~5-7 min read
Darest thou sayeth I am wrong? Art thou mad? ‘Tis the model that is wrong, not I!
~Unknown Expert, circa 1700 AD
Public health “experts” (statisticians, virologists, epidemiologists, etc.) are not bound by the constraints that most other professionals are because they are not paid to find immediate and concrete solutions to a problem. They are paid to theorize and conjure up any number of possible and plausible remedies to a given health issue. They continue to get a steady stream of income during health crises, and they can actually boost their salaries if they can manage to publish work that gets global attention and acknowledgement from their peers. As a result, coronavirus researchers are incentivized to publish their latest extrapolations and conjectures as quickly and as often as possible in order to outperform their rivals who are vying for the same validation and acclaim. It does not matter if the findings are exposed as being faulty or fallacious at a later date. As long as the lead researcher and his or her team of scientists have a strong reputation (i.e. solid name recognition) and the requisite financial support, then their studies and their hypotheses will be taken seriously and will be widely disseminated at the time of release.
“Hello my name is Expert” by Graham Lavender is licensed under Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)
Dr. Neil Ferguson, The Infallible
The Imperial College London has a $1.32 billion budget and is one of the most esteemed research institutions in the world. Dr. Neil Ferguson, a world-renowned epidemiologist and mathematical biologist, is the man behind the March 16th CoVid-19 report that shook the planet. Dr. Ferguson achieved global acclaim for his research on previous outbreaks such as the 2009 Swine Flu pandemic and the 2016 West African Ebola outbreak, which helped him to establish connections with the World Health Organization, the US government, and the UK government. So is it any surprise that Ferguson’s solemn report was received with so much deference and solemn acceptance when it was released? His analysis was viewed as absolute divine doctrine. No brave soul dared to push back on it. Never mind the fact that his team concluded that even with the most harsh disease suppression and prophylactic methods in place, 1.1-1.2 million Americans would still die from the coronavirus. That figure seems a bit far off now, but is Dr. Ferguson going to lose his job or his pre-eminent stature in the scientific community? Nope. Of course not.
“Neil M Ferguson” By elifesciences.org, CC BY 4.0
Dr. Fauci Repeatedly Offers Bad Advice…Nobody Seems To Notice
The health experts and scientists who present impactful information that shape government decisions and directly affect the lives of billions of people rarely have to take any responsibility for the errors or misjudgments that they make. On January 24th, Dr. Fauci stated that the coronavirus was not a “major threat for the people in the United States,” and that it was not “something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.” He said those words just a week before the Trump administration declared a public health emergency and announced a travel ban from China. But everybody seemingly forgot about that. In early March, Dr. Fauci went on 60 Minutes and claimed that people “should not be walking around with masks” in the United States and argued that only health care providers and obviously sick people should be wearing them. On April 3rd, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that all citizens should wear masks to help prevent the spread of the coronavirus, reversing its own (and Fauci’s) previous stance on the issue. That same day, the great Dr. Fauci, went on PBS Newshour and with a totally straight face declared that disease prevention would be “more efficient” if people wore masks. Fauci spoke about the American public wearing masks as if doing so were a no-brainer. It was if he had never had a different opinion. There was no admission of his former erroneous pontifications on the matter. No acknowledgement that he had been wrong.
The problem is that Fauci’s former assertion that masks were unnecessary was not inconsequential. Actually, it was dangerous. Fauci did not just say that masks were ineffective, he urged people not to get masks. He even at one point said that there is “no reason whatsoever” to wear a facemask. Countless numbers of coronavirus cases could have been prevented if Dr. Fauci had not advised against the usage of masks. One could argue that Fauci has some level of responsibility for the illnesses and deaths that occurred in the interim between his change of heart. Why hasn’t anyone asked him about that? Nobody has accused Fauci of malfeasance or irresponsibility, and that is a shame. Someone needs to ask Dr. Fauci the following questions: 1) Given the speed at which the coronavirus has been shown to spread in the population, how many people do you think got infected with the disease while following your advice? 2) How many people do you think actually had masks and thanks to your outrageous recommendation, decided to forego their usage, putting themselves and others at great risk? 3) How many coronavirus illnesses and deaths do you think came as a result of your smug proclamations? 4) Why isn’t anyone upset at you for putting lives in danger?
Dr. Anthony S. Fauci delivers remarks during a coronavirus update briefing Thursday, April 16, 2020, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Andrea Hanks)
“Experts” Hide Their Blunders By Blaming Data
Obviously, the questions that were just listed will never be asked, and the answers to those questions will never be provided because Dr. Fauci has a get out of jail free card. He’s a leading scientist and he’s a renowned physician. He can always claim that he made his statements based on “imperfect” data, and that he corrected himself when the data became available. People like Dr. Fauci can always blame artificial intelligence for their incompetence or nefariousness. They can just say well, “sorry, but the models were imprecise,” and everyone leaves them alone. That is the danger of listening solely to experts. Dr. Christopher Murray changed his coronavirus mortality projections from 100,000- 240,000 to 60,000 after receiving “a massive infusion of new data.” In between that massive infusion, thousands of businesses had to close because the government decided to extend the lockdown for two more weeks at least. “Experts” can always say that they made their assessments and health declarations based on the “information that was available,” and that they changed their minds after “more data was found,” even if scores of human lives are adversely impacted by the inaccuracies. By constantly moving the goalposts, the experts give off the impression that they are always right because whatever they say matches whatever the prevailing scientific opinion is at the time. And thus, they develop a façade of infallibility and righteousness, exculpating themselves and winning the unwavering trust of the masses in the process.
Not only is someone like Fauci allowed to be wrong and wildly off the mark, people like him are permitted to concede that they might be wrong. In late March, Fauci said that the United States could be looking at anywhere between 100,000 and 200,000 coronavirus deaths. However, he hedged his assertion by saying that he didn’t “want to be held to that [number of deaths]” He added that since the projection was a “moving target,” it would be easy to be “wrong and mislead people.” After telling the American people that they should expect between 100,000 to 240,000 deaths, Dr. Birx offered the caveat that “[w]e are hoping the models are not completely right, that we can do better than what predictions are.” Well, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx! Those are rather enviable jobs that you have! Imagine if a politician were to shirk responsibility for the potential impact of critical information like that. Could any politician get away with saying that whatever policy they are enacting may not be “completely right” or that they do not want to be “held” to what they are implementing? No way. They’d be removed from office. It seems that the same people who attack President Trump for underestimating the impact of the coronavirus early on (which he certainly did) are completely silent on Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx. Only unelected technocrats like Fauci and Birx can actually absolve themselves of any future blame by preemptively removing themselves from any future controversy. Unfortunately, for someone who sees through the crap, that method just doesn’t cut it. When people do not hold the “experts” accountable for the flawed information that they provide the government and the general public, they essentially allow them to get away with murder.
Comments