I have been watching Steve Kirsch making a valiant effort, trying every which way to get a respected physician, scientist, public health official, college official, essentially anyone that he could think of, to debate his team of experts on vaccine and mask safety and efficacy. He thought that since he’s been defined as the #3 misinformation spreader, that the powers that be would be happy to prove him wrong. Well unfortunately, no one will have anything to do with him or his band of formerly well respected physicians and experts. They have been happy to essentially dismiss him out of hand, so despite the lure of a $1,000,000 for a 3 hour recorded debate, he has NO takers.
I have come up with a variation on that theme which necessarily removes Steve from the mix initially but hopefully providing some incentive for mainstream media (MSM) to consider reporting on this. Here goes…please know that I’m eager to hear your thoughts and feelings. Correct me when you think I’m seeing it wrong or if you’ve got any suggestions or additions that might make this proposal more appealing or effective.
As public confidence in our government, MSM and public health authorities has significantly dropped over the last year, our goal is to create an inclusive, independent, international Covid-19 Commission. It would be designed to assess vaccine efficacy and safety, along with clinical trial data from vaccine manufacturers. I propose utilizing VigiAccess - rather than VAERS
For those not familiar with this site, it is the W.H.O’s adverse events reporting system which provides global reporting data on ALL medicines and vaccines. At the time of this writing, they listed 3,614,767 adverse reactions to the Covid-19 vaccines. They don’t differentiate between vaccines however so you must type in Covid-19 vaccine not vaccines - exactly as I’ve written or it won’t provide the requested information.
Just for fun, I typed in ivermectin, which shows the report going back to 1992 with a cumulative total of 6,311 reported adverse reactions. Prior to Covid, it was estimated that 3.7 BILLION prescriptions had been written for this amazing medicine. As over 27% of the world’s population are currently using ivermectin, that number has grown exponentially. I was listening to Bill Maher a week ago and he mentioned that it was known that millions of people, human beings, not horses, had taken ivermectin. So make that billions of people Bill!
Getting back on track with this esteemed panel, it would function much like the FDA and CDC advisory panels have, mirroring time given to review documents, time spent in round table discussions and time given for each member to come to their own conclusion. We could also consider the option to allow questions from heads of our public health agencies, should they have questions for this panel. It is absolutely essential that any members of the panel not have ANY conflicts of interest, either with the pharmaceutical industry or public health agencies. The one exception might be to consider inviting a few of the high level, senior public health agency Ph.D./MD employees who quit their job because of their concerns about trials or interpretation of data, to participate. Locating eminent professionals who meet these criteria AND who have not already been perceived as being "misinformation" spreaders, will be the biggest challenge but we can work on creating criteria for participation. To encourage MSM and public health agency acceptance, we would accept their list of the 10 top misinformation spreaders and enlist them to accept the conclusions of this Commission. Who could realistically refuse the conclusions of such a process?
Do I think the public health agencies would like this idea? Obviously not, as they have much to lose, but as long as we are transparent and present a reasonable opportunity that has the potential to dispel their perceived misinformation, then how can they refuse to support this effort? This independent commission becomes even more important to pursue as the UK has dropped their weekly reporting of Covid hospitalizations and death. That information had been a valuable source of accurate and transparent hospitalization and death data that was broken down by categories: unvaccinated, 1 vaccination, 2 vaccinations and 3 vaccinations( 1 booster) . Their reporting from week 13 of 2022 documents that the more jabs one has gotten, the worse the outcome regarding hospitalization and death. Lots of information is provided but go to page 42-43 to see the startling data I highlight below. Comparing unvaccinated deaths to those with 2 and 3 doses, the results are nothing short of terrifying. Comparing those 60-69 years of age who were unvaccinated, 116 deaths were reported. Among those with 2 doses, 135 deaths were recorded while those with 3 doses experienced 774 deaths. Moving to an older group age 70-79, the unvaccinated deaths for that week were 140, those with 2 doses showed 171 deaths but those with 3 doses showed the astonishing deaths of 1,668 people. If that’s not horrifying enough, let’s move to the last group of 80 year olds and older. The unvaccinated had 147 reported deaths while those with 2 doses had 224 deaths while those taking a 3rd dose experienced 2,940 deaths.
The U.K. also provides a chart showing ER visits resulting in a hospital admission by vaccination status in Table 14. There you’ll see that the numbers are even worse than the deaths, again based on vaccination status.
Moving along to masks, I hold an opinion that isn’t a popular one by those who are opposed to the mandates. As a psychologist, I realize that I come to this issue with a focus on people’s emotions rather than facts. Yes, there does not appear to be any uncontested science that clearly shows a significant advantage of mandating masks. What people don’t seem to appreciate however is the psychological component that is creating considerable distress to countless Americans. Having been fed fear porn for the last 2 years, people are beyond frightened of getting Covid. They are terrified. The simple remedy of wearing a mask has allowed people to begin to feel a sense of having some control over this virus. From my perspective and from video demonstrations that I’ve seen online, cloth and surgical masks are not effective, but people continue to happily wear them. (Even while outdoors and alone!) Yes, if a Covid infected person sneezes in your face and you’re wearing a mask, I believe it would help reduce the viral load that is seeking to enter your nose and mouth. Will it prevent all small viral particles from entering? No it won’t, but it certainly will stop some, thus reducing the all important viral load. The biggest factor the masks provide, in my opinion, is a psychological sense of safety and having some control. In truth, this is simply no different from children carrying around a blanket, or bankee, which was the term my daughter used or a woobee that was carried by a little boy in the ever popular Mr. Mom movie, starring Michael Keaton. We called them security blankets. Did the kids need it to keep warm? Absolutely not. Did they carry them around to help them feel safe and comforted? Absolutely. Ideally everyone should have the option to wear or not wear a mask but obviously a mandate takes that freedom away from us. Let me remind you of other “freedoms” that have been taken from us over the years; a seat belt takes the freedom to drive without a strap across our chest and lap while a bicycle/motorcycle helmet takes the freedom to feel the wind moving through your hair away from us. Requiring our children to be educated, either from a public or private school, or homeschooling, takes some parental freedoms away from us as well. Living in community has its restrictions, but overall, we benefit more than we are required to give up I believe.
I have a confession to make. Although I was relieved to see the mask mandate removed from Oregon, over a month ago, I distinctly remember pulling up to my local supermarket, parking and then sitting in the car thinking. My mask was hanging on the gear shift as it’s been for 2 years. ( I did upgrade from cloth to N95 when initial research suggested that was most effective) Should I take the mask with me or should I bravely go where I haven’t gone in 2 years with my face exposed? Remember, I’m a former psychologist so of course I had some talking to myself to do. Stepping back from my creeping, unanticipated anxiety, I pushed through, left the mask in the car, held my head up high, shoulders back and I walked into the store fully exposed. Interestingly, I was surprised to see about 1/3 of the customers were wearing all manner of masks, just as they had been doing for the last 2 years. I made it through shopping without any additional anxiety I’m happy to report. Each subsequent time I entered the market, my walking up to the entrance anxiety lessened each time. Today I can honestly report 2 things. I no longer feel any anxiety walking into the market unmasked and the percentage of people wearing masks has continued to drop. Over time, I suspect people feel increasingly comfortable with some return to normalcy. If however, people choose to continue to wear a mask in indoor or outdoor settings, by all means, knock yourself out. My advice would be, go with those cute cloth ones as they’re so much easier to breath in, they add a fashion statement and since you believe masks will help, you might as well enjoy the pretty one you’re wearing.
Do not disrespect people by suggesting they be told fairy tales about masks "for their own good." That is psychological manipulation, and is exactly the rationale for mandates. And N95s are not one whit better than any other mask readily available--there is no RCT showing a benefit against a virus. As Steve Kirsch himself has pointed out, an effective mask costs about $800.