Last year, we discussed the declaration of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that censorship was needed to combat what he called the “infodemic.” It was a jarring position given the censorship of experts and scientists who have now been vindicated in raising questions over mask protection to natural immunities to school closings to the origins of Covid 19. Nevertheless, U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Robert Califf added his own voice to call for censorship. Califf declared that life expectancy rates are being suppressed due to “misinformation.” His call for action against ill-defined “disinformation” or “misinformation” is being echoed throughout the Biden Administration.
In a CNBC interview, Califf lashed out at “health misinformation” which he said was one of his top priorities to address through “specific authorities at FDA, FTC and other areas.”
Califf noted:
“You think about the impact of a single person reaching a billion people on the internet all over the world, we just weren’t prepared for that. We don’t have societal rules that are adjudicating it quite right, and I think it’s impacting our health in very detrimental ways.”
He does not elaborate on what would be those “societal rules” for “adjudication” of access to information. However, it holds a familiar ring for free speech advocates.
In recent months, the Twitter Files revealed an extensive and secret effort by the FBI and other agencies to censor citizens on social media. I testified on that effort. New emails uncovered in the ongoing Missouri v. Biden litigation reportedly show that the Biden Administration’s censorship efforts extended to Facebook to censor private communications on its WhatsApp messaging service.
We also know of backchannel communications with the CDC and other agencies. As officials like Califf call for continued crackdowns, there is no recognition of how the government worked to silence opposing views that have been vindicated in recent months.
For years, scientists faced censorship for even raising the lab theory as a possible explanation for the virus. Their reputations and careers were shredded by a media flash mob. The Washington Post declared this a “debunked” coronavirus “conspiracy theory.” The New York Times’ Science and Health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was calling any mention of the lab theory “racist.”
When a Chinese researcher told Fox News that this was man-made, the network was attacked and the left-leaning PolitiFact slammed her a “pants on fire rating.”
The mask mandate and other pandemic measures like the closing of schools are now cited as fueling emotional and developmental problems in children. The closing of schools and businesses was challenged by some critics as unnecessary. Many of those critics were also censored. It now appears that they may have been right. Many countries did not close schools and did not experience increases in Covid. However, we are now facing alarming drops in testing scores and alarming rises in medical illness among the young.
The point is only that there were countervailing indicators on mask efficacy and a basis to question the mandates. Yet, there was no real debate because of the censorship supported by many Democratic leaders in social media. To question such mandates was declared a public health threat and what the WHO called our “infodemic.”
A lawsuit was filed by Missouri and Louisiana and joined by leading experts, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya (Stanford University) and Martin Kulldorff (Harvard University). Bhattacharya previously objected to the suspension of Dr. Clare Craig after she raised concerns about Pfizer trial documents. Those doctors were the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdown as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination. Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.
The media has quietly acknowledged the science questioning mask efficacy and school closures without addressing its own role in attacking those who raised these objections.
What is most striking about Califf’s comments is the failure to address how censorship in the last three years may have increased public health risks by suppressing opposing or dissenting scientific views. Indeed, just this week, a new British study came out directly refuting CDC guidance on masks and suggesting that, while not appreciably reducing the risk of serious Covid symptoms, masks may have caused health problems. Other studies have rejected the mask efficacy argument though this remains a matter of intense debate.
The point is that there is now a debate after social media companies allowed people to discuss these views and the media is no longer labelling dissenters as conspiracists or racists.
Before we continue to make these government efforts a top priority, we should have a public debate over the means used to combat misinformation and what constitutes misinformation. That should start with a full investigation of past government efforts to censor or blacklist individuals or groups.
Well when a governmental entity lies to the people or the media lies to the people, or politicians lie to the people then you lose credibility and every subsequent statement is looked at with doubt. It’s like testimony in a trial. “Well we know you lied to us before so how do we to know that what you now call the truth is not another lie”. Once you have lost that trust, it is near impossible to get it back. The government is always going to have the greater burden because, with our votes, we have placed our trust in them. They are have to be truthful to us otherwise why should we elect them.
Frankly the messaging of the medical authorities throughout the pandemic was atrocious and inspired a lot of doubt and instead of flooding us with accurate information to support their assertions, we got cherry picked data only from studies that supported their assertions in many cases, and they ignored studies that contradicted them. Instead of facing this head-on and explaining why you felt one approach was better than another and reviewing studies right and left and what their weaknesses and strengths were they fell back into a bunker mentality and attacked people personally and that, in turn made them look even more like they were lying.. You might confuse some people but hold back nothing.
If the medical authorities had been on the watch for obvious mistruths or lies, then they should have immediately responded with facts and studies and not personal attacks. Each day when reporting on the statistics and findings, they should then have hammered the mistruths with real facts and findings but instead they were petulant and childish. And in medicine you have to repeat, repeat, repeat! Just a fact of life.
Oh, and neither president should have been there except on rare occasions to answer questions about logistics and plans to institute what the medical authorities recommend. I don’t listen to presidents give medical advice.
The CDC, NIH, FDA, and others should always have appeared as a group and never separately, otherwise minor contradictions would get blown into major controversies. It would also have helped if they actually looked like they had talked to each other about what they were going to say. You have to be truthful but you also have to control the messaging. Also they should look like they have been working and are not trying to show off their expensive scarfs and wardrobes. Patients (and the whole country was made up of patients) hate doctors who like to show off their expensive cars and wardrobes. I always wore slacks and a casual shirt and the obligatory white coat, sometimes. Never a tie. Patients wanted one thing “solve the problem” speak plainly.
GEB,our government doesn’t lie to us. Tonkin gulf incident, weapons oh mass destruction. How many more should we add to this list?
Can anyone remember a worse group of appointees than the conglomeration of leftist misfits that Biden has forced upon us?
Obama and Clinton had some doozies, but in both instances the man at the top was sane and in control. Not true with dementia Joe. This band of leftist misfits is running the asylum.
BIDEN, STALIN, HITLER OR LINCOLN?
“U.S. government to end gas-powered vehicle purchases by 2035 under Biden order”
WASHINGTON/DETROIT, Dec 8 (Reuters) – The U.S. government plans to end purchases of gas-powered vehicles by 2035 in a move to lower emissions and promote electric cars under an executive order signed by President Joe Biden on Wednesday.
– Reuters
________
They’re unconstitutional. Where the —- is the Supreme Court with its power of Judicial Review? The Supreme Court is actionably derelict, negligent and subversive. Please cite the Constitution wherein Congress has the power to regulate automobile production or purchases – not possible, doesn’t exist. By contrast, Americans are completely free by the Constitution to “pursue happiness,” engage in free enterprise, build and sell cars and operate competitive free markets. Consumers are free to purchase mouse traps and better mouse traps when they emerge – cars and better cars (are EVs demonstrably better?). Biden is not dissimilar to Lincoln in his unconstitutional tyranny, dictatorship and oppression. Why is it that the Supreme Court cannot read, assimilate and comprehend the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution?
If this was about stopping Americans from purchasing gas-powered vehicles you would be right. Biden’s EO is about ending U.S. Government purchases of GPVs. Hopefully, the next President will not be a Dem and will revoke Biden’s EO. However, there can be little doubt that Dems will eventually ban GPVs for all American consumers, Constitution be damned.
You are technically correct.
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) in America absolutely want to stop the sale of ICE vehicles tomorrow if possible.
They were admonished by the head of Toyota who indicated a full conversion was impossible in the foreseeable future.
My point is that there is no enumerated power for Congress to regulate the environment, and that the EPA is unconstitutional and without legal basis.
The Supreme Court must have struck down the EPA as it struck down a federal right to abortion, returning it to the States per the Constitution.
There must be no FDA, EPA and a majority of other departments and agencies.
Unfortunately, an activist, left-wing SC has allowed all these programs by twisting the Commerce Clause into pretzels in order to justify actions which should have been unconstitutional.
FREEDOM FROM BIAS OR FAVORITISM IN:
“THE COMMERCE, THE WHOLE COMMERCE AND NOTHING BUT THE COMMERCE, SO HELP YOU GOD.”
NOTHING ELSE.
The “Commerce Clause” simply assures equity and precludes bias and favor in commerce, business or trade by one “foreign Nation, State or Indian Tribe” against another.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To…regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes;…
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
equity
noun
eq·ui·ty ˈe-kwə-tē
plural equities
Synonyms of equity
1 a: justice according to natural law or right
specifically : freedom from bias or favoritism
@hullbobby
Not in my lifetime, no. I personally think it was always the plan to absorb them all after the national temperature had been taken during the primaries so the DNC could install a candidate accordingly. None of this was organic, IMO.
A human being has the capacity to develop a natural immunity to misinformation and disinformation. It’s called a classical education model. If you develop this beginning at an early age, then it won’t matter how and at what volume misinformation and disinformation is attacking the mind of someone so educated. But just like the Covid vaccine, the government took away the option to be free to choose how to develop immunity. Classical education was replaced with the progressive educational system. Think Dr. Robert Malone being replaced by Dr. Anthony Fauci. And now after the government’s 100+ years of weakening the natural immunity to misinformation and disinformation, people in government like this idiot are raising the alarm that society has no natural defense. We still have the capacity to once again develop that natural immunity. It will not happen overnight and very likely won’t do anything for the 2+ generations of demoralized citizens reduced to zombies by the progressive modern education system.
What is most striking about Califf’s comments is the failure to address how censorship in the last three years may have increased public health risks by suppressing opposing or dissenting scientific views.
What is most striking about Califf’s comments, nay his career, is his ties to Big Pharma, and his censoring of damaging data regarding big Pharma COVID vaccines as FDA Commissioners. Democrat Senators Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin voted against Califf’s nomination for FDA Commissioner because of how his tenure at the FDA under Barack Obama, strengthened Big Pharma’s influence on the FDA. It was Republicans who supported Califf’s nomination. Indeed, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, a “progressive” group, founded by Ralph Nader, stated Biden must nominate an individual who has been dedicated to advancing public health–one who unquestionably will place the public interest ahead of the interests of FDA-regulated industries
Robert Calff, and Biden’s White House, are loathe to advance public health but rather censor concerned Americans, so as to feed their masters: big corporations. Fascism is defined as the marriage of Big Government + Big Corporations. Never have so many corporations been embraced, defended and positioned in the back pockets of a political party. Never.
It takes 6 months to 2 years for a newly launched drug to manifest its adverse events, e.g. Vioxx/Merck COX-2 anti-inflammatory drug. Recently published scientific literature is now explaining why some classes of COVID vaccines (adenovirus vector vaccines, not mRNA vaccines) lead to cardiovascular deaths. Robert Califf could have required Big Pharma to do more rigorous studies as to their vaccines activating platelets in the cardiovascular circulatory system. Califf could have educated Americans about these deadly events as they became documented in 2020, 2021 and 2022, but instead they covered for them. For 2 years physicians were announcing that some vaccines resulted in cardiovascular deaths. Now we are understanding the mechanisms (see citations below this text).
Naturally Robert Califf wants to silence his accusers. This from the Left who fawn over the French Revolution, which utilized the guillotine against the governing elites.
Off with his head!
– Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland
Kim AY, et al. Thrombosis patterns and clinical outcome of COVID-19 vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Jun;119:130-139. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.03.034.
Klok FA, et al. Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Lancet Haematol. 2022 Jan;9(1):e73-e80. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(21)00306-9.
Ostrowski SR, et al. Inflammation and Platelet Activation After COVID-19 Vaccines – Possible Mechanisms Behind Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis. Front Immunol. 2021 Nov 23;12:779453. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.779453.
Perhaps a “Ministry of Truth” is in order along with a “Disinformation Board” that possesses enforcement authority.
I need your help s@@tlibs. What should be the penalty for spreading disinformation as defined by leftists – fines, jail time, capital punishment? I have a feel that out leftist moral bettors won’t have the same objection to capital punishment, if used against the right people.
Again, I need your help s@@tlibs!
I don’t want to understand, dialogue or reconcile with these people, I want a divorce.
antonio
“It’s the [Constitution], stupid!”
– James Carville
_____________
The problem is the rogue Supreme Court and judicial branch which is derelict, negligent and subversive.
Americans enjoy the absolute, immutable and superior freedom of speech.
Congress has no power to regulate anything but money, commerce and land and naval Forces.
The fda, cdc, nih, etc. are not the arbiters of science. One of their essential duties is to make sure people have information to make informed decisions. They have illegally assumed the role of decision maker for the subjects of the United States.
Fighting tyranny is like fighting cockroaches. Victory is an illusion. The battle never ends.
Here’s what I recommend that you do. Take your hand handkerchief spit in it and keep it over your mouth and nose all day. I bet that there were trillions of bacteria living in the boogers in the masks of the little children. We know that bacteria love warm wet places. Common sense really isn’t very common.
And conventional wisdom too often turns out to be not wise at all.
Califf refers to “specific authorities” to regulate “misinformation.” The First Amendment denies the Government any authority to do this, specific or otherwise. “Misinformation” is not one of the narrow judicially-crafted exceptions to speech covered by the First Amendment.
Califf has no power to amend the Constitution (Congress has no power to regulate food and drugs, making the FDA and Califf invalid, illegitimate, illicit and unconstitutional).
“Specific authorities,” “misinformation” – The relevant and defining words are in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The freedom of speech is absolute and superior.
Amendments are absolute.
Amendments that are not absolute qualify themselves, as does the 5th.
Amendments provide all constitutional qualifications; if the Amendment does not qualify itself, no qualification is licit, legal or constitutional.
The 5th Amendment provides the right to private property and the sole, licit qualification to that right to private property, which is that property may be fully taken for public use with just compensation.
___________
5th Amendment
No person shall be…deprived of…property…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
When would we ever want a government to decide which speech is correct or which is false? How did that idea even get floated anywhere near the seat of this constitutional republic? It is time to set things right with this nation.
Professional liars want to lie with impunity about ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and masks and say they’re being “canceled” or “censored” because they don’t want to face consequences for their dishonesty.
djfnyc, i know you don’t want to take a walk down memory lane but I must insist that you remember that there was a man who in rare moment of truthfulness said that masks were not effective in stopping the spread of Covid. Who was this man you might ask. Well my oh my it was none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci himself. Sometimes memory lane is a painful place to go but you should walk that lonesome valley on the way back to a town named Sanity.
Inconvenient Truth: https://nypost.com/2021/06/03/fauci-emails-show-his-flip-flopping-on-wearing-masks-to-fight-covid/
Your cutesy “memory lane” snark isn’t helpful. Truth is. https://nypost.com/2021/06/03/fauci-emails-show-his-flip-flopping-on-wearing-masks-to-fight-covid/
TiT, Fauci never said masks were supposed to stop the spread of COVID. That’s your first mistake. He said masks help SLOW the spread of COVID. The whole point of wearing masks was to minimize the spread as much as possible. Masks were never claimed to be 100% effective. Not even the N95 masks. They had the ability to block 95% of viral particles. What made them more effective overall was keeping distance and minimal contact with others. The other less effective masks were 30-40% effective meaning they still MINIMIZED spread vs no mask. Coupled with social distancing the effectiveness increased but was still not deemed 100%. The whole point of masks was to minimize spread as much as possible. It was never intended to stop the spread. That’s it. Fauci knew this, but idiots and those too ignorant to make that important distinction kept stating the false claims that masks were supposed to stop the spread. That misinformation is what led many to ignore masking and do without. Those people were the ones spreading the virus more effectively than those wearing masks. Meaning they were stymieing any attempts to minimize the spread as much as possible. That was the insanity borne out of the misinformation Fauci and others were trying to dispel.
Well Svelaz here it is right from the horses mouth. https://www.newsweek.com/fauci-said-masks-not-really-effective-keeping-out-virus-email-reveals-1596703. So much for saying that Fauci never said that masks were ineffective in the spread of the Covid virus. Svelaz be wrong again.
TiT, that’s not what he’s saying. It’s obvious when you don’t take the time to read the the article you posted. He’s still recommending it to those who are infected. That Isn’t to say that they are not effective.
Your article clearly mentions this.
“On March 8, 2020, Fauci said “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask,” according to Reuters—but this was before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance on masks on April 3.
The CDC recommended that people wear face coverings “in public settings when around people outside their household, especially when social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.”
The changes were made as more information about COVID-19 became available during the pandemic. Fauci has since encouraged mask-wearing in line with the CDC advice. He told NBC News on January 25 that wearing two masks was “common sense.”
“The changes were made as more information about COVID-19 became available during the pandemic.”
That is ludicrously stupid.
It was known before covid that masks do not work.
It was known during.
It is now known after.
The science did not change.
Our knowledge did not change.
Fauxi’s words and the CDC guidance changed.
Regardless, even by your OWN arguments the “experts” are sufficiently fallible that their views can not be imposed by force,
and certainly we can not censor those who disagree.
You bought a lie
You sold a lie.
And you are still too gullible to grasp that you were lied to and used.
You are still selling that lie.
https://imgs.search.brave.com/JfS2FDO4D6qv5d1EdVRsk9TrY6YzCLIjRNMavcSTskg/rs:fit:1200:1200:1/g:ce/aHR0cHM6Ly9xdW90/ZWZhbmN5LmNvbS9t/ZWRpYS93YWxscGFw/ZXIvMzg0MHgyMTYw/LzIwODQyNjEtVmly/Z2luaWEtRm94eC1R/dW90ZS1Gb29sLW1l/LW9uY2Utc2hhbWUt/b24teW91LUZvb2wt/bWUtdHdpY2Utc2hh/bWUuanBn
“Fauci never said masks were supposed to stop the spread of COVID.”
“Dr. Anthony Fauci says Americans who don’t wear masks may ‘propagate the further spread of infection’”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/05/dr-anthony-fauci-says-americans-who-dont-wear-masks-may-propagate-the-spread-of-infection.html
Ignoring your idiotic rant about masks etc. the FACT is that “skowing the spread” means nothing except dying more slowly while inflicting more damage to everyone first.
Skowing the spread is not and never was a legitimate goal unless it actually saves lives – and we KNOW it does not. It actually increases total deaths.
Whethe ryou like it or not the only legitimat objective is to STOP the spread. To reduce the transmission rate significantly below 1.0.
All Covid public health measures COMBINED do not come CLOSE to that. The initial version of Covid had an infection rate of 2.8-3.4.
That would have required measures that were atleast 98% effective in “slowing” the spread to get the spread rate below 1.0.
N95 masks are NOT 95% effective. They block 95% of airbone particles – not 95% of viruses.
In lab tests N95 masks block 70% of Covid virus not 95% and that is for a SINGLE exposure.
To be effective against the original Covid they woul dhave had to have been 98% effective in combination with other measures.
We NEVER got close to that.
Against Omicron they would have had to have been 99.99% effective.
“meaning they still MINIMIZED spread vs no mask”
No they SLOWED the spread. A train wreck is still a train wreck even in slow motion.
The FACT is none of this was going to work and those with a brain knew that from the start.
And LIED about it.
You may not have grasped that at the time.
But you SHOULD by NOW.
Faucci was lying in 2020. But YOU did not know what Faucci and those more intelligent than you knew at the time.
You KNOW now or you should KNOW. Defending and repeating this nonsense is LYING.
I encourage all right wing people to not wear masks or get vaccinated. Please, let your fate be just like all those right wing radio personalities that did not get vaccinated and died from COVID. The world will be so much better with you gone. But, be sure to pray to your god for guidance. I’m sure his answer would be the same, good ridance.
Troll alert.
Bob, speaking about people on the right who died from Covid because they didn’t wear a mask without saying who they were leads us to believe fact is being confused with fantasy. I know someone at MSNBC said that it was true so in your world it must be true. Perhaps you can provide more specific information as to the identity of those of which you speak. Short of such specific information your pontifications can only be thought of as drivel seeping from the bottom of your masks. Two being better than one.
Do you also wear a mask over your eyes?
Robert Califf obediently ignores any differing points of view. He has to. He’s on Team Biden (whoever that is). Thank you, Jonathan, for keeping this vital issue in the forefront.
Not long ago these would-be dictators would not have dared to make such ridiculous statements. Now it is commonplace for Bidenites to openly attack the bedrock of our republic.
Government-assigned arbiters of misinformation are infinitely more dangerous than misinformation itself.
You got that right. As the ACLU always says, the remedy for untruthful speech is more speech, not censorship. These Biden admin people are so extreme they find themselves on the opposite side of the left-leaning ACLU. They are a menace to society.
Oldman, that is the old ACLU. The current ACLU no longer believes in free speech and has even tried to ban books in places like Target.
hullbobby –
The current ACLU no longer believes in free speech . . .
If that’s true I’d like to know about it. However, on a quick search I turned up the following which suggests they’re sticking to their old line.
https://www.aclu.org/other/speech-campus
Excerpt: Where racist, misogynist, homophobic, and transphobic speech is concerned, the ACLU believes that more speech — not less — is the answer most consistent with our constitutional values.
Admittedly this is one data point limited to campus speech, so if there are some examples pointing in the opposite direction in other contexts, I’d be very interested to see what they are.
This very recent article in the City Journal might be a good place to start.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/civil-liberties-need-better-defenders-than-the-aclu
https://www.city-journal.org/article/civil-liberties-need-better-defenders-than-the-aclu
The point is only that there were countervailing indicators on mask efficacy and a basis to question the mandates. Yet, there was no real debate because of the censorship supported by many Democratic leaders in social media.
Censorship is killing us, as shown by censorship of critics of the draconian lockdowns and vax mandates. The idea that free speech is killing us is pure gaslighting – which happens to be the only kind of light the Biden admin has.
yea…the Germans and Russians wanted less freedom of speech in the 1930’s…China in the 1960-70’s
You know what…I didn’t VOTE to be ruled by Fascists!
That won’t be a problem soon because you won’t be allowed to vote.
They’re more clever. You will be allowed to vote, but they won’t count it.
This entire Governmental Administration is a “Medical Risk”
what we need LESS of is ALL POWERFUL Government.
Cut 50% of it!
I’m from the government and I’m here to help!
And then after you cut 50%, cut 50% of the remainder.
Not sure that will be enough. One more 50% cut might still be needed.
We have FAR TOO MUCH government.
Yesterday’s misinformation is frequently today’s fact.
Those words ought to be engraved somewhere prominent and permanent. How true they are.