Twitter account compiled a number of movies of Dr. Atlas making (and later denying) many related statements. In a single clip, Dr. Atlas mentioned:
There’s a optimistic to having low-risk teams get an infection. What’s the optimistic? That is the way you develop inhabitants primarily based immunity. After I mentioned this months in the past, as did others, if we isolate each human being from social interplay, we’re prolonging the issue, we’re stopping inhabitants immunity from creating. However we remoted, and that is what we known as for, isolating and defending the high-risk teams, as soon as we try this efficiently, we don’t care if youthful, more healthy folks get the an infection.
Dr. Atlas and his defenders declare this was right. Stanford mentioned nothing.
There’s a gross exaggeration of hospitalizations and deaths for COVID
Squirrelelite was right- there’s an ongoing, aggressive means of writing the historical past of the pandemic– and if we don’t bear in mind precisely what pro-infection medical doctors mentioned, they undoubtedly gained’t remind us.
Dr. Atlas was considered one of a number of Stanford medical doctors (Dr. John Ioannidis, Drs. Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya) who predicted that COVID’s 2020 demise toll could be 10,000-40,000 folks and that the mass an infection of unvaccinated youth would result in herd immunity. Like Dr. Atlas, these doctors- none of whom handled COVID patients- now insist they have been principally proper about every part. Think about predicting that the flu was going to be worse than COVID, and 1.1 million COVID deaths later, having the audacity to say that the passage of time has validated your preliminary pandemic pronouncements. The truth is, advocates of mass an infection are aggrieved. Though they grew to become pandemic celebrities, they declare to have been silenced, and so they really feel they’re owed an apology. Since they will’t admit error, they declare there’s a conspiracy to cover the truth- COVID wasn’t that unhealthy in any case. In March 2022, for instance, Dr. Atlas mentioned, “there’s a gross exaggeration of hospitalizations and deaths for COVID.” Not even the deceased are spared pandemic revisionism.
But, regardless of claiming to have been vindicated, pro-infection medical doctors sound very totally different in 2024 in comparison with 2020. They not say “We like the truth that there’s quite a lot of instances in low- threat populations, as a result of that’s precisely how we’re going to get herd immunity“. Why not? What modified? Although these sentiments dominated a lot of the dialogue in 2020, they vanished quickly after that- poof!
Proponents of mass an infection now search to erase their phrases from historical past and exchange them with a fictional narrative the place they have been benevolent souls who have been solely involved about kids and poor folks. They berate medical doctors who refuse to go together with their revisionism by precisely quoting them. My speak wasn’t cancelled as a result of it was “political”, however quite as a result of it remembered issues that highly effective folks need us to neglect.
As Squirrelelite acknowledged, this isn’t simply in regards to the previous. It’s potential that pro-infection medical doctors will as soon as once more wield important affect if political fortune swings their method. Due to their rhetoric, we’re virtually actually much less ready to reply to a pandemic than we have been in 2019. When COVID-29 emerges, there shall be an present infrastructure able to oppose all measures to include it, and far of the general public can have been conditioned to detest and mistrust anybody who tries. Medical doctors who likened public well being to Nazism and made movies titled Cease Trusting The Public Well being Institution have laid the groundwork for the long run failure.
As such, it’s important to each bear in mind precisely what these medical doctors mentioned, and to know why they desperately need us to neglect it. That’s why I preserve writing “all these articles about these similar folks.” It’s not like Stanford is as much as the duty.
And sooner or later, if anybody truly desires to defend Dr. Atlas, they need to to have the integrity to precisely quote Dr. Atlas. Everyone knows that may by no means occur. Even Dr. Atlas is afraid to cite Dr. Atlas, and that ought to let you know one thing.