Tucker Carlson on Public Health and Politics
Public health is an evidence-based profession dedicated to improving health and preventing disease. The politicalprocess is how public policy decisions—laws, regulations, tax policies, and the allocation of scarce public resources—are made by elected officials. (Evidence based, we ask?)
By Anne Dachel
On Mar. 16, 2021 ‘Tucker Carlson’ over at Fox News devoted almost 20 minutes of his show to exposing the duplicity and control practices of Dr. Anthony Fauci.
I’ve watched lots of news coverage at MSNBC and CNN where Fauci is always given the last word unchallenged, so it was refreshing to see Carlson examine the restrictions on American life that we’ve been forced to endure because Fauci said so.
What is the science out there that supports Fauci’s demands that we social distance at six feet and get a COVID19 vaccine? Carlson looked into it.
About 12 minutes into the show Carlson brought up the push for the COVID19 vaccine.
He asked two questions about the vaccines that everyone should be asking and noted that no one has answered them.
How effective is this corona virus vaccine?
How necessary is it to take the vaccine?
Carlson raised concerns about blood clots associated with three of the COVID vaccines.
I especially liked his comment:
It turns out there are things we don’t know about the effects of this vaccine and all vaccines by the way. It’s always a tradeoff.
It’s time someone asked why Fauci has so much power over our lives at the same time he doesn’t have to respond to the issues Carlson brings up here.
Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host examines differing COVID guidance from leaders and health experts over the past year
Here Carlson asks questions about the orders for a social distance of six feet to stop the spread of COVID19.
Carlson: But where did that law come from? Who did the scientific research that determined that six feet was the safest distance apart from other people you could be?
Somebody should have asked that question last spring, but as far as we know, nobody did ask.
It turns out that the research that formed the basis of that law came from a German hygienist, Carl Flugge.
It was Flugg who determined that six foot separations were necessary to slow the spread of pathogen.
The CDC went with Flugg’s judgment.
What the CDC didn’t tell us was that Karl Flugg had been dead for a hundred years. His research on social distancing was published in the 19th century, before most Americans had electricity or indoor plumbing.
So why is that research still guiding public health policy in this country in 2021?
It’s a good question. Experts don’t seem to have a good answer.
Last year, one of the top aerosol scientists in Australia, a woman called Lidia Morawska, likened social distancing regulations to a cult ritual.
“The dogma was born. Like any dogma, it’s extremely difficult to change people’s minds and change the dogmas.”
So dogma posing as science.
It was all just faith-based and had massive consequences. Millions of American school children have not been educated for a year because the CDC turned century old German theories about tuberculosis into a kind of modern state-enforced religious faith. …
Yes, our authorities are just that mediocre.
But the most infuriating part of it all is not that they were wrong, but that they won’t admit that they were wrong and apologize for it.
Watch Tony Fauci pretend as if six feet apart were some kind of unquestioned universally recognized physics principle like gravity or photosynthesis….
Fauci: “Everything on here, one way or the other, points to physical separation.”
“Whether it’s no crowds, whether it’s six feet, go out, wear a mask, stay feet away from anyone.”
“When you’re outside, stay at least six feet apart from someone.”
“I think if you stay six feet apart with masks, you can do whatever it is you need to do.”
“Every aspect of that ending the COVID outbreak in 30 days has some aspect of physical separation, whether that’s avoiding crowds, whether that’s staying six feet away from people.”
Carlson: If you stay six feet apart with masks you can do whatever it is you need to do.
Of course it sounds so simple. That’s why every elevator you get into, every airport check-in line you see, every convenience store has on the floor six feet apart on stickers.
It’s not hard. Just change every part of your life, every interaction you have with other human beings, and it’s totally fine. It’s not a big deal.
In the state of Washington, high schools tried their best to comply with Anthony Fauci’s pronouncement.
Here’s how one school adapted its band practice to conform to German germ research from the 1890s.
“Wenatchee High School finding a socially distance solution to get the band back together.
These so-called pods,set up in the band and choir rooms. Individual students getting inside sipping themselves in and then removing their masks to play their instruments or to sing.”
Carlson: Getting less oxygen is good for you, so get inside your little plastic pod like freeze dried people. It’s dystopia. …
The kids had no choice. The science was settled. That’s what we were told.
Well it was settled until last Wednesday when the Journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases found the law of six foot social distancing isn’t actually real. It’s not a law. It was a guess and it’s wrong.
Researchers looked at corona virus case rates in the state of Massachusetts, the school districts there, schools that required six foot social distancing and compared those with school districts that required only three feet of social distancing, and there were some.
Researchers found there was no statistically significant difference in corona virus cases between the two.
And it wasn’t just for students. It was also true for adult staff members.
The study also controlled for corona virus rates in the surrounding community.
It was not shoddy research. It was real, and here’s the conclusion:
“Lower physical distancing policies can be adopted in school settings with masking mandates without negatively affecting student or staff safety.”
This has massive implications, but mostly for people like Tony Fauci, people who spent the last year assuring everyone, the science is clear.
So if you had spent the last year saying that, insisting that 19th century German hygiene research was the last word on social distancing, if you’d staked your rapidly diminishing credibility on that fact, wouldn’t you apologize, now that the fact turns out to be a lie?
But Tony Fauci didn’t apologize for the fake science he’s imposed on the entire country.
He just nodded and kept going. …
Fauci on CNN was asked,
“…Does this study suggest to you that three feet is good enough?”
Fauci: “It does indeed.”
Carlson: It does. Not a big deal, just kept an entire generation of kids from learning anything. We’ll just move forward with the new science.
The charitable interpretation of the clip you just saw is that maybe Tony Fauci is finally learning something about science, because despite what they tell you, science is never final or absolute.
There is no settled science. That’s an oxymoron. Real scientists adjust their conclusions based on the evidence which is always changing. They ignore partisan considerations, but Tony Fauci didn’t. If he had, he’d already have known this because the study in the Journal of Infectious Diseases was not the first study to reach this conclusion.
In fact back in June of last year one of the leading scientific journals in the world, the Lancet, not a small publication, came out with a study on social distancing, and it found this: “For the general public, [that would include schools] evidence shows that physical distancing of more than a meter is highly effective.
So three feet was enough in June, they just didn’t tell us that. Other medical experts were saying the same thing. In fact last summer Dr. Mark Escott, the medical director for the Austin Public Health System, put it this way:
“I know that at three feet there’s about an 80 percent reduction of the transmission of the disease.”
So it’s not actually new information. It was ignored information, and we made policy on the basis of bad information, not on the basis of science, on the basis of lies justified by 19thcentury research into tuberculosis.
So why are they telling us this now?
Here’s one reason: the political balance of the country has changed.
With Joe Biden in charge, Fauci’s party wants to see the schools reopen because the public wants it. Parents are upset, and they should be.
So all of a sudden they’re changing the so-called scientific recommendation .
If that seems too cynical to be real, keep in mind they’ve done it before.
Last summer dozens of public health experts exempted BLM from corona virus restrictions, not because science demanded that BLM get a pass, but because they personally supported BLM.
The so-called scientific community signed a letter that will live forever in infamy claiming, “The risks of congregating during a global pandemic shouldn’t keep people from protesting racism.”
The scourge of white supremacy, the letter said, is a “lethal public health issue that predates and contributes to COVID19.”
Oh, it contributes to COVID19. So you thought it may have escaped from a lab in Wuhan that was in part funded by the US government, with the knowledge of Tony Fauci.
So maybe Tony Fauci and the government of China might have something to answer for, but now we learn from the scientific community that your racism caused COVID.
In June Johns Hopkins epidemiologist Jennifer Nuzzo delared,
“In this moment the public health risks of not protesting to demand an end to systemic racism greatly exceed the harms of the virus.”
It’s hard to believe that a so-called scientist could write something like that on paper and not be held accountable for it….
That same month the governor of New Jersey, Phil Murphy, praised the BLM riots that broke out after the death of George Floyd on Memorial Day. Yes, there was a mandatory stay-at-home order in New Jersey and a public health emergency, of course, that justified it.
But Phil Murphy wasn’t bothered. He said that rioters were “taking to the streets peacefully to create a better future for our entire New Jersey family.”
So if they can justify a riot on the basis of public health, …What can’t they justify? What aren’t they justifying?
Our leaders and public health experts are clearly guided, some of them anyway, by politics. …
And what’s also becoming clear is how much these experts actually know about some of the topic they claim to be expert in. …
It’s just very hard to know what this virus is going to do. Viruses are hard to understand. This one is new, but no one will admit it.
So out of nowhere news stories pop up that seem to have no explanation.
Here’s one example, South Africa. …
Epidemiologists there predicted a surge in corona virus cases this year. Vacationers were returning from around the world, South Africa was still not under a strict lockdown, there was a new strain… There was no vaccine for most people in South Africa. It seemed like the perfect place for what Tony Fauci might call a super spreader event, a disaster.
But that’s not what happened. Since mid January, corona virus infections in South Africa have plummeted from more than 20,000 a day to about 1,000 a day. Less than 5 percent of corona virus tests administered in South Africa are now coming back positive.
The question is why. What is going on in South Africa? And the answer is, we don’t know. …
The problem is when the people in charge of our public health systems won’t admit that they don’t know.
So all of this should prompt some pretty tough questions for our public health experts in this country.
And one of those questions is: How effective is this corona virus vaccine?
How necessary is it to take the vaccine?
Don’t dismiss those questions from anti-vaxxers. Don’t kick people off social media for asking them. Answer the questions, especially now.
The administration would like you to take this vaccine. Joe Biden told you last week, if you don’t, you can’t celebrate the Fourth of July.
It turns out there are things we don’t know about the effects of this vaccine and all vaccines by the way. It’s always a tradeoff.
But in this specific case, Germany, France, Italy and Spain—these are not third world countries—have just suspended the distribution of Astra Zeneca’s vaccine. They’re saying it could be linked to deadly blood clots.
A month ago the New York Times reported the FDA and the CDC were looking into reports the Moderna and Pfizer’s vaccine could be causing blood clots as well.
The paper reported that one 56 year old physician called Gregory Michael developed a severe case of a blood disorder, platelets in his blood dropped three days after taking the vaccine. Without those platelets his blood couldn’t clot. He died of a brain hemorrhage after two weeks in the hospital.
Should this scare you? We don’t know, but the rest of us deserve an answer.
Instead our leaders are acting, once again, as if the science were totally settled, and you’re not allowed to ask a question.
Look at the vaccination rates in certain states and it’s pretty clear some people are not taking the vaccine on purpose.
If you want them to take the vaccine, don’t berate them. Don’t issue more commands. Calm their fear by rationally explaining the benefits and the risks of taking the vaccine. That’s how you deal with adults.
But instead they’re telling you, if you want to see your grandparents ever again, you’ll shut up and take the shot.
CDC spokesperson clip:
“If you and a friend or you and a family member are both vaccinated, you can have dinner together, wearing masks without distancing.
“You can visit your grandparents if you have been vaccinated and they have been too. “
So instead they just lecture us like they’re our parents, which they are absolutely not. …
The patronizing never stops.
As Joe Biden has told us, it’s possible that you can cook a hot dog in your own backyard in July if you’re obedient.
They tell you this is all about protecting the elderly and flattening the curve…
The question is in real life what happens if you are an older person and you don’t obey. Well we have an answer to that.
A 65 year old woman in Galveston, Texas learned on March 11th what happens when you don’t obey.
This was one day after the governor of Texas lifted that state’s mask mandate and reopened Texas.
That woman, apparently believing news reports that it was a free country, walked into a Bank of America branch. That’s when, to keep her safe, Texas police officers violently attacked her. …
(VIDEO SHOWS THE WOMEN SUBDUED AND HANDCUFFED https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72UEvQGj_Dk )
So just to be clear, she wasn’t trying to rob the bank. She didn’t pass the teller a note saying she had a bomb or a firearm, she just wasn’t wearing a mask in a state where there is no mask mandate.
“Is anyone going to get real here?” she asked, she screamed as she’s thrown to the ground by the police. But they did it though to keep her safe.
She was under the impression she could go into a Bank of America branch in full compliance with state law without being thrown to the ground. Texas could be in trouble.
But to be fair, if that woman had read more CNN articles she’d know that actually she had it coming. …
According to CNN, facemasks are a sign of respect.
No mention of respecting people who don’t wear facemasks. They’re not worthy of respect.
But wearing a facemask will “help the US return to normal,” because it is totally normal to shield your face from the people around you. …
Wearing your mask is a sign of respect and if you don’t do it, you’ll be beaten in public for your own good.
And as our media will tell you, it’s not just banks that mandate this new sign of respect. Over at NBC News, a similar piece is now advising readers on how they ought to behave at the gym, unless they too want to get thrown to the ground.
“Instead of taking your mask off to drink from a water bottle, slip the straw under chin of your mask.
“If you need to shower at the gym, shower as quickly as possible and only remove your mask when your face and head is going to get wet.”
So NBC News is now telling you how long you’re allowed to shower and how you’re allowed to drink your water with your mask on….
This is science. Don’t dare question the competence of the people who told you to never wear a mask just a year ago. That would be disrespectful to our public health experts.
And you know what happens to people who show disrespect to public health experts.
Posted by Age of Autism on March 23, 2021 at 06:00 AM in Anne Dachel | Permalink | Comments (3)
Thank you for your coverage of this important piece by Tucker Carlson.
To add to it, here is Dr. Pam Popper’s email message from yesterday, also very important:
The Forbidden COVID-19 Chronicles
The Makers of COVID-19 Vaccines: Johnson & Johnson
Pamela A. Popper, President
Wellness Forum Health
While some people enthusiastically anticipated the release of COVID-19 vaccines, others have a much more cautious view, and a significant percentage of people state that they will not receive ANY COVID-19 vaccines. The new term for people who are concerned about vaccines is “vaccine-hesitant” (medical authorities finally acknowledged that negative name-calling was not helping their cause) and health officials are concerned about this rather large and growing group of people. Why are 35-40% of Americans (depending on the survey cited) refusing to take one of these vaccines? One commonly cited reason is the track record of the vaccine makers.
Take Johnson & Johnson, for example. The company announced that it received Emergency Use Authorization for its single injection COVID-19 vaccine on February 27, 2021. The vaccine was developed by a subsidiary, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies, and is available for individuals age 18 and older.
Both Johnson & Johnson and Janssen have made and distributed drugs and vaccines for a long time in the U.S., and both have paid large fines to state and federal governments. Since 2000, J&J and its subsidiaries have been charged 55 times with criminal or civil crimes and have paid a total of $4,247,381 in fines.
J&J and its subsidiaries paid over $2.2 billion in 2013 in one of the largest healthcare fraud settlements in the history of the U.S. Here are just a few of the details (from Department of Justice documents):
J&J subsidiary Janssen Pharmaceuticals marketed Risperdal, an antipsychotic drug, for unapproved uses. The company’s drug reps promoted Risperdal to doctors and other prescribers who treated elderly dementia patients, falsely claiming that the drug was effective for symptoms like anxiety, agitation, depression, hostility, and confusion.
Blatantly disregarding the fact that at the time Risperdal was only approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, Janssen created an “ElderCare sales force” to market the drug to prescribers. The company’s business plan stated that its goal was to “[m]aximize and grow Risperdal’s market leadership in geriatrics and long-term care.” Written sales aids and promotional materials were developed for reps to use when calling on doctors. The company provided incentives for off-label promotion and based bonuses for its salespeople on total sales of Risperdal in their territories, not just sales for FDA-approved uses. The company also paid kickbacks to doctors who prescribed the drug. Reps told doctors that they would receive generous speaker’s fees if they were prolific prescribers.
The company’s illegal practices resulted in the filing of false claims with federal healthcare programs. Additionally, J&J and Janssen paid kickbacks to Omnicare, Inc., the largest pharmacy specializing in dispensing drugs to nursing home patients. These kickbacks were falsely categorized as market share rebates, data-purchase fees, grants, and educational funding. The kickbacks were designed to incentivize Omnicare’s pharmacists to promote Risperdal to nursing home patients.
Janssen was warned by FDA officials on several occasions that claims that Risperdal was safe and effective were misleading. FDA officials told Janssen executives that behavioral problems in elderly dementia patients were usually not due to psychotic disorders and were more likely “appropriate responses to the deplorable conditions under which some demented patients are housed…”
According to the Justice Department, both J&J and Janssen knew that Risperdal increased the risk of stroke in the elderly. The companies manipulated data in order to cover this up. When a J&J study showed that taking Risperdal significantly increased the risk of stroke and other adverse events, Janssen executives combined the data with other studies to make it look like the drug actually lowered the risk.
A second study confirmed the risk of Risperdal for elderly patients. When it looked like the company was not going to publish the data, a physician involved with the study advised Janssen that “[a]t this point, so long after [the study] has been completed…we must be concerned that this gives the strong appearance that Janssen is purposely withholding the findings.”
Another complication of Risperdal was increased risk of diabetes. First, the company outright lied, promoting Risperdal as “uncompromised by safety concerns (does not cause diabetes).” When confronted with research showing that Risperdal increased the risk of diabetes, just like other antipsychotics, the company hired experts to re-analyze the study and to publish articles stating that Risperdal actually lowered the risk of diabetes.
The company’s behavior seems particularly egregious since the targeted population for the unlawful prescribing of the drug were some of the most vulnerable people. In addition to elderly nursing home patients, Janssen promoted the drug to children and adults who had developmental disabilities. Records show that both J&J and Janssen executives knew that there were several risks associated with prescribing Risperdal to children. These included the risk of elevated levels of prolactin, a hormone that stimulates breast development and milk production. Nonetheless, Janssen’s “Key Base Business Goals” included growing and protecting market share for children and adolescents for Risperdal. Reps were instructed to call on psychiatrists and facilities that treated children, and to promote Risperdal as a safe and effective drug for children with attention deficit disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and autism. The company was warned repeatedly by FDA not to promote the drug for use in children.
It is important to note that there are other side effects of Risperdal that are quite concerning, including tardive dyskinesia, fatigue, drowsiness, fever, weight gain, dry mouth, restlessness, anxiety, insomnia, vomiting, stomach pain, constipation, cough, sore throat, and skin rash.
Drug companies make so much money that multi-billion-dollar fines for criminal behavior are just a cost of doing business. Thus it is not surprising that in 2019, an Oklahoma judge ruled that J&J had intentionally minimized the risks and misrepresented the benefits of opioid drugs. The judge wrote that J&J had used “false, misleading and dangerous marketing campaigns” that “caused exponentially increasing rates of addiction, overdose deaths, and babies born exposed to opioids.” The company was ordered to pay the state $572 million.
I’ve presented here just a couple of the episodes in which J&J and/or its subsidiaries were caught committing criminal fraud and engaging in activities that resulted in considerable harm and even death for large numbers of people. The company is a serial offender, yet the federal government continues to allow it to do business in the U.S., and routinely approves new products submitted by the company, such as its new COVID-19 vaccine.
I can’t fathom that anyone who knows about J&J and its prior bad acts would agree to any medical intervention produced and marketed by it. I certainly won’t.
Posted by: Laura Hayes | March 23, 2021 at 10:12 AM
Thanks, Anne. Tucker Carlson is usually good, and this is one of his best. He nails it.
Posted by: Gary Ogden | March 23, 2021 at 09:48 AM
Tucker Carlson’s show is “must see t.v. for me”. In my humble opinion he has proven to be unafraid to openly question the numerous “narratives” .. such as BLM protests being “too important” they should be exempt from covid restrictions … being propagandized by our main stream media .. and .. like others before him (Lou Dobbs, Bill O’Rielly, Graham Ledger, etc) .. the possibility of him being removed from his show would not surprise anyone.
Having said that .. Tucker said this: “It turns out there are things we don’t know about the effects of this vaccine and all vaccines by the way. It’s always a tradeoff.”
Duh … where has Tucker been the last two DECADES as the vaccine industry … working alongside our public health regulatory agencies .. have worked tirelessly DENYING parents their INFORMED CONSENT on what vaccines .. if any .. those parents want administered to THEIR MOST PRECIOUS RESOURCE .. THEIR CHILDREN?????
State after State have removed all legal EXAMPTIONS .. PHILOSPICAL, RELIGIOUS, MEDICAL … from the most aggressive vaccine policies in the world .. with children being routinely DENIED THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PUBLIC EDUCATION … while at the same time DENYING THOSE PARENTS THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO SUE IN A CIVIL COURT FOR INJURIES CAUSED BY VACCINES.
Parents have been asking the very same questions about vaccine “safety and efficiency” for DECADES without any satisfactory answers from both .. the vaccine industry and public health regulators that are providing NON SATISFACTORY ANSWERS REGARDING COVID VACCINES.
Over 5 BILLION DOLLARS has been awarded to parents and victims of vaccine INJURIES … which should surprise NO ONE .. even Tucker acknowledges ALL VACCINES HAVE RISKS … according to Supreme Court .. vaccines are UNAVOIDABLY UNSAFE .. yet .. THEY ARE MANDATED FOR EVERY CHILD .. NO EXAMPTIONS PERMITTED.
Unfortunately Tucker is far too late to the problem … which has been the IMPOSSIBILITY FOR SCIENCE TO CREATE A “ONE SIZE FITS ALL VACCINE” .. it is not only IMPROBABLY … IT IS SCIENTIFICALLY ACKNOWLEDGED TO BE SCIENIFICALL IMPOSSIBLE … BUT THE RISKS TAKEN ARE BEING FORCED UPON OUR CHILDREN EVERY DAY.
Posted by: Bob Moffit | March 23, 2021 at 08:46 AM