https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1j5r3o9/jay_bhattacharyas_confirmation_hearing_proves_the/
Jay Bhattacharya's Confirmation Hearing Proves the Lockdown Skeptics Won >Trump's nominee for NIH director once stirred major controversy for >criticizing lockdowns, mask mandates, and school closures. Yesterday,
Senate Democrats didn't even raise the issue.
Christian Britschgi | 3.6.2025 4:15 PM
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly >versionCopy page URL
Jay Bhattacharya | Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom
(Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)
Tomorrow will be the fifth anniversary of then-New York Gov. Andrew
Cuomo's first statewide emergency declaration issued in response to
COVID-19, setting up a long series of orders shuttering down businesses, >closing schools, and ordering people to stay in their homes.
When enacted in early March 2020, Cuomo's order was the consensus policy >response to the pandemic, endorsed by the first Trump administration and >quickly replicated by most red state governors.
Meanwhile, critics of lockdowns were dismissed as dangerous, fringe >characters who were peddling "nonsense" solutions or even experimenting >with"human sacrifice."
As it happens, yesterday was the Senate confirmation hearing of one such >lockdown critic—Stanford professor and medical researcher Jay
Bhattacharya, whom President Donald Trump has tapped to head the
National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Bhattacharya was an early critic of lockdowns and masking. He is perhaps
best known for his co-authorship of the October 2020 Great Barrington >Declaration, which criticized school closures and society-wide
restrictions and instead argued for a strategy of "focused protection"
that would "allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their
lives normally."
This was a hugely controversial position to take at the time.
Former NIH Director Francis Collins demanded a "quick and devastating >published take down" in an email to his underling Anthony Fauci. Fauci
would later describe the Great Barrington Declaration as "nonsense."
Public health officials and Democratic politicians either condemned the >declaration or ignored it as they tightened pandemic restrictions in the
fall and winter of 2020.
Yet five years on, at Bhattacharya's confirmation hearing, Democrats
were completely mum about his COVID-era research and advocacy.
Not a single Democrat mentioned the Great Barrington Declaration. None >bothered to press Bhattacharya on his opposition to once-consensus
opinions on lockdowns, masking, and school closures.
Despite having every opportunity and incentive to attack Bhattacharya as
a dangerous crank nominee, the minority on the Senate's Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee chose not to even mention what
were once his most controversial views.
Instead, Democrats almost exclusively focused their questions on the
Trump administration's recent pauses of NIH grant and advisory
committees and caps on grantees' indirect research spending. Sen. Bernie >Sanders (I–Vt.) asked Bhattacharya if he'd lead a campaign against food >companies' advertisement of unhealthy snacks to children.
When Bhattacharya's COVID views were mentioned, the comments came from >Republican senators heaping praise on him.
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R–Neb.), Nebraska's governor during the pandemic,
thanked Bhattacharya for helping him to keep schools open. Sen. Jim
Banks (R–Ind.) called the Great Barrington Declaration "undeniably right."
Bhattacharya himself was unapologetic about his criticism of
lockdowns—saying that Florida ended the pandemic with lower all-cause >mortality than California, as did Sweden vis-à-vis its neighbors.
Democrats' silence and Republicans' praise is a remarkable touchstone.
It's yet more proof that five years on from the start of the COVID-19 >pandemic, the lockdown skeptics have won the argument.
Critics of lockdowns can publicly express the idea that lockdowns don't
work as an uncontroversial matter of fact. Past defenders of lockdowns
are now unwilling to back the policies in public, not even in a lockdown >skeptic's confirmation hearing for a high-ranking public health position.
This shift of the Overton window is remarkable by itself.
It's also suggestive of where the NIH is headed in a second Trump >administration.
At his confirmation hearing, Bhattacharya criticized past NIH leaders
for stepping outside their role as scientists to tell people what to do >during the pandemic and attempting to silence debate instead of
encouraging it.
"The role of scientists is to say these are the risks by giving more
data," said Bhattacharya. "Science should be an engine for freedom,
knowledge and freedom."
It's a refreshing sentiment and one that would seem to take the most >authoritarian COVID-era policies off the table in any future crisis.
Michael Ejercito wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1j5r3o9/jay_bhattacharyas_confirmation_hearing_proves_the/
Jay Bhattacharya's Confirmation Hearing Proves the Lockdown Skeptics Won
Trump's nominee for NIH director once stirred major controversy for
criticizing lockdowns, mask mandates, and school closures. Yesterday,
Senate Democrats didn't even raise the issue.
Christian Britschgi | 3.6.2025 4:15 PM
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly
versionCopy page URL
Jay Bhattacharya | Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom
(Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)
Tomorrow will be the fifth anniversary of then-New York Gov. Andrew
Cuomo's first statewide emergency declaration issued in response to
COVID-19, setting up a long series of orders shuttering down businesses,
closing schools, and ordering people to stay in their homes.
When enacted in early March 2020, Cuomo's order was the consensus policy
response to the pandemic, endorsed by the first Trump administration and
quickly replicated by most red state governors.
Meanwhile, critics of lockdowns were dismissed as dangerous, fringe
characters who were peddling "nonsense" solutions or even experimenting
with"human sacrifice."
As it happens, yesterday was the Senate confirmation hearing of one such
lockdown critic—Stanford professor and medical researcher Jay
Bhattacharya, whom President Donald Trump has tapped to head the
National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Bhattacharya was an early critic of lockdowns and masking. He is perhaps
best known for his co-authorship of the October 2020 Great Barrington
Declaration, which criticized school closures and society-wide
restrictions and instead argued for a strategy of "focused protection"
that would "allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their
lives normally."
This was a hugely controversial position to take at the time.
Former NIH Director Francis Collins demanded a "quick and devastating
published take down" in an email to his underling Anthony Fauci. Fauci
would later describe the Great Barrington Declaration as "nonsense."
Public health officials and Democratic politicians either condemned the
declaration or ignored it as they tightened pandemic restrictions in the
fall and winter of 2020.
Yet five years on, at Bhattacharya's confirmation hearing, Democrats
were completely mum about his COVID-era research and advocacy.
Not a single Democrat mentioned the Great Barrington Declaration. None
bothered to press Bhattacharya on his opposition to once-consensus
opinions on lockdowns, masking, and school closures.
Despite having every opportunity and incentive to attack Bhattacharya as
a dangerous crank nominee, the minority on the Senate's Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee chose not to even mention what
were once his most controversial views.
Instead, Democrats almost exclusively focused their questions on the
Trump administration's recent pauses of NIH grant and advisory
committees and caps on grantees' indirect research spending. Sen. Bernie
Sanders (I–Vt.) asked Bhattacharya if he'd lead a campaign against food
companies' advertisement of unhealthy snacks to children.
When Bhattacharya's COVID views were mentioned, the comments came from
Republican senators heaping praise on him.
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R–Neb.), Nebraska's governor during the pandemic,
thanked Bhattacharya for helping him to keep schools open. Sen. Jim
Banks (R–Ind.) called the Great Barrington Declaration "undeniably right." >>
Bhattacharya himself was unapologetic about his criticism of
lockdowns—saying that Florida ended the pandemic with lower all-cause
mortality than California, as did Sweden vis-Ã -vis its neighbors.
Democrats' silence and Republicans' praise is a remarkable touchstone.
It's yet more proof that five years on from the start of the COVID-19
pandemic, the lockdown skeptics have won the argument.
Critics of lockdowns can publicly express the idea that lockdowns don't
work as an uncontroversial matter of fact. Past defenders of lockdowns
are now unwilling to back the policies in public, not even in a lockdown
skeptic's confirmation hearing for a high-ranking public health position.
This shift of the Overton window is remarkable by itself.
It's also suggestive of where the NIH is headed in a second Trump
administration.
At his confirmation hearing, Bhattacharya criticized past NIH leaders
for stepping outside their role as scientists to tell people what to do
during the pandemic and attempting to silence debate instead of
encouraging it.
"The role of scientists is to say these are the risks by giving more
data," said Bhattacharya. "Science should be an engine for freedom,
knowledge and freedom."
It's a refreshing sentiment and one that would seem to take the most
authoritarian COVID-era policies off the table in any future crisis.
HeartDoc Andrew's profile photo
HeartDoc Andrew
Feb 14, 2024, 12:34:03?PM
to
In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).
Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
"convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
longer effective.
Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry ( https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ
) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
So how are you ?
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Michael Ejercito wrote:
https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1j5r3o9/jay_bhattacharyas_confirmation_hearing_proves_the/
Jay Bhattacharya's Confirmation Hearing Proves the Lockdown Skeptics Won >>> Trump's nominee for NIH director once stirred major controversy for
criticizing lockdowns, mask mandates, and school closures. Yesterday,
Senate Democrats didn't even raise the issue.
Christian Britschgi | 3.6.2025 4:15 PM
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly
versionCopy page URL
Jay Bhattacharya | Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom
(Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)
Tomorrow will be the fifth anniversary of then-New York Gov. Andrew
Cuomo's first statewide emergency declaration issued in response to
COVID-19, setting up a long series of orders shuttering down businesses, >>> closing schools, and ordering people to stay in their homes.
When enacted in early March 2020, Cuomo's order was the consensus policy >>> response to the pandemic, endorsed by the first Trump administration and >>> quickly replicated by most red state governors.
Meanwhile, critics of lockdowns were dismissed as dangerous, fringe
characters who were peddling "nonsense" solutions or even experimenting
with"human sacrifice."
As it happens, yesterday was the Senate confirmation hearing of one such >>> lockdown critic—Stanford professor and medical researcher Jay
Bhattacharya, whom President Donald Trump has tapped to head the
National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Bhattacharya was an early critic of lockdowns and masking. He is perhaps >>> best known for his co-authorship of the October 2020 Great Barrington
Declaration, which criticized school closures and society-wide
restrictions and instead argued for a strategy of "focused protection"
that would "allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their
lives normally."
This was a hugely controversial position to take at the time.
Former NIH Director Francis Collins demanded a "quick and devastating
published take down" in an email to his underling Anthony Fauci. Fauci
would later describe the Great Barrington Declaration as "nonsense."
Public health officials and Democratic politicians either condemned the
declaration or ignored it as they tightened pandemic restrictions in the >>> fall and winter of 2020.
Yet five years on, at Bhattacharya's confirmation hearing, Democrats
were completely mum about his COVID-era research and advocacy.
Not a single Democrat mentioned the Great Barrington Declaration. None
bothered to press Bhattacharya on his opposition to once-consensus
opinions on lockdowns, masking, and school closures.
Despite having every opportunity and incentive to attack Bhattacharya as >>> a dangerous crank nominee, the minority on the Senate's Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee chose not to even mention what
were once his most controversial views.
Instead, Democrats almost exclusively focused their questions on the
Trump administration's recent pauses of NIH grant and advisory
committees and caps on grantees' indirect research spending. Sen. Bernie >>> Sanders (I–Vt.) asked Bhattacharya if he'd lead a campaign against food
companies' advertisement of unhealthy snacks to children.
When Bhattacharya's COVID views were mentioned, the comments came from
Republican senators heaping praise on him.
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R–Neb.), Nebraska's governor during the pandemic,
thanked Bhattacharya for helping him to keep schools open. Sen. Jim
Banks (R–Ind.) called the Great Barrington Declaration "undeniably right." >>>
Bhattacharya himself was unapologetic about his criticism of
lockdowns—saying that Florida ended the pandemic with lower all-cause
mortality than California, as did Sweden vis-à-vis its neighbors.
Democrats' silence and Republicans' praise is a remarkable touchstone.
It's yet more proof that five years on from the start of the COVID-19
pandemic, the lockdown skeptics have won the argument.
Critics of lockdowns can publicly express the idea that lockdowns don't
work as an uncontroversial matter of fact. Past defenders of lockdowns
are now unwilling to back the policies in public, not even in a lockdown >>> skeptic's confirmation hearing for a high-ranking public health position. >>>
This shift of the Overton window is remarkable by itself.
It's also suggestive of where the NIH is headed in a second Trump
administration.
At his confirmation hearing, Bhattacharya criticized past NIH leaders
for stepping outside their role as scientists to tell people what to do
during the pandemic and attempting to silence debate instead of
encouraging it.
"The role of scientists is to say these are the risks by giving more
data," said Bhattacharya. "Science should be an engine for freedom,
knowledge and freedom."
It's a refreshing sentiment and one that would seem to take the most
authoritarian COVID-era policies off the table in any future crisis.
HeartDoc Andrew's profile photo
HeartDoc Andrew
Feb 14, 2024, 12:34:03?PM
to
In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).
Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given
moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
"convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and
self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
longer effective.
Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry (
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ >> ) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
So how are you ?
I am wonderfully hungry!
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: The LORD says "Blessed are you who hunger now ..."
Shame on andrew, look at his red face.
He is trying to pull a fast one. His scripture bit is found among these:
'14 Bible verses about Spiritual Hunger'
Psalms
81:10 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: >open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.
Proverbs
13:25 The righteous has enough to satisfy his appetite, But the stomach of >the wicked is in need.
Joel
2:26 And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of
the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my
people shall never be ashamed.
Psalms
107 For he satisfies the thirsty and fills the hungry with good things.
Acts
14:17 "Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by >giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying
your hearts with food and gladness."
someone eternally condemned & ever more cursed by GOD perseverated:
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: a very very very simple definition of sin ...
Does andrew's "definition" agree with scripture? Let's see in 1 John:
John wrote this to christians. The greek grammer (sic) speaks of an ongoing >> status. He includes himself in that status.
1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us.
1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, >> and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is >> not in us.
ReplyPermalinkOn Sat, 8 Mar 2025 08:19:33 -0800, Michael EjercitoMangina, try being wonderfully hungry.
I am wonderfully hungry!He did it to you again, you brainwashed twit. Not only did he totally
dismiss whatever idiotic point you were making, he even changed the
Subject: He's probably the reason you suffer the delusion that you're
an American or that your chunky self is 'hungry'.
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: The LORD says "Blessed are you who hunger now ..."
Shame on andrew, look at his red face.
He is trying to pull a fast one. His scripture bit is found among these:
'14 Bible verses about Spiritual Hunger'
Psalms
81:10 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: >open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.
Proverbs
13:25 The righteous has enough to satisfy his appetite, But the stomach of >the wicked is in need.
Joel
2:26 And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of
the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my
people shall never be ashamed.
Psalms
107 For he satisfies the thirsty and fills the hungry with good things.
Acts
14:17 "Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by >giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying
your hearts with food and gladness."
someone eternally condemned & ever more cursed by GOD perseverated:
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: a very very very simple definition of sin ...
Does andrew's "definition" agree with scripture? Let's see in 1 John:
John wrote this to christians. The greek grammer (sic) speaks of an ongoing >> status. He includes himself in that status.
1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us.
1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, >> and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is >> not in us.
ReplyPermalinkOn Sun, 9 Mar 2025 10:05:39 -0700, Michael EjercitoNithing, there is no justification for anyone to shackle either me
Mangina, try being wonderfully hungry.If I'm hungry, I eat a nice meal or sandwich; not listen to some
Then you will be rapture ready!
criminal quack. You'll wish you never met the slant-eyed charlatan
when you and he are shackled together on the boat back to Manila.
ReplyPermalinkOn Sun, 9 Mar 2025 11:41:46 -0700, NOT Michael EjercitoDr. Chung and I are American citizens!
Loose Cannonabout an hour agoGook, there is EVERY legal and moral justification for ICE to shackle
If I'm hungry, I eat a nice meal or sandwich; not listen to someNithing, there is no justification for anyone to shackle either me
criminal quack. You'll wish you never met the slant-eyed charlatan
when you and he are shackled together on the boat back to Manila.
nor Dr. Chung on a boat to Manila.
you two gooks and deport you back to your respective Asiatic
shitholes.
Loose Cannonabout an hour ago
ReplyPermalinkOn Sun, 9 Mar 2025 10:05:39 -0700, Michael EjercitoNithing, there is no justification for anyone to shackle either me
Mangina, try being wonderfully hungry.If I'm hungry, I eat a nice meal or sandwich; not listen to some
Then you will be rapture ready!
criminal quack. You'll wish you never met the slant-eyed charlatan
when you and he are shackled together on the boat back to Manila.
nor Dr. Chung on a boat to Manila.
Michael
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: The LORD says "Blessed are you who hunger now ..."
Shame on andrew, look at his red face.
He is trying to pull a fast one. His scripture bit is found among these:
'14 Bible verses about Spiritual Hunger'
Psalms
81:10 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: >open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.
Proverbs
13:25 The righteous has enough to satisfy his appetite, But the stomach of >the wicked is in need.
Joel
2:26 And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of
the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my
people shall never be ashamed.
Psalms
107 For he satisfies the thirsty and fills the hungry with good things.
Acts
14:17 "Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by >giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying
your hearts with food and gladness."
someone eternally condemned & ever more cursed by GOD perseverated:
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Subject: a very very very simple definition of sin ...
Does andrew's "definition" agree with scripture? Let's see in 1 John:
John wrote this to christians. The greek grammer (sic) speaks of an ongoing >> status. He includes himself in that status.
1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us.
1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, >> and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is >> not in us.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 11:41:46 -0700, Michael Ejercito
<MEjercit@HotMail.com> wrote:
Loose Cannonabout an hour ago
ReplyPermalinkOn Sun, 9 Mar 2025 10:05:39 -0700, Michael EjercitoNithing, there is no justification for anyone to shackle either me
Mangina, try being wonderfully hungry.If I'm hungry, I eat a nice meal or sandwich; not listen to some
Then you will be rapture ready!
criminal quack. You'll wish you never met the slant-eyed charlatan
when you and he are shackled together on the boat back to Manila.
nor Dr. Chung on a boat to Manila.
There is every justification. You both refused to leave on your own.
The ICE police will have no other choice when enforcing a deportation
order
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 157:16:35 |
| Calls: | 10,384 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,056 |
| Messages: | 6,416,476 |