A More Humane Approach

This is my third letter to PAW on the topic of the lockdowns.

This week I see that professors of epidemiology, public health, infectious disease and other relevant disciplines from schools like Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins, and Stanford have co-signed a letter condemning the “inhumane” treatment of students at their schools during the so-called COVID-19 pandemic.

I want to add my voice to this statement along with my apology, as an adult, to undergrads that we allowed anti-scientific hysteria promoted by known habitual medical grifters to not only interfere with your education, but also to inflict incalculable harm on the world’s poor.

There is a long history of the CDC, NIH, and WHO exaggerating and distorting science to achieve self-serving bureaucratic agendas.

For example, calling positive test results “cases” and using these numbers to claim “clusters” and “spikes” is an abuse of medical language and the scientific process.

A positive so-called “COVID test” indicates the presence of genetic fragments that may — or may not — indicate exposure to the recently named (but still not conclusively isolated) SARS-2 virus, genetic material which is reputed by mechanisms still not adequately described to create a disease state called “COVID.”

For those who want an interesting intellectual exercise, read the CDC’s own definition of “COVID” and then the WHO’s definition of a “pandemic.” There is nothing even remotely scientific about either of them. They are bureaucratic-legal descriptions designed to justify open-ended abuses of the public which are in fact taking place all over the world negatively impacting the lives of billions. 

At some point, it will be recognized that we are living through a chapter of Charles Mackay’s “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.” I hope for the sake of the people who are victims of this farce that this day comes sooner rather than later.

It would be inspiring to see Princeton at least provide a forum for views counter to “the consensus” and it’s disappointing in the extreme that with all its resources such views are relegated to the online version of PAW.