I wrote a piece summarizing a few of the things Trump's pick to lead the NIH, Dr. Bhattacharya, got catastrophically wrong — especially in 2020. I’ve criticized public authorities, including for nonsensical and excessive measures (closing parks and beaches?). But let’s not rewrite history either. - ThreadSky

zey.bsky.social • 91 days ago

I wrote a piece summarizing a few of the things Trump's pick to lead the NIH, Dr. Bhattacharya, got catastrophically wrong — especially in 2020.

I’ve criticized public authorities, including for nonsensical and excessive measures (closing parks and beaches?).

But let’s not rewrite history either.

Comments

zey.bsky.social•91 days ago

Were there no points those folks made that were valid? I would say some, especially 2021 onwards — and Francis Collins already conceded that. And some of the censorship directed their way was wrong — more open argument would have been better.

But let’s not forget basic facts.

https://t.co/pQXbuoi51K

rogerailes.bsky.social•91 days ago

Censorship? Are you on crack?

xpostfactoid.bsky.social•90 days ago

I am an admirer of your writings on the pandemic, but this is just crazy perverse. How could someone so catastrophically wrong on the most high-stakes and vital public health questions in the midst of a pandemic (as you detail) be considered an acceptable pick to guide life-and-death policy?

lovemoz2.bsky.social•89 days ago

An absolute disaster. Horrific. Likely all candidates would/will be. He was a co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration on “herd immunity” and a purveyor of LL conspiracy nonsense.

kristyrawson.bsky.social•91 days ago

I appreciate your balanced approach. Agree that closing parks and beaches was VERY bad policy (A reaction against spring break celebrants that was really arguably anti-youth). It should have been reversed much earlier than it was, as I think we had the information to know that it was bad policy.

thelonious08.bsky.social•90 days ago

which is all fine, but 99.9% of the people who see this headline will never read the article, and they'll think you think the Fascist Regime's nominee for the head of NIH is a pretty good guy.

santelli.bsky.social•91 days ago

How do you feel about the headline? https://bsky.app/profile/jfallows.bsky.social/post/3lbydmswzjk2y

zey.bsky.social•90 days ago

I was out and about and didn’t write it myself. I would probably have reversed it — got many things “catastrophically wrong”, as the phrase I use in the piece, has a few points. Agree that it can be misunderstood. @jfallows.bsky.social

santelli.bsky.social•90 days ago

I can appreciate that. Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.

zircosmith.bsky.social•90 days ago

My reading of the Great Barrington Declaration was that it wasn't prescribing only protecting the elderly but rather saying that we should ease up on protecting the less vulnerable, in particular not closing schools. It seemed at the time and still seems like a point upon which reasonable ... /1

zircosmith.bsky.social•90 days ago

... people can disagree, but not an obvious error. After all, Sweden took basically that approach and wound up with fewer excess deaths than most other countries that had more severe restrictions. And Swedish students didn't suffer the consequences of a year or more of remote schooling.

arjaysutton.bsky.social•91 days ago

The upcoming avian flu pandemic will kill 50 million Americans. 49.999 million more than it would without this clown show.

gfnc.bsky.social•91 days ago

Just seconding the great points here. If Bhattacharya had been in charge during the prime part of the pandemic, the death toll in the US would have been much much higher. Put out totally garbage data and analysis early on and completely in left field about who had immunity and why.

gfnc.bsky.social•91 days ago

And thank gods that most of the world didn't adopt the Great Barrington nonsense. Would have killed a lot more everywhere as well.. He would be a complete disaster if we get another pandemic or similar in the near future.

bdowney.bsky.social•91 days ago

Given the glowing treatment by some newspapers, do you think it's more important to highlight his sloppy reasoning and many mistakes, or the occasional cases he was right?

Do you think he was ever intellectually honest?

And is there _any_ evidence that would change?

batterystaple51.bsky.social•91 days ago

already seeing the washington post whitewashing him. like they have a long article and nothing about how absurdly wrong he was. i don’t know if these outlets just suck at basic journalism now or if they are maliciously censoring facts.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply