I learn from every one of your columns, Katelyn, and appreciate you and your efforts to inform, educate, and listen. Regarding your responses to Kelley's points, we are in desperate need of effective strategies to convey that our behaviors do not exist in a vacuum. In many cases, what we do has an impact on others, and it is our responsibility to care about others and adjust our behaviors even when we perceive low or no personal risk. How do we do this more effectively while not shaming or blaming?
The problem I have seen with those who want others to change their behavior is that they dont explain why we are suddenly asking for these things. Take those who are at very high risk from Covid now, they are and always were at risk from influenza and other diseases. Why do you want others who are at no risk to adjust their behavior now when they didn’t before. Explain. There’s never much of an effort to do that. Personally I thought one big mistake was not to focus on asking people to make very limited changes. The pro mask crowd would have had more success in my view by never asking that masks be worn outside and when conditions improved by saying feel free to take off your mask while engaging in voluntary activities like theater but please keep them on while at a medical facility, grocery or on public transportation. I personally still keep a mask on at medical facilities and on public transport.
Abbie, I understand your comments. I do think we have to give grace to anyone making decisions. As a school board director during the pandemic, we were constantly trying to make decisions with limited information. At times it felt like we had to decide on the most conservative side because there was just not enough information and we had to protect our children and staff. Hind sight is 20 20. Of course we would have made different decisions if we knew everything we know now.
I think this is a good example of revisionist history. Masks in the U.S. were only requested when we were trying to learn about Covid and how it spread (which can include outside in certain situations). It was a NOVEL virus that killed many more than flu (we also at the time didn’t know who was truly at risk). I agree that we should be wearing masks still in the places you mention. Are you wearing them in those places?
Not revisionist at all. I am live in both Illinois and California and where I am in California was requiring outdoor masks at all times, well after we had learned that they were not necessary in most situations. I thought this was a huge public policy error and undermined trust. And yes, as I said I still wear a mask in any health care center and on public transport. I also do so in grocery stores if crowded at all and numbers are surging.
Just curious what area in CA asked that people wore masks outside? I’m in CA and it’s been maskless the whole time outdoors. Esp after vaccines rolled out 2021.
The reason it was novel was that it was engineered to do damage to our bodies. Natural viruses do damage incidentally while they are trying to do what Darwin dictates: reproduce as fast as possible. But engineered viruses do damage that is not incidental, but by design. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has a spike protein that is engineered to damage nerves, cause blood clots, and attack the artery walls.
Josh you state a thesis that Covid-19 was engineered (presumably by evil Chinese scientists). But, I would counter that you could make that argument for every flu, bacteria that ever evolved to spread more easily (SARS) or to infect more easily. The scientists who were dispatched to look at the thesis you subscribe to (with obvious disdain for those who don't agree with you, reported two things. One, the Chinese labs were not forthcoming in making early pronouncements about the discovery of a "new virus" and secondly, that there was a greater likelihood of the "Cross species" origin of COVID than any man-made attempt to create a diabolical new virus. I would say that the best evidence around would not support your thesis.
I think you misunderstand. There is an evolutionary benefit to REPRODUCING rapidly. There is an evolutionary benefit to SPREADING more widely. But for a parasite, there is no direct benefit from harming the host. Harming the host is incidental, and over time a parasite learns better to reproduce without harming the host. It may become commensal, because in the long run, what benefits the host benefits the parasite.
But the SARS-CoV-2 virus has features that gratuitously harm us. Its spike protein is not optimal for entering the cell (which is its primary function). This is because the spike protein has extra features that damage nerve and epithelial tissue. This is one way in which we know that the virus is engineered.
We can know it is an engineered virus, but we don't know whodunnit. It could have been China, where biosecurity is lax. It could have been the US, where there are more bioweapons labs than all other countries combined. It could have been a joint venture, Shi collaborating with UNC. It could have been Chinese research sponsored by Dr Fauci at NIH. All these are possibilities that we cannot exclude.
Your opinion about engineered virus is not unique, and one could construe it has validity, but ONLY in the sense that nature, not humans, engineered the coronovirus recombinant protein to enhance its infectivity and replication capacity. Further, it’s the hosts own immune response that appears to be the culprit responsible for the multisystemic issues seen clinically. The clinical events my colleagues and I have experienced, esp in the early stages of the pandemic have provided us with many opportunities to see how and why the human host suffers so much. It’s not the viral presence alone, rather the host’s immune response to the antigens. You could say, the human immune system is an enabler, “the fall-guy”. Our clinical experiences and subsequent collaborations with a team of cellular biologists, biochemists and molecular immunologists have found some nuances that provide a number of answers to the unresolved issues of a durable treatment for the disease of COVID19 and a credible approach to treatments that go beyond the preventive vaccine approach. References to Dr Fauci as a perpetrator or enabler thru Chinese sources is among the most egregious and ludicrous comments I have encountered in my own study of this pandemic. Dr Fauci did his best dealing with the slings and arrows coming his way. He is an honorable man and has been castigated unfairly in my/our opinion. Why must some nefarious person or human entity be the “fall guy”? Can you accept that evolutionary genetics and science is incredibly complex? If so, it’s worth the time to investigate this far more reasonable avenue for better understanding this novel virus. I respectfully disagree with the belief that this is a human engineered virus. It’s an easy out to blame someone when the science is simply not clear to those who declare such things. History has many forms of miasmas in an attempt to explain the unknown to the unknowing. I can accept the fact that no one is hiding something and there is no conspiracy to cover up the origin since I’ve read and discussed with knowledgeable people and choose not to gain my information from bloggers, YouTube or FB. The video link you provide with the Chinese narrator has a bit of irony that shouldn’t go unnoticed. The message from the article by Rowan Jacobsen is an opinion by journalist with experience in writing about scientific matters, but it is nothing more than an opinion, just as yours is an opinion. The targets for this viral infection are being slowly unraveled and the means to mitigate the multisystems dysfunctions are responding to our approach based on some unique laboratory science and appreciation for repurposed therapy. Some of my previous comments in this YLE and in Topol’s Ground Truths amplify these same issues.
and all our "behavior adjusting" of the past 4 years accomplished what exactly? It didn't affect the spread of the virus at all, and we were left with a devastated economy, record inflation, a more depressed, anxious, and sick public, a generation of children behind socially and academically, etc.
What were the societal benefits of covid hysteria?
I think the initial lock down slowed down the spread of the virus enough for health systems to try and set up more infrastructure: masks for essential workers, respirator machines, staffing plans, etc. You are right that we ended up with the virus everywhere. But there was value in a few weeks of shut down.
Beyond that initial time period, the decision points get much harder to make since there was very little data about the virus and about the effect of shut downs. Understanding that nuance better in hindsight is important for planning for future pandemics and emergencies. It is not just a yes or no equation.
Paul, good to see you still around. I think your initial question "accomplished what exactly" is a good question, but your follow-up of "it didn't affect the spread of the virus at al," is actually a testable hypotheses; and from all I've read the test results are that yes indeed, we did slow the spread (slow, not stop), and that places that instituted protective measures early saw more lives saved and lower rates of hospitalization, especially in wave one and the Delta wave. See this study of studies. https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/impact-non-pharmaceutical-interventions-on-covid-19-transmission/. Sometimes buying time buys more than time. It buys saved lives, a sustainable medical infrastructure, a less devastated economy, an unknowable inflation/deflation scenario, and a public even more depressed, anxious and sick. Did we overshoot on some things before we knew everything about COVID? For sure. Did many folks put their heads in the sand, costing extra lives and disruption? For sure. Hopefully the end game is that we learned from this pandemic and will be more prepared for the next. But thanks to those who knowingly and purposefully misled many people, thus engendering even less trust in the medical establishment, I'm not sure that will be the outcome.
Unfortunately the message was divided from the top down from the beginning and people were killed. So all that work was for nothing. Long Covid is going to get us in that it contributes to cardiovascular disease, probably cancer ( top 2 causes of death) and will add to a whole host of diseases but the message is so muddled with “experts who are also biased to push supplements and their own products” taking a lot of band width that it continues to confuse people. So the fact that many countries into 2023 still had excess mortality was not blamed on Covid but the vaccine was disheartening….Especially, when I’m still seeing this clinically. This winter I still had quite a few patients clot and have body parts die off from covid. I cannot ignore their suffering. If they had a crystal ball and could have a choice to avoid getting covid knowing this could happen, they would have. Unfortunately it’s so politicized that their story won’t be acknowledged.
Wow. Really? Behavior adjusting saved many hundreds of thousands of people from getting fatal COVID. Have you ever heard of Johns Hopkins University> They modeled the epidemic and suggest that some one million people died because they failed to take the recommended precautions (vaccines, distancing, effective masking). What studies did you read that support your thesis that "behavior adjusting" didn't "do anything." Here's one of a dozen references I found on the subject. Rev Income Wealth. 2022 Jun; 68(2): 348–392.
Published online 2022 Feb 21. doi: 10.1111/roiw.12570
PMCID: PMC9115509
PMID: 35602915
Excess Mortality Versus COVID‐19 Death Rates: A Spatial Analysis of Socioeconomic Disparities and Political Allegiance Across U.S. States
Janine Aron 1 and John Muellbauercorresponding author 2
Author information Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer
Go to:
Abstract
Excess mortality is a more robust measure than the counts of COVID‐19 deaths typically used in epidemiological and spatial studies. Measurement issues around excess mortality, considering data quality and comparability both internationally and within the U.S., are surveyed. This paper is the first state‐level spatial analysis of cumulative excess mortality for the U.S. in the first full year of the pandemic. There is strong evidence that, given appropriate controls, states with higher Democrat vote shares experienced lower excess mortality (consistent with county‐level studies of COVID‐19 deaths). Important demographic and socio‐economic controls from a broad set tested were racial composition, age structure, population density, poverty, income, temperature, and timing of arrival of the pandemic. Interaction effects suggest the Democrat vote share effect of reducing mortality was even greater in states where the pandemic arrived early. Omitting political allegiance leads to a significant underestimation of the mortality disparities for minority populations.
Keywords: excess mortality, COVID‐19, spatial analysis, U.S. states, political polarization.
Another thing I would have liked to see when things were improving was a call for very limited targeted restrictions instead of a refusal to lift anything which was then met with demands for total lift and the refusal to ever wear a mask. One monthly masks required theater showing. One hour a day at groceries masks required. Etc….. Find ways to try to protect the vulnerable without much burden on the low risk.
I know it's hard not to be discouraged, Katelyn, after the threats and mistreatment to which you've been subjected; but please keep up your good work. There are more of us "out there" in America who respect science and the kind of hard data on which you base your reports than buy into the half baked, paranoiac theories that have led to vaccine hesitancy and a re-emergence of diseases which were considered vanquished decades ago. Thank you for everything you do to keep science, "the candle in the dark"( as Carl Sagan put it) alive.
Katelyn, you glossed over one very important point which must be called out. You noted that you received death threats and that random Twitter posters are running polls on how public health officials should be executed. Can you share with us how many death threats Kelley Krohnert received? I will venture that the number is zero. There is a fundamental difference between the anti-vax crowd (which undeniably encompasses the broader MAGA demographic) and those of us that believe in science and data. The MAGA crowd view death threats as a legitimate way to attempt to shut down discourse and ideas they don't like. I don't know anyone not in that camp who is making death threats, not one.
Your work in reaching out to the other side is both admirable and needed, and I am sorry you have been and undoubtedly continue to be subjected to abuse for talking about science and data. I just fear that talking to people who are cult members isn't going to get you or us far.
Mark, I have a much smaller following than Dr. Jetelina, and was never a figure in national news, so I wasn't subject to the same level of toxic abuse, but I was called many horrible names for advocating for open schools among other things, including that I'm selfish, a racist, a murderer, etc. Some of these people have said they hoped I get very sick with Covid or suffer from Long Covid. People can be very cruel. And, as a reminder, just because someone disagreed with the pandemic response doesn't make them "anti-vax," "MAGA," or a "cult member." I am none of those things. This demonization comes from both sides as you've demonstrated.
Kelley, I am truly sorry that you have been subjected to abuse. We all must try to distinguish between people who are honestly trying to improve our understanding of science/data, and people who are obfuscating the facts (often from a tribal view, on both sides). We also must understand the difficulties of addressing a novel health threat and carrying out the process of science in full view of a public who does not understand the many complexities. We can disagree on interpretation of facts without demonizing each other. As a strong supporter of Katelyn, I thank you for being willing to discuss the intricacies and errors that were/are being made in Public Health.
Kelley, thank you for your thoughtful response. I should have been clearer in my initial comment in that I was not suggesting that someone disagreeing with the pandemic response means that they are automatically any of the adjectives I used in my comment. In fact I personally did not agree with all that was done in response to the pandemic, and we as a society need to learn from those lessons. That said, my core point remains, which is that the anti-vax, MAGA crowd did not politely disagree with the public health response during the pandemic and make reasoned arguments based in science about how to improve the response for the good of everyone. Rather, they actively and maliciously spread lies and misinformation about the pandemic which we know for a fact led to hundreds of thousands of excess deaths. Insanity like injecting bleach and taking horse dewormer became religion for these people. And when you pointed out that their religion is crazy, death threats became the go-to tool to silence critics. This is neither a demonization of others or an expression of a personal opinion, but rather a demonstrable, objective fact well embedded in the historical record.
I do genuinely appreciate your willingness to have a dialogue, which is critical to moving our society to a better place. But having a dialogue does not negate the need to call out the incredible damage that so many people did during the pandemic to our collective public health and to our trust in experts. I am absolutely the first person to say that the global public health response to the pandemic was flawed. But I also recognize that our health officials were dealing with an unprecedented situation, and I truly believe that the vast, vast majority of health professionals were making decisions that that they viewed as grounded in science and for the good of society as a whole.
Questioning orthodoxy is core to the scientific method and should be welcomed, but replacing it with another orthodoxy rooted in misinfomation and lies is not the solution. On this I hope we can agree.
Kelly - I am so sorry that you have experienced what you described. I advocated strongly for our schools to remain open during the pandemic out of a deep concern for children's mental and physical health (School was my safe place as a kid living in a troubled home). I received a lot of hate over that. I know I'm a good person who cares about people (and I assume you are as well). It's hard living in a world where so many assume the worst in others. Thank you for engaging in open conversations. I hope we can continue.
It's not demonization from both sides as you assert. It's stating what trained and objective eyes see and reporting it vs not wanting to hear the message and shooting the messenger. I'd say your assertion is false equivalency and not reason.
Sadly the pro-mask, pro-lockdown crowd (to which I belong) have some nasty people, and some of them are extremely powerful. They tend to abuse this power by silencing/cancelling/censoring critics.
It's stark and deeply disturbing to acknowledge that violence and vitriol against those whom we disagree with has become part of our political everyday life. I'm not sure what should be done now, but when I see the hatred, ignorance and "otherism" in practice, I just want to get away from it. Is there an island somewhere without MAGA hatred or right wing extremists. Or on the other hand, those "false equivalency" writers who seem to think that standing up for open mindedness, science and not prejudice, or advocating communal action to solve our community problems are somehow the same thing as threatening and committing violence against those who aren't in the camp. In my book, freedom of thought is a good thing. But, getting closed and violent about it are not.
I have been called names like Nazi and Pharma Shill online, but some of the worst vitriol I've seen has been directed at female colleagues: apparently a woman speaking as an expert can trigger a special flavor of hatred from some people.
Fortunately for me, I have also had a lot of supportive comments online.
I am the only Virology expert most of my friends and family know, so throughout the pandemic I have answered a huge number of private messages. One of the most common types of message I get is just a practical "what should I do in this situation?" For instance in May 2020 a friend wanted to get her piano tuned but how to make that safe? I suggested (1) masks for all, (2) turn off HVAC and open windows, (3) put fans in windows of the room with the piano sending air from that room out the windows. That's what she did.
Another very common question I get from friends and relatives is "my [relative/in-law/colleague/whoever sent me this article full of sciency words, is it true?" In about 80% of such cases my answer is, "it's nonsense, here's what's wrong."
You nailed it. Answers to “What should I do?” questions are my biggest need. In the early days of the pandemic, there were very few answers (we just didn’t have them yet). And now, my questions (even of my doctors) are pooh-poohed and I’m just told not to worry and to get on with my life. Funny thing — my life may actually depend on getting good, science-based answers, because Covid is still out there and I am still high risk.
Well, here's what I am doing while I undergo chemotherapy:
1. This Friday I'll get a COVID Booster shot. My Oncologist says unfortunately we don't have data on how effective the vaccine is for somebody getting chemo, but we know getting chemo makes a person vulnerable to infections so it's a good idea to get the shot.
2. I avoid indoor dining away from home.
3. I wear a good mask almost every indoor place away from home and pay attention to its fit. On my face the 3M "AFFM" with the clip attached to the back of my head fits better than the 3M "Aura" but your mileage may vary.
4. I follow the numbers for covid AND OTHER INFECTIONS at https://data.wastewaterscan.org/ because ANY infection now would interrupt my chemo.
5. For activities like church and fitness classes, I always wear a mask and I stayed home during the December peak, resuming MASKED attendance only when wastewater numbers were well below their December peak.
This document is where I have been keeping track of the science for some time. I fear it's too long now because I don't edit earlier parts, I only add new content at the top
I had the same experience as a retired medical sociologist (PhD thesis in social epidemiology). I began following reports of the epidemic in mid-January 2020; as soon as I read Dr. Nancy Messonnier's prophetic warning (2/25/20, historians should record as a landmark day in the pandemic), I started a newsletter ("Epidemiology 101") to interpret the often confusing and contradictory publicly available information: first for relatives and friends, then on my FB page, and immediately got questions from former students by early March 2020 (I ended the newsletter after 45 issues in July 2021). There is a LOT to understand, and to make public health more difficult policy originally came down on the wrong side of the droplet vs. aerosol divide initially. A lot that seems clear in hindsight was very messy when experienced live.
I am a nurse practitioner, and a deep believer in vaccines, God made the immune system to be amazing and we should use it to our best ability at all times. I do not do social media, I find a few use it responsibly. I get the YLE information directly to my gmail. By far, the most important and poignant comment I have is how frightening, concerning, and saddening is the tweet you posted. I cannot fathom, nor do I want to live in a country where that question would even be thought to be asked, have we not grown or learned anything in the past 200 years. That anyone would even pose the question is beyond my understanding, that people would actually take the time to respond is even more deplorable. A serial killer, who made a victim of one of your family members, I might be able to allow that kind of hate. Under any other circumstances, it is absolutely not acceptable for a civilized, intelligent, first world country. It saddened me beyond words.
True, though remember some of the content you are reading is intentionally posted by foreign interests seeking to destabilize the US, so you never actually know how much is genuine hate vs. foreign propaganda. So please don't lose faith in your fellow citizens just yet.
Dr. J. — I commend you for your calm, professional, and open-minded approach to the wildly emotional nature of both public and political response to this pandemic. I LIKE it that you are trying to understand other points of view. What I DON’T LIKE is how too many responses are vicious, vindictive and violent. I don’t understand this attitude toward you and your colleagues in Public Health. You are the people, the pros, who work harder than anyone else to protect all of us!! And this gets you death threats?! You are the canary in the coal mine. We have no one else to alert us to health and safety issues in a timely and reasoned manner. The government delays, hides, or distorts information and direction we desperately need. And the media? Forget it! In their world, they have to have (or create) monsters or they lose their audience. And scientists? They are being judged and sentenced by people who don’t have a scientific bone in their bodies. They thrive on emotion and they don’t let data (if any is available) get in their way. We used to respect science and the professions that helped keep us safe and healthy. I am so sorry you and your colleagues have been treated so terribly. It’s part of the growing evidence that this country is in big, big trouble. I, for one, deeply appreciate what you are doing and I believe you are smart, sincere, and open-minded. We all need to engage in dialogue that brings us together. We don’t always have to agree with each other, but we do need to work together with respect, courtesy, and basic human decency. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO AND ALL YOU ARE TRYING TO DO.
Your doing great, Katelyn. During Covid19 my biggest surprise was learning how the public was so clueless about emerging germ management being a fluid, exhausting dance while simultaneously playing every orchestral instrument as the data conducted changes in rhythm and key. Sadly politics compounds this often discordant performance. And the audience still doesn't see or understand all that's going on back stage with the goal of everyone going home safe and happy when the curtain closes...until the next germ show. And we epi-folks drop everything and strike up the band again. I started in the band during HIV emergence. Good work Katelyn. Needs saying alot!
You are examining the hard roads we travelled: one with a new, vicious virus, and the second with the unprecedented public debate that was conducted before knowledge of the dangers was broad. We are grateful that you are doing this work. There will be new crises in health and the medical/research/public sectors will benefit from hindsight and the wisdom you glean. 1.1 million Americans and their families don't have the luxury of just closing the book on Covid. We must change the temperature of these discussions. We must leave the bunker and honor science and service to community health, even when leaps of faith are sometimes required but disproven. Science is static and evolutionary. It's complicated for laymen, and we crave absolutes. That's not realistic. Demonizing people doing public health work will de-incentivize future scientists. You are a guide and we appreciate your translations for our daily lives. Thank you. I'm sorry that the rancor is louder than the gratitude.
I am a now retired family practitioner who worked "through" the pandemic.(not entirely sure it is over) We generally escaped the anger and death threats, but it was hurtful to have patients I cared for for over 3 decades view my advice with suspicion and denial. Some high risk people were persuaded after some quality time in the ICU, but some died. One woman I was doing a preop for accused me of wanting her to die when I refused to send in a prophylactic prescription for Ivermectin. I appreciate all the wonderful public health people who put in the long hours to keep us informed during these challenging years.
I applaud your cooperative effort with Kelley K. and am sympathetic to some aspects of her POV (e.g., in 2020, I thought the school closures would do more harm than good), but it's disappointing to see her follow-up piece include a statement such as this: " I am sorry that public health spent the past four years terrifying you about a virus that was never going to be stopped and that we are all going to get at some point..." This statement not only mocks the legitimate concerns expressed by public health officials about a disease that led to a huge number of deaths, it is illogical---i.e., the fact that the virus was never going to be stopped doesn't mean that officials shouldn't have regularly spoken out about the dangers of COVID.
I’m no scientist, nor medical professional, nor public health professional. I’m simply an ordinary senior citizen with a number of significant Covid risk factors. From the beginning of Covid, I NEVER felt public health pros or medical or science pros were trying to terrify me. I felt they were doing their level best to learn about the virus, its dangers and manifestations, and ways to fight it, and doing their best to keep us informed, even as the science changed and expanded — that’s what science does. You want to be terrified of something, read the data sheets that accompany your prescription medications — that will scare the pants off you. But that does not negate the scientific research and proven benefits of your meds. We cannot at this point know whether Covid can’t be stopped or that we are all going to get it. I have worked these last four years to keep myself safe from getting Covid because I still have hopes that scientists around the world are still working on new vaccines and other protective measures that will reduce a Covid infection to something very minor, or maybe stop it in its tracks. But research takes funding, and with Covid, I’d like to see our government investing much more in this research (and research on other serious diseases, too). I applaud all legitimate efforts to inform and educate the public, without media spin or government control. We need the best and most current info and data (and our scientists and PH pros need it more then we do!). The problem is that so many average citizens are tired of hearing about Covid. They refuse to talk about it or read about it or learn anything new about it. That’s the hopeless thing, not whether Covid will be conquered or not.
I appreciate your thoughts. Regarding your comment that you "NEVER felt public health pros or medical or science pros were trying to terrify me," the use of the word "terrify" (not by you, but by the writer whom I quoted) is a political red flag (pun intended). One of the favorite talking points of right wing media in the last few years has been to suggest that those who've adhered to the advice of public health officials regarding vaccines and masking are spineless, clueless conformists who can't think for themselves and cower under their blankets until their government "daddies" tell them it's OK to come out.
Thank you for taking a leap of faith in reaching out and listening to other viewpoints. I really struggle to listen because I feel like there is no reciprocation or respect for science and medicine from the other side. And I hate that there are “sides” to this and that they frequently run along political lines. I’m so very sorry that you, your family, and others in the community have been threatened. I believe that you and your peers are truly the best of us. Thank you.
I love your columns and am sorry about the personal attacks. What I have gotten out of this pandemic is there are a lot of deliberate liars who are willing to say anything true or not to get their own way. An example is the people who refuse vaccines because "I don't trust that new fangled technology", when offered a traditional vaccine they still refuse because the first statement didn't reflect their reasons it was just an excuse.
I started out thinking that most people were telling the truth as they knew it and separating their opinions from the facts. Now I am not so sure. The Barrington dimwits were starting with false premises and going to impossibilities.
I believe that you are sticking to the facts and that the opinions you share are what you truly believe. Of course those beliefs and facts are reinforcing my initial stance so I can't be a good narrator.
I didn't like the last column because I have gotten to the point of ignoring anti vaxxers as being deliberately blind. I have a friend who didn't think covid-19 was as bad because he didn't know anyone who died. His parents are already dead, and he doesn't work in hospitals, or nursing homes. He has a limited social circle and most are the same age. He didn't think any of that was a reason why he personally didn't know anyone at that time who had died of covid-19.
I’m a huge fan. My advice is to stay in your lane. Provide top notch information, assessments and advice. Win in the marketplace of ideas without getting bogged down in engaging or negating the bad actors/info.
Keep it up Katelyn. Your credibility is first rate. Credible sources need to speak loudly and clearly as you do.
I learn from every one of your columns, Katelyn, and appreciate you and your efforts to inform, educate, and listen. Regarding your responses to Kelley's points, we are in desperate need of effective strategies to convey that our behaviors do not exist in a vacuum. In many cases, what we do has an impact on others, and it is our responsibility to care about others and adjust our behaviors even when we perceive low or no personal risk. How do we do this more effectively while not shaming or blaming?
The problem I have seen with those who want others to change their behavior is that they dont explain why we are suddenly asking for these things. Take those who are at very high risk from Covid now, they are and always were at risk from influenza and other diseases. Why do you want others who are at no risk to adjust their behavior now when they didn’t before. Explain. There’s never much of an effort to do that. Personally I thought one big mistake was not to focus on asking people to make very limited changes. The pro mask crowd would have had more success in my view by never asking that masks be worn outside and when conditions improved by saying feel free to take off your mask while engaging in voluntary activities like theater but please keep them on while at a medical facility, grocery or on public transportation. I personally still keep a mask on at medical facilities and on public transport.
Abbie, I understand your comments. I do think we have to give grace to anyone making decisions. As a school board director during the pandemic, we were constantly trying to make decisions with limited information. At times it felt like we had to decide on the most conservative side because there was just not enough information and we had to protect our children and staff. Hind sight is 20 20. Of course we would have made different decisions if we knew everything we know now.
I think this is a good example of revisionist history. Masks in the U.S. were only requested when we were trying to learn about Covid and how it spread (which can include outside in certain situations). It was a NOVEL virus that killed many more than flu (we also at the time didn’t know who was truly at risk). I agree that we should be wearing masks still in the places you mention. Are you wearing them in those places?
Not revisionist at all. I am live in both Illinois and California and where I am in California was requiring outdoor masks at all times, well after we had learned that they were not necessary in most situations. I thought this was a huge public policy error and undermined trust. And yes, as I said I still wear a mask in any health care center and on public transport. I also do so in grocery stores if crowded at all and numbers are surging.
Just curious what area in CA asked that people wore masks outside? I’m in CA and it’s been maskless the whole time outdoors. Esp after vaccines rolled out 2021.
Palm Springs.
The reason it was novel was that it was engineered to do damage to our bodies. Natural viruses do damage incidentally while they are trying to do what Darwin dictates: reproduce as fast as possible. But engineered viruses do damage that is not incidental, but by design. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has a spike protein that is engineered to damage nerves, cause blood clots, and attack the artery walls.
Josh you state a thesis that Covid-19 was engineered (presumably by evil Chinese scientists). But, I would counter that you could make that argument for every flu, bacteria that ever evolved to spread more easily (SARS) or to infect more easily. The scientists who were dispatched to look at the thesis you subscribe to (with obvious disdain for those who don't agree with you, reported two things. One, the Chinese labs were not forthcoming in making early pronouncements about the discovery of a "new virus" and secondly, that there was a greater likelihood of the "Cross species" origin of COVID than any man-made attempt to create a diabolical new virus. I would say that the best evidence around would not support your thesis.
I think you misunderstand. There is an evolutionary benefit to REPRODUCING rapidly. There is an evolutionary benefit to SPREADING more widely. But for a parasite, there is no direct benefit from harming the host. Harming the host is incidental, and over time a parasite learns better to reproduce without harming the host. It may become commensal, because in the long run, what benefits the host benefits the parasite.
But the SARS-CoV-2 virus has features that gratuitously harm us. Its spike protein is not optimal for entering the cell (which is its primary function). This is because the spike protein has extra features that damage nerve and epithelial tissue. This is one way in which we know that the virus is engineered.
We can know it is an engineered virus, but we don't know whodunnit. It could have been China, where biosecurity is lax. It could have been the US, where there are more bioweapons labs than all other countries combined. It could have been a joint venture, Shi collaborating with UNC. It could have been Chinese research sponsored by Dr Fauci at NIH. All these are possibilities that we cannot exclude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIZdz-nnzgM
Your opinion about engineered virus is not unique, and one could construe it has validity, but ONLY in the sense that nature, not humans, engineered the coronovirus recombinant protein to enhance its infectivity and replication capacity. Further, it’s the hosts own immune response that appears to be the culprit responsible for the multisystemic issues seen clinically. The clinical events my colleagues and I have experienced, esp in the early stages of the pandemic have provided us with many opportunities to see how and why the human host suffers so much. It’s not the viral presence alone, rather the host’s immune response to the antigens. You could say, the human immune system is an enabler, “the fall-guy”. Our clinical experiences and subsequent collaborations with a team of cellular biologists, biochemists and molecular immunologists have found some nuances that provide a number of answers to the unresolved issues of a durable treatment for the disease of COVID19 and a credible approach to treatments that go beyond the preventive vaccine approach. References to Dr Fauci as a perpetrator or enabler thru Chinese sources is among the most egregious and ludicrous comments I have encountered in my own study of this pandemic. Dr Fauci did his best dealing with the slings and arrows coming his way. He is an honorable man and has been castigated unfairly in my/our opinion. Why must some nefarious person or human entity be the “fall guy”? Can you accept that evolutionary genetics and science is incredibly complex? If so, it’s worth the time to investigate this far more reasonable avenue for better understanding this novel virus. I respectfully disagree with the belief that this is a human engineered virus. It’s an easy out to blame someone when the science is simply not clear to those who declare such things. History has many forms of miasmas in an attempt to explain the unknown to the unknowing. I can accept the fact that no one is hiding something and there is no conspiracy to cover up the origin since I’ve read and discussed with knowledgeable people and choose not to gain my information from bloggers, YouTube or FB. The video link you provide with the Chinese narrator has a bit of irony that shouldn’t go unnoticed. The message from the article by Rowan Jacobsen is an opinion by journalist with experience in writing about scientific matters, but it is nothing more than an opinion, just as yours is an opinion. The targets for this viral infection are being slowly unraveled and the means to mitigate the multisystems dysfunctions are responding to our approach based on some unique laboratory science and appreciation for repurposed therapy. Some of my previous comments in this YLE and in Topol’s Ground Truths amplify these same issues.
Well said.
and all our "behavior adjusting" of the past 4 years accomplished what exactly? It didn't affect the spread of the virus at all, and we were left with a devastated economy, record inflation, a more depressed, anxious, and sick public, a generation of children behind socially and academically, etc.
What were the societal benefits of covid hysteria?
I think the initial lock down slowed down the spread of the virus enough for health systems to try and set up more infrastructure: masks for essential workers, respirator machines, staffing plans, etc. You are right that we ended up with the virus everywhere. But there was value in a few weeks of shut down.
Beyond that initial time period, the decision points get much harder to make since there was very little data about the virus and about the effect of shut downs. Understanding that nuance better in hindsight is important for planning for future pandemics and emergencies. It is not just a yes or no equation.
Paul, good to see you still around. I think your initial question "accomplished what exactly" is a good question, but your follow-up of "it didn't affect the spread of the virus at al," is actually a testable hypotheses; and from all I've read the test results are that yes indeed, we did slow the spread (slow, not stop), and that places that instituted protective measures early saw more lives saved and lower rates of hospitalization, especially in wave one and the Delta wave. See this study of studies. https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/impact-non-pharmaceutical-interventions-on-covid-19-transmission/. Sometimes buying time buys more than time. It buys saved lives, a sustainable medical infrastructure, a less devastated economy, an unknowable inflation/deflation scenario, and a public even more depressed, anxious and sick. Did we overshoot on some things before we knew everything about COVID? For sure. Did many folks put their heads in the sand, costing extra lives and disruption? For sure. Hopefully the end game is that we learned from this pandemic and will be more prepared for the next. But thanks to those who knowingly and purposefully misled many people, thus engendering even less trust in the medical establishment, I'm not sure that will be the outcome.
Unfortunately the message was divided from the top down from the beginning and people were killed. So all that work was for nothing. Long Covid is going to get us in that it contributes to cardiovascular disease, probably cancer ( top 2 causes of death) and will add to a whole host of diseases but the message is so muddled with “experts who are also biased to push supplements and their own products” taking a lot of band width that it continues to confuse people. So the fact that many countries into 2023 still had excess mortality was not blamed on Covid but the vaccine was disheartening….Especially, when I’m still seeing this clinically. This winter I still had quite a few patients clot and have body parts die off from covid. I cannot ignore their suffering. If they had a crystal ball and could have a choice to avoid getting covid knowing this could happen, they would have. Unfortunately it’s so politicized that their story won’t be acknowledged.
Wow. Really? Behavior adjusting saved many hundreds of thousands of people from getting fatal COVID. Have you ever heard of Johns Hopkins University> They modeled the epidemic and suggest that some one million people died because they failed to take the recommended precautions (vaccines, distancing, effective masking). What studies did you read that support your thesis that "behavior adjusting" didn't "do anything." Here's one of a dozen references I found on the subject. Rev Income Wealth. 2022 Jun; 68(2): 348–392.
Published online 2022 Feb 21. doi: 10.1111/roiw.12570
PMCID: PMC9115509
PMID: 35602915
Excess Mortality Versus COVID‐19 Death Rates: A Spatial Analysis of Socioeconomic Disparities and Political Allegiance Across U.S. States
Janine Aron 1 and John Muellbauercorresponding author 2
Author information Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer
Go to:
Abstract
Excess mortality is a more robust measure than the counts of COVID‐19 deaths typically used in epidemiological and spatial studies. Measurement issues around excess mortality, considering data quality and comparability both internationally and within the U.S., are surveyed. This paper is the first state‐level spatial analysis of cumulative excess mortality for the U.S. in the first full year of the pandemic. There is strong evidence that, given appropriate controls, states with higher Democrat vote shares experienced lower excess mortality (consistent with county‐level studies of COVID‐19 deaths). Important demographic and socio‐economic controls from a broad set tested were racial composition, age structure, population density, poverty, income, temperature, and timing of arrival of the pandemic. Interaction effects suggest the Democrat vote share effect of reducing mortality was even greater in states where the pandemic arrived early. Omitting political allegiance leads to a significant underestimation of the mortality disparities for minority populations.
Keywords: excess mortality, COVID‐19, spatial analysis, U.S. states, political polarization.
Another thing I would have liked to see when things were improving was a call for very limited targeted restrictions instead of a refusal to lift anything which was then met with demands for total lift and the refusal to ever wear a mask. One monthly masks required theater showing. One hour a day at groceries masks required. Etc….. Find ways to try to protect the vulnerable without much burden on the low risk.
I know it's hard not to be discouraged, Katelyn, after the threats and mistreatment to which you've been subjected; but please keep up your good work. There are more of us "out there" in America who respect science and the kind of hard data on which you base your reports than buy into the half baked, paranoiac theories that have led to vaccine hesitancy and a re-emergence of diseases which were considered vanquished decades ago. Thank you for everything you do to keep science, "the candle in the dark"( as Carl Sagan put it) alive.
Katelyn, you glossed over one very important point which must be called out. You noted that you received death threats and that random Twitter posters are running polls on how public health officials should be executed. Can you share with us how many death threats Kelley Krohnert received? I will venture that the number is zero. There is a fundamental difference between the anti-vax crowd (which undeniably encompasses the broader MAGA demographic) and those of us that believe in science and data. The MAGA crowd view death threats as a legitimate way to attempt to shut down discourse and ideas they don't like. I don't know anyone not in that camp who is making death threats, not one.
Your work in reaching out to the other side is both admirable and needed, and I am sorry you have been and undoubtedly continue to be subjected to abuse for talking about science and data. I just fear that talking to people who are cult members isn't going to get you or us far.
Mark, I have a much smaller following than Dr. Jetelina, and was never a figure in national news, so I wasn't subject to the same level of toxic abuse, but I was called many horrible names for advocating for open schools among other things, including that I'm selfish, a racist, a murderer, etc. Some of these people have said they hoped I get very sick with Covid or suffer from Long Covid. People can be very cruel. And, as a reminder, just because someone disagreed with the pandemic response doesn't make them "anti-vax," "MAGA," or a "cult member." I am none of those things. This demonization comes from both sides as you've demonstrated.
Kelley, I am truly sorry that you have been subjected to abuse. We all must try to distinguish between people who are honestly trying to improve our understanding of science/data, and people who are obfuscating the facts (often from a tribal view, on both sides). We also must understand the difficulties of addressing a novel health threat and carrying out the process of science in full view of a public who does not understand the many complexities. We can disagree on interpretation of facts without demonizing each other. As a strong supporter of Katelyn, I thank you for being willing to discuss the intricacies and errors that were/are being made in Public Health.
Kelley, thank you for your thoughtful response. I should have been clearer in my initial comment in that I was not suggesting that someone disagreeing with the pandemic response means that they are automatically any of the adjectives I used in my comment. In fact I personally did not agree with all that was done in response to the pandemic, and we as a society need to learn from those lessons. That said, my core point remains, which is that the anti-vax, MAGA crowd did not politely disagree with the public health response during the pandemic and make reasoned arguments based in science about how to improve the response for the good of everyone. Rather, they actively and maliciously spread lies and misinformation about the pandemic which we know for a fact led to hundreds of thousands of excess deaths. Insanity like injecting bleach and taking horse dewormer became religion for these people. And when you pointed out that their religion is crazy, death threats became the go-to tool to silence critics. This is neither a demonization of others or an expression of a personal opinion, but rather a demonstrable, objective fact well embedded in the historical record.
I do genuinely appreciate your willingness to have a dialogue, which is critical to moving our society to a better place. But having a dialogue does not negate the need to call out the incredible damage that so many people did during the pandemic to our collective public health and to our trust in experts. I am absolutely the first person to say that the global public health response to the pandemic was flawed. But I also recognize that our health officials were dealing with an unprecedented situation, and I truly believe that the vast, vast majority of health professionals were making decisions that that they viewed as grounded in science and for the good of society as a whole.
Questioning orthodoxy is core to the scientific method and should be welcomed, but replacing it with another orthodoxy rooted in misinfomation and lies is not the solution. On this I hope we can agree.
Kelly - I am so sorry that you have experienced what you described. I advocated strongly for our schools to remain open during the pandemic out of a deep concern for children's mental and physical health (School was my safe place as a kid living in a troubled home). I received a lot of hate over that. I know I'm a good person who cares about people (and I assume you are as well). It's hard living in a world where so many assume the worst in others. Thank you for engaging in open conversations. I hope we can continue.
It's not demonization from both sides as you assert. It's stating what trained and objective eyes see and reporting it vs not wanting to hear the message and shooting the messenger. I'd say your assertion is false equivalency and not reason.
Sadly the pro-mask, pro-lockdown crowd (to which I belong) have some nasty people, and some of them are extremely powerful. They tend to abuse this power by silencing/cancelling/censoring critics.
It's stark and deeply disturbing to acknowledge that violence and vitriol against those whom we disagree with has become part of our political everyday life. I'm not sure what should be done now, but when I see the hatred, ignorance and "otherism" in practice, I just want to get away from it. Is there an island somewhere without MAGA hatred or right wing extremists. Or on the other hand, those "false equivalency" writers who seem to think that standing up for open mindedness, science and not prejudice, or advocating communal action to solve our community problems are somehow the same thing as threatening and committing violence against those who aren't in the camp. In my book, freedom of thought is a good thing. But, getting closed and violent about it are not.
I have been called names like Nazi and Pharma Shill online, but some of the worst vitriol I've seen has been directed at female colleagues: apparently a woman speaking as an expert can trigger a special flavor of hatred from some people.
Fortunately for me, I have also had a lot of supportive comments online.
I am the only Virology expert most of my friends and family know, so throughout the pandemic I have answered a huge number of private messages. One of the most common types of message I get is just a practical "what should I do in this situation?" For instance in May 2020 a friend wanted to get her piano tuned but how to make that safe? I suggested (1) masks for all, (2) turn off HVAC and open windows, (3) put fans in windows of the room with the piano sending air from that room out the windows. That's what she did.
Another very common question I get from friends and relatives is "my [relative/in-law/colleague/whoever sent me this article full of sciency words, is it true?" In about 80% of such cases my answer is, "it's nonsense, here's what's wrong."
You nailed it. Answers to “What should I do?” questions are my biggest need. In the early days of the pandemic, there were very few answers (we just didn’t have them yet). And now, my questions (even of my doctors) are pooh-poohed and I’m just told not to worry and to get on with my life. Funny thing — my life may actually depend on getting good, science-based answers, because Covid is still out there and I am still high risk.
Well, here's what I am doing while I undergo chemotherapy:
1. This Friday I'll get a COVID Booster shot. My Oncologist says unfortunately we don't have data on how effective the vaccine is for somebody getting chemo, but we know getting chemo makes a person vulnerable to infections so it's a good idea to get the shot.
2. I avoid indoor dining away from home.
3. I wear a good mask almost every indoor place away from home and pay attention to its fit. On my face the 3M "AFFM" with the clip attached to the back of my head fits better than the 3M "Aura" but your mileage may vary.
4. I follow the numbers for covid AND OTHER INFECTIONS at https://data.wastewaterscan.org/ because ANY infection now would interrupt my chemo.
5. For activities like church and fitness classes, I always wear a mask and I stayed home during the December peak, resuming MASKED attendance only when wastewater numbers were well below their December peak.
This document is where I have been keeping track of the science for some time. I fear it's too long now because I don't edit earlier parts, I only add new content at the top
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SaRn2KQsie-eMbUOmUMHNHVHguRKpVJkk97daBrG9tA/edit
I had the same experience as a retired medical sociologist (PhD thesis in social epidemiology). I began following reports of the epidemic in mid-January 2020; as soon as I read Dr. Nancy Messonnier's prophetic warning (2/25/20, historians should record as a landmark day in the pandemic), I started a newsletter ("Epidemiology 101") to interpret the often confusing and contradictory publicly available information: first for relatives and friends, then on my FB page, and immediately got questions from former students by early March 2020 (I ended the newsletter after 45 issues in July 2021). There is a LOT to understand, and to make public health more difficult policy originally came down on the wrong side of the droplet vs. aerosol divide initially. A lot that seems clear in hindsight was very messy when experienced live.
I am a nurse practitioner, and a deep believer in vaccines, God made the immune system to be amazing and we should use it to our best ability at all times. I do not do social media, I find a few use it responsibly. I get the YLE information directly to my gmail. By far, the most important and poignant comment I have is how frightening, concerning, and saddening is the tweet you posted. I cannot fathom, nor do I want to live in a country where that question would even be thought to be asked, have we not grown or learned anything in the past 200 years. That anyone would even pose the question is beyond my understanding, that people would actually take the time to respond is even more deplorable. A serial killer, who made a victim of one of your family members, I might be able to allow that kind of hate. Under any other circumstances, it is absolutely not acceptable for a civilized, intelligent, first world country. It saddened me beyond words.
The U.S. is not the first world nation you might think it is.
True, though remember some of the content you are reading is intentionally posted by foreign interests seeking to destabilize the US, so you never actually know how much is genuine hate vs. foreign propaganda. So please don't lose faith in your fellow citizens just yet.
Dr. J. — I commend you for your calm, professional, and open-minded approach to the wildly emotional nature of both public and political response to this pandemic. I LIKE it that you are trying to understand other points of view. What I DON’T LIKE is how too many responses are vicious, vindictive and violent. I don’t understand this attitude toward you and your colleagues in Public Health. You are the people, the pros, who work harder than anyone else to protect all of us!! And this gets you death threats?! You are the canary in the coal mine. We have no one else to alert us to health and safety issues in a timely and reasoned manner. The government delays, hides, or distorts information and direction we desperately need. And the media? Forget it! In their world, they have to have (or create) monsters or they lose their audience. And scientists? They are being judged and sentenced by people who don’t have a scientific bone in their bodies. They thrive on emotion and they don’t let data (if any is available) get in their way. We used to respect science and the professions that helped keep us safe and healthy. I am so sorry you and your colleagues have been treated so terribly. It’s part of the growing evidence that this country is in big, big trouble. I, for one, deeply appreciate what you are doing and I believe you are smart, sincere, and open-minded. We all need to engage in dialogue that brings us together. We don’t always have to agree with each other, but we do need to work together with respect, courtesy, and basic human decency. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO AND ALL YOU ARE TRYING TO DO.
Your doing great, Katelyn. During Covid19 my biggest surprise was learning how the public was so clueless about emerging germ management being a fluid, exhausting dance while simultaneously playing every orchestral instrument as the data conducted changes in rhythm and key. Sadly politics compounds this often discordant performance. And the audience still doesn't see or understand all that's going on back stage with the goal of everyone going home safe and happy when the curtain closes...until the next germ show. And we epi-folks drop everything and strike up the band again. I started in the band during HIV emergence. Good work Katelyn. Needs saying alot!
Great metaphor. Thank you for sharing, Robin.
You are examining the hard roads we travelled: one with a new, vicious virus, and the second with the unprecedented public debate that was conducted before knowledge of the dangers was broad. We are grateful that you are doing this work. There will be new crises in health and the medical/research/public sectors will benefit from hindsight and the wisdom you glean. 1.1 million Americans and their families don't have the luxury of just closing the book on Covid. We must change the temperature of these discussions. We must leave the bunker and honor science and service to community health, even when leaps of faith are sometimes required but disproven. Science is static and evolutionary. It's complicated for laymen, and we crave absolutes. That's not realistic. Demonizing people doing public health work will de-incentivize future scientists. You are a guide and we appreciate your translations for our daily lives. Thank you. I'm sorry that the rancor is louder than the gratitude.
I am a now retired family practitioner who worked "through" the pandemic.(not entirely sure it is over) We generally escaped the anger and death threats, but it was hurtful to have patients I cared for for over 3 decades view my advice with suspicion and denial. Some high risk people were persuaded after some quality time in the ICU, but some died. One woman I was doing a preop for accused me of wanting her to die when I refused to send in a prophylactic prescription for Ivermectin. I appreciate all the wonderful public health people who put in the long hours to keep us informed during these challenging years.
I applaud your cooperative effort with Kelley K. and am sympathetic to some aspects of her POV (e.g., in 2020, I thought the school closures would do more harm than good), but it's disappointing to see her follow-up piece include a statement such as this: " I am sorry that public health spent the past four years terrifying you about a virus that was never going to be stopped and that we are all going to get at some point..." This statement not only mocks the legitimate concerns expressed by public health officials about a disease that led to a huge number of deaths, it is illogical---i.e., the fact that the virus was never going to be stopped doesn't mean that officials shouldn't have regularly spoken out about the dangers of COVID.
I’m no scientist, nor medical professional, nor public health professional. I’m simply an ordinary senior citizen with a number of significant Covid risk factors. From the beginning of Covid, I NEVER felt public health pros or medical or science pros were trying to terrify me. I felt they were doing their level best to learn about the virus, its dangers and manifestations, and ways to fight it, and doing their best to keep us informed, even as the science changed and expanded — that’s what science does. You want to be terrified of something, read the data sheets that accompany your prescription medications — that will scare the pants off you. But that does not negate the scientific research and proven benefits of your meds. We cannot at this point know whether Covid can’t be stopped or that we are all going to get it. I have worked these last four years to keep myself safe from getting Covid because I still have hopes that scientists around the world are still working on new vaccines and other protective measures that will reduce a Covid infection to something very minor, or maybe stop it in its tracks. But research takes funding, and with Covid, I’d like to see our government investing much more in this research (and research on other serious diseases, too). I applaud all legitimate efforts to inform and educate the public, without media spin or government control. We need the best and most current info and data (and our scientists and PH pros need it more then we do!). The problem is that so many average citizens are tired of hearing about Covid. They refuse to talk about it or read about it or learn anything new about it. That’s the hopeless thing, not whether Covid will be conquered or not.
I appreciate your thoughts. Regarding your comment that you "NEVER felt public health pros or medical or science pros were trying to terrify me," the use of the word "terrify" (not by you, but by the writer whom I quoted) is a political red flag (pun intended). One of the favorite talking points of right wing media in the last few years has been to suggest that those who've adhered to the advice of public health officials regarding vaccines and masking are spineless, clueless conformists who can't think for themselves and cower under their blankets until their government "daddies" tell them it's OK to come out.
Thank you for taking a leap of faith in reaching out and listening to other viewpoints. I really struggle to listen because I feel like there is no reciprocation or respect for science and medicine from the other side. And I hate that there are “sides” to this and that they frequently run along political lines. I’m so very sorry that you, your family, and others in the community have been threatened. I believe that you and your peers are truly the best of us. Thank you.
I love your columns and am sorry about the personal attacks. What I have gotten out of this pandemic is there are a lot of deliberate liars who are willing to say anything true or not to get their own way. An example is the people who refuse vaccines because "I don't trust that new fangled technology", when offered a traditional vaccine they still refuse because the first statement didn't reflect their reasons it was just an excuse.
I started out thinking that most people were telling the truth as they knew it and separating their opinions from the facts. Now I am not so sure. The Barrington dimwits were starting with false premises and going to impossibilities.
I believe that you are sticking to the facts and that the opinions you share are what you truly believe. Of course those beliefs and facts are reinforcing my initial stance so I can't be a good narrator.
I didn't like the last column because I have gotten to the point of ignoring anti vaxxers as being deliberately blind. I have a friend who didn't think covid-19 was as bad because he didn't know anyone who died. His parents are already dead, and he doesn't work in hospitals, or nursing homes. He has a limited social circle and most are the same age. He didn't think any of that was a reason why he personally didn't know anyone at that time who had died of covid-19.
Keep up the great work
Youre doing the right thing. hang in there.
I’m a huge fan. My advice is to stay in your lane. Provide top notch information, assessments and advice. Win in the marketplace of ideas without getting bogged down in engaging or negating the bad actors/info.