Leighton, we are really happy that you wrote this article. We really need people to write and talk about this dynamic that has been our world for the past year+.
A question - you mention being a frequent listener to DarkHorse, but also that you haven’t come across any new & concerning evidence regarding vaccines. Have you listened to Bret Weinstein’s interview with Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology, and Steve Kirsch? Steve’s disposition makes the interview a hard listen, but the information therein — while inconclusive — raises the red flags on the mRNA COVID vaccines an inch or two further.
Leighton, before I proceed, I want to note, I am not arguing in favor of youtube censoring his videos, and as someone with a PhD in the relevant fields, I've been suggesting (like many scientists) that lab leak should be taken seriously.
I think you've done a good job laying out your thought process, but I think you vastly overestimate Bret Weinstein as a source of good info on this topic. Take for instance his Bill Maher appearance, where he claims that susceptibility to UV light and lack of transmission outdoors is an indication that SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab. A first year virology graduate student could tell you that this is straight up asinine. Many viruses are susceptible to UV light and almost all respiratory viruses transmit much better outdoors than indoors. These things are not evidence of anything one way or the other. Whenever he has said something correct about the evidence in favor or the lab leak, it's clear its from reading the work of other scientists who have actually done close examinations of primary data (people like Alina Chan and the scientists at DRASTIC). He doesn't have any original insights and his explications of others work often puts undue weight on certain lines of evidence over others (e.g. he places the existence of a furin cleavage sight as more pertinent than the lack of mutations in early case sequencing data). He also places absurd weight on the lab leak hypothesis (he claims its close to 90-98% likely), which even someone like Alina Chain would call out of bounds.
I don't have as much expertise on medical science, but the reason doctors across the world haven't adopted this cheap miracle drug is not because of some big pharma conspiracy, it's that there aren't randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that show its efficacy. As a counter-example, take dexamethasone, also a cheap drug, that was adopted world-wide as treatment following solid evidence from RCTs. More absurd, is his idea for resolving the pandemic: have everyone take ivermectin at the same time for a short duration of time. The idea that this will work in a world where you can't get 20% of people to wear a mask is delusional beyond all recognition. Worse yet, convincing people that Ivermectin is some kind of medical drug (when there's no solid evidence for it) could actually get lots of people killed. This is especially galling when there's no good evidence that the vaccines are harmful or particularly risky.
I don't want to waste more time on this, but suffice to say that Weinstein doesn't know what he's talking about, and he jumps from one conspiracy theory to the next (e.g. see his initial comments about election fraud) bringing on whatever credentialed scientist who will back him up (Robert Malone, for instance, has promoted straight quackery: https://twitter.com/uberfeminist/status/1408901303468761091). The fact that he happened to be tangentially right about one thing (lab leak) is not a point in his favor--especially when you look at the broad swatch of his career. For more on what's wrong with Weinstein, please take a look at this article: https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2021/06/youre-probably-not-galileo-scientific-advance-rarely-comes-from-lone-contrarian-outsiders/
A relevant quote from the piece:
"This tendency towards sensationalism and grandiose claims is not restricted to lofty theoretical topics – it also manifests in the explanations offered for mundane events. For example, when encountering technical difficulties recording their podcast in Portland, Bret and Heather speculated that this could be due to ‘external interference’ and placed tinfoil hats on the cameras to reduce the interference, but subsequently revised their opinion, attributing it instead to the effects of radiation-leakage from the Fukushima nuclear plant. They claim, incorrectly, that seafood from the Pacific is now too dangerous to eat. In the same recording, they discuss the dangers of water fluoridation, a classic Bircher conspiracy theory, and describe the evidence for water fluoridation as preposterous, taking pains to point out that it is derived from industrial waste and that it is ‘insane to medicate this way’."
I think there is a tendency among a lot of people to see the breakdown in media institutions and therefore reject all mainstream narratives and take suppression as evidence of proof of the legitimacy of a claim. This is simply put a logical fallacy. Please don't succumb to it.
I feel the same as you, but never could have put it so eloquently. I have not taken the vax, but I'm not anti vax. I've just had the virus, trust my body, and trust other scientists that a combo of super high vitamin D, C, quercitin, can help me get through the virus. And it did, once I started that protocol that I read hospitals recommend, my lungs stopped being irritated and the symptoms finally receded. I still think the vaxx is likely a net good, but why would I take any new medicine if I feel my body can handle it? It's like people have never seen the class action lawsuit medical commercials on things that were formerly deemed safe. The risk may be small (hopefully), but there is still risk, and people have the right to weigh that risk themselves. Some will be wrong and some will be right, but it's better than government mandating new medicines. Also, I think you should have spoke to the FB group that was removed where a hundred thousand women were sharing extreme period issues that were extreme.
At my work most people just had headaches and soreness for a couple days. But a few got hit hard after the second dose, 2 had food poisoning symptoms for a week and said they'll never take it again. That's enough for me to try to be healthier and let my body handle it. If CV makes an extreme come back, maybe I'll get the vax.
Don't vaccinate your baby, not against covid at any rate. Babies are pretty much entirely uneffected by Covid and it will be a couple years before your child is of the age that vaccine apartheid will become as issue for him, and in the meantime networks of people opposed to the vaccine can form and perhaps some justice can be served to some people. The second part it unlikely, but if you can wait and see, why not?
Beautifully written. You captured the feelings of disorientation and paranoia generated by this issue brilliantly.
I feel exactly the same way! Thanks for writing this. Its good to know others are experiencing the same vertigo.
Leighton, we are really happy that you wrote this article. We really need people to write and talk about this dynamic that has been our world for the past year+.
Terrific piece Leighton. Thank you!
A question - you mention being a frequent listener to DarkHorse, but also that you haven’t come across any new & concerning evidence regarding vaccines. Have you listened to Bret Weinstein’s interview with Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology, and Steve Kirsch? Steve’s disposition makes the interview a hard listen, but the information therein — while inconclusive — raises the red flags on the mRNA COVID vaccines an inch or two further.
Leighton, before I proceed, I want to note, I am not arguing in favor of youtube censoring his videos, and as someone with a PhD in the relevant fields, I've been suggesting (like many scientists) that lab leak should be taken seriously.
I think you've done a good job laying out your thought process, but I think you vastly overestimate Bret Weinstein as a source of good info on this topic. Take for instance his Bill Maher appearance, where he claims that susceptibility to UV light and lack of transmission outdoors is an indication that SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab. A first year virology graduate student could tell you that this is straight up asinine. Many viruses are susceptible to UV light and almost all respiratory viruses transmit much better outdoors than indoors. These things are not evidence of anything one way or the other. Whenever he has said something correct about the evidence in favor or the lab leak, it's clear its from reading the work of other scientists who have actually done close examinations of primary data (people like Alina Chan and the scientists at DRASTIC). He doesn't have any original insights and his explications of others work often puts undue weight on certain lines of evidence over others (e.g. he places the existence of a furin cleavage sight as more pertinent than the lack of mutations in early case sequencing data). He also places absurd weight on the lab leak hypothesis (he claims its close to 90-98% likely), which even someone like Alina Chain would call out of bounds.
I don't have as much expertise on medical science, but the reason doctors across the world haven't adopted this cheap miracle drug is not because of some big pharma conspiracy, it's that there aren't randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that show its efficacy. As a counter-example, take dexamethasone, also a cheap drug, that was adopted world-wide as treatment following solid evidence from RCTs. More absurd, is his idea for resolving the pandemic: have everyone take ivermectin at the same time for a short duration of time. The idea that this will work in a world where you can't get 20% of people to wear a mask is delusional beyond all recognition. Worse yet, convincing people that Ivermectin is some kind of medical drug (when there's no solid evidence for it) could actually get lots of people killed. This is especially galling when there's no good evidence that the vaccines are harmful or particularly risky.
I don't want to waste more time on this, but suffice to say that Weinstein doesn't know what he's talking about, and he jumps from one conspiracy theory to the next (e.g. see his initial comments about election fraud) bringing on whatever credentialed scientist who will back him up (Robert Malone, for instance, has promoted straight quackery: https://twitter.com/uberfeminist/status/1408901303468761091). The fact that he happened to be tangentially right about one thing (lab leak) is not a point in his favor--especially when you look at the broad swatch of his career. For more on what's wrong with Weinstein, please take a look at this article: https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2021/06/youre-probably-not-galileo-scientific-advance-rarely-comes-from-lone-contrarian-outsiders/
A relevant quote from the piece:
"This tendency towards sensationalism and grandiose claims is not restricted to lofty theoretical topics – it also manifests in the explanations offered for mundane events. For example, when encountering technical difficulties recording their podcast in Portland, Bret and Heather speculated that this could be due to ‘external interference’ and placed tinfoil hats on the cameras to reduce the interference, but subsequently revised their opinion, attributing it instead to the effects of radiation-leakage from the Fukushima nuclear plant. They claim, incorrectly, that seafood from the Pacific is now too dangerous to eat. In the same recording, they discuss the dangers of water fluoridation, a classic Bircher conspiracy theory, and describe the evidence for water fluoridation as preposterous, taking pains to point out that it is derived from industrial waste and that it is ‘insane to medicate this way’."
I think there is a tendency among a lot of people to see the breakdown in media institutions and therefore reject all mainstream narratives and take suppression as evidence of proof of the legitimacy of a claim. This is simply put a logical fallacy. Please don't succumb to it.
I feel the same as you, but never could have put it so eloquently. I have not taken the vax, but I'm not anti vax. I've just had the virus, trust my body, and trust other scientists that a combo of super high vitamin D, C, quercitin, can help me get through the virus. And it did, once I started that protocol that I read hospitals recommend, my lungs stopped being irritated and the symptoms finally receded. I still think the vaxx is likely a net good, but why would I take any new medicine if I feel my body can handle it? It's like people have never seen the class action lawsuit medical commercials on things that were formerly deemed safe. The risk may be small (hopefully), but there is still risk, and people have the right to weigh that risk themselves. Some will be wrong and some will be right, but it's better than government mandating new medicines. Also, I think you should have spoke to the FB group that was removed where a hundred thousand women were sharing extreme period issues that were extreme.
At my work most people just had headaches and soreness for a couple days. But a few got hit hard after the second dose, 2 had food poisoning symptoms for a week and said they'll never take it again. That's enough for me to try to be healthier and let my body handle it. If CV makes an extreme come back, maybe I'll get the vax.
Don't vaccinate your baby, not against covid at any rate. Babies are pretty much entirely uneffected by Covid and it will be a couple years before your child is of the age that vaccine apartheid will become as issue for him, and in the meantime networks of people opposed to the vaccine can form and perhaps some justice can be served to some people. The second part it unlikely, but if you can wait and see, why not?