Cleaning House at the CDC? For Better or for Worse? That's Now Entirely Up to Dr. Walensky
Nancy Messonier and Ann Schuchat are on the way out. That's called "A Good Start". The Important Question: Who's Next?
Many who have followed the COVID-19 vaccine debacle may be surprised to learn that the reasons why they distrust the official messaging from HHS related to the level and quality of “scientific” evidence used to bolster public confidence in a rushed, under-studied vaccine did not start with COVID-19.
The problem, it seems, is that the messaging that worked to convince most of the public that everything was “a-ok” with CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule does not quite wash with adults considering “recommended” vaccines for themselves.
“Hiding the Bodies”
A good friend of mine, Louis Conte, who co-authored a stunning report in Pace Environmental Law Review that found that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) has been awarding damages to families of kids who develop autism symptoms, but not for autism, has a way with words. When I asked Louis whether he thought they and their alleged co-conspirators might resign or retire, he quipped “They can’t. They know where all the bodies are hidden”.
It was 2016, and we were discussing when Frank Destefano and Coleen Boyle might retire from their positions. These two, who gamed the now infamous 2004 “Destefano” et al. study, were made infamous by the exposure provided by the film documentary VAXXED, are the same Destefano and Boyle who fudged the data showing the Agent Orange was not responsible for the ill health effects of US soldiers who served in Vietnam.
The news that both Nancy Messonier and Anne Schucat are leaving the CDC therefore might be a sign that foretells a better, more reasonable future at the CDC.
According to Politico, who cited “a person familiar with the matter” (who, of course, could well be Schucat), they left after clashes with CDC Director Rochelle Walensky. Dr. Walensky, a relative outsider to the CDC Vaccine Risk and Death Denialista, has been receiving emails and reports from scientists and doctors who hoped that she might retain objectivity and reason. For example, I sent her my report on CDC’s “test more with a single-threshold PCR test that has false positives but let’s deny false positives exist” strategy. My report proves that trying to manage COVID-19 the way CDC has adopted leads inevitably to the outcome that more testing means higher false positive bias in the overall results. Which means eternal disaster and lock-downs, regardless of the actual prevalence of COVID-19.
One can hope that Dr. Walensky got the message. Four public health journals refused to even put the report out for peer-review. Walensky got the report, nevertheless, and let’s hope that she can see what “persons guarding the bodies at CDC” have been up to.
My gripe with the CDC’s testing approach, which is amply supported by empirical data, is fundamental. If so many people with “COVID-19” don’t have COVID-19, but, instead, have other respiratory infections, they are not only being denied treatment for COVID-19 (which they don’t have) - they are being denied proper medical attention starting with a misdiagnosis. Public health has no business running medicine; they are too far away from actual patients - and they have proven, over and over, to be willing to play fast and loose with realities like early treatments work, and that people who are sent home for 10-14 days to, as Brett Weinstein refers to it, “sicken-in-place”, become incubators for new variants. (This is known as the Fauci protocol. For a better protocol, see FLCCC.net). The denialist propaganda machine is trying to convince it’s the unvaccinated alone in whom new variants emerge, which is not biologically possible - and which is woefully unethical as it puts individuals who do not vaccinate in the same categories into which the Nazi placed Jewish people (see “Jews are Lice - They Spread Typhus). In reality, the arrogant and thoughtless use of social manipulation based on fear is a sociopathology, and the CDC, and HHS in toto needs a cure for this disease.
The clue that Dr. Walensky might save the CDC is that she announced the policy that the vaccinated must continue to mask, following the report from Brackenridge County, Massachusetts showing that the 74% of the COVID-19 diagnoses were in the vaccinated. It turns out that at R0 = 3.6, 74% of the cases being vaccinated is nearly identical to the ratio expected when vaccine efficacy is zero. Running the numbers considering only twice-vaccinated leads to negative efficacy.
Parents and families of the vaccine injured - and survivors of vaccine injury may have something to celebrate. Perhaps ethical physicians such as Dr. Peter McCollough and Dr. Pierre Kory might be suitable replacements.
Then there’s the opportunity to learn more about regulatory capture. Let’s watch where Schucat and Messonier end up. If they join vaccine manufacturers, like former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb and former CDC Director Julie Gerberding, they will exist as additional data points in the fact that regulatory capture involves a revolving door that must be closed. Perhaps permanently.
James Lyons-Weiler, PhD
What I’m Reading Now: