Did Fauci Lie? Implications for Pain...

Started by drusso
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
In January 2021, Fauci communicated with Vivek Murthy, who would soon become surgeon general, and then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky about the issue. In one message, Fauci said that a second dose of an mRNA COVID vaccine could “theoretically” be “associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”

In another exchange, Murthy expressed his own concerns about the vaccines, telling Fauci, “I’ve been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well.” The following day, Murthy flagged an announcement from the World Health Organization advising pregnant women to avoid the Moderna COVID vaccine at the time.

The texts are particularly notable because of how they compare with Fauci’s public messaging about COVID vaccination and pregnancy. Just days after his private discussion about the potential miscarriage risk, Fauci publicly offered a much more reassuring assessment of the vaccines for pregnant women. In one interview about a week later, Fauci stressed multiple times that there are “no red flags” showing adverse effects for pregnant women. He later said that it’s “pretty clear” pregnant women should get vaccinated.

Fauci did not publicly discuss the possibility of miscarriage that he had raised in private, nor did he mention Murthy’s concerns about potential effects on a developing baby.

Peter Hasson, a former news editor, said he and his wife had to scrape by during the pandemic because his then-pregnant wife refused to be vaccinated, apparently sharing the same private concerns as Fauci and other medical professionals before we had more data.

“My wife was pregnant and in her clinical year of PA school at this time,” Hasson said. “But virtually none of the hospitals or doctors offices in the … area would accept PA students for clinical rotations if they weren’t vaccinated — even if they were pregnant, even if they had the antibodies — because they were following Fauci’s advice.”
 
In January 2021, Fauci communicated with Vivek Murthy, who would soon become surgeon general, and then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky about the issue. In one message, Fauci said that a second dose of an mRNA COVID vaccine could “theoretically” be “associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”

In another exchange, Murthy expressed his own concerns about the vaccines, telling Fauci, “I’ve been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well.” The following day, Murthy flagged an announcement from the World Health Organization advising pregnant women to avoid the Moderna COVID vaccine at the time.

The texts are particularly notable because of how they compare with Fauci’s public messaging about COVID vaccination and pregnancy. Just days after his private discussion about the potential miscarriage risk, Fauci publicly offered a much more reassuring assessment of the vaccines for pregnant women. In one interview about a week later, Fauci stressed multiple times that there are “no red flags” showing adverse effects for pregnant women. He later said that it’s “pretty clear” pregnant women should get vaccinated.

Fauci did not publicly discuss the possibility of miscarriage that he had raised in private, nor did he mention Murthy’s concerns about potential effects on a developing baby.

Peter Hasson, a former news editor, said he and his wife had to scrape by during the pandemic because his then-pregnant wife refused to be vaccinated, apparently sharing the same private concerns as Fauci and other medical professionals before we had more data.

“My wife was pregnant and in her clinical year of PA school at this time,” Hasson said. “But virtually none of the hospitals or doctors offices in the … area would accept PA students for clinical rotations if they weren’t vaccinated — even if they were pregnant, even if they had the antibodies — because they were following Fauci’s advice.”
sigh.

footnote?
 
They may not have to look very far as Trump uses his scientific expertise to slash vaccines:


AAP doesn't seem to agree with him. Maybe they will be indicted in Congress like Fauci:

My expectation is the greatest harm that will come from this is parents hell bent on defying it.

If anything it will take the wind out of the sail of the antivax movement.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
In January 2021, Fauci communicated with Vivek Murthy, who would soon become surgeon general, and then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky about the issue. In one message, Fauci said that a second dose of an mRNA COVID vaccine could “theoretically” be “associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”

In another exchange, Murthy expressed his own concerns about the vaccines, telling Fauci, “I’ve been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well.” The following day, Murthy flagged an announcement from the World Health Organization advising pregnant women to avoid the Moderna COVID vaccine at the time.

The texts are particularly notable because of how they compare with Fauci’s public messaging about COVID vaccination and pregnancy. Just days after his private discussion about the potential miscarriage risk, Fauci publicly offered a much more reassuring assessment of the vaccines for pregnant women. In one interview about a week later, Fauci stressed multiple times that there are “no red flags” showing adverse effects for pregnant women. He later said that it’s “pretty clear” pregnant women should get vaccinated.

Fauci did not publicly discuss the possibility of miscarriage that he had raised in private, nor did he mention Murthy’s concerns about potential effects on a developing baby.

Peter Hasson, a former news editor, said he and his wife had to scrape by during the pandemic because his then-pregnant wife refused to be vaccinated, apparently sharing the same private concerns as Fauci and other medical professionals before we had more data.

“My wife was pregnant and in her clinical year of PA school at this time,” Hasson said. “But virtually none of the hospitals or doctors offices in the … area would accept PA students for clinical rotations if they weren’t vaccinated — even if they were pregnant, even if they had the antibodies — because they were following Fauci’s advice.”
A theoretical risk is just that, theoretical. Do you discuss every theoretical risk of everything you do with every patient? I've never known a doctor who did.

The studies we had at that time didn't show an increased risk of miscarriage. Nor have any of the studies we've done since then.

You know what really does increase the risk of both miscarriages and, worse, still births? Getting COVID.
 
A theoretical risk is just that, theoretical. Do you discuss every theoretical risk of everything you do with every patient? I've never known a doctor who did.

The studies we had at that time didn't show an increased risk of miscarriage. Nor have any of the studies we've done since then.

You know what really does increase the risk of both miscarriages and, worse, still births? Getting COVID.
I think he, and a lot of others, felt they had a public health mission to get people vaccinated, even if it meant that some info was omitted or suppressed, for the greater good. Would you agree with that?

I don't think it was nefarious but I don't like it.
 
I think he, and a lot of others, felt they had a public health mission to get people vaccinated, even if it meant that some info was omitted or suppressed, for the greater good. Would you agree with that?

I don't think it was nefarious but I don't like it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they thought that, but we've not seen any evidence of anything like that from the vaccine standpoint.

But, similar to my above post, we've all done that before too. Who among us hasn't downplayed really rare side effects to help convince a patient to take a med/get a procedure that we truly felt was beneficial to them? I sure as hell don't bring up the risk of sudden cardiac death every time I prescribe azithromycin unless the patient is at increased risk of it and I'm covering my backside (usually if I don't really want to prescribe it in the first place).
 
I wouldn't be surprised if they thought that, but we've not seen any evidence of anything like that from the vaccine standpoint.

But, similar to my above post, we've all done that before too. Who among us hasn't downplayed really rare side effects to help convince a patient to take a med/get a procedure that we truly felt was beneficial to them? I sure as hell don't bring up the risk of sudden cardiac death every time I prescribe azithromycin unless the patient is at increased risk of it and I'm covering my backside (usually if I don't really want to prescribe it in the first place).
I think downplaying rare side effects is generally appropriate.

What happened during COVID by health officials and the media was something entirely different.

 
Because, freedom. We don't exactly have a homogenous, compliant population. Also, a death rate or % of population is probably a lot more objective number to compare.
As I said before .......selfish

There are a lot of incidences where personal freedom, while important, does not trump the benefit of the collective.

For all the freedom folks... why is it mandatory to wear a seat belt.? why doesn't your personal freedom to not wear a seat belt not carry the day here?
 
As I said before .......selfish

There are a lot of incidences where personal freedom, while important, does not trump the benefit of the collective.

For all the freedom folks... why is it mandatory to wear a seat belt.? why doesn't your personal freedom to not wear a seat belt not carry the day here?
I find most people are selfish. Some are better at self-deception, virtue signaling is a strong force of late, and some people are truly great at thinking of others, but that’s the exception. I also find most self-respecting folks don’t like being told what to do.

My state recently changed the helmet law, and it is now optional. It blows my mind how few people wear helmets now. I think helmet use would be more common if the risks were clearly stated and people were encouraged to follow the data. The rampant lack of helmet use seems to be a reaction by many to previously being forced to use them. People do dumb things.

The whole 2020 mask thing was absurdity at its finest. Wearing vanity masks with 1/4” holes was dumb virtue signaling. Refusing to wear a mask because it was mandated was really dumb. Being honest with people, giving the “why” and trusting them to make decisions usually works better than nanny-state policies, at least in America where a lot of people have a rebellious streak.
 
I find most people are selfish. Some are better at self-deception, virtue signaling is a strong force of late, and some people are truly great at thinking of others, but that’s the exception. I also find most self-respecting folks don’t like being told what to do.

My state recently changed the helmet law, and it is now optional. It blows my mind how few people wear helmets now. I think helmet use would be more common if the risks were clearly stated and people were encouraged to follow the data. The rampant lack of helmet use seems to be a reaction by many to previously being forced to use them. People do dumb things.

The whole 2020 mask thing was absurdity at its finest. Wearing vanity masks with 1/4” holes was dumb virtue signaling. Refusing to wear a mask because it was mandated was really dumb. Being honest with people, giving the “why” and trusting them to make decisions usually works better than nanny-state policies, at least in America where a lot of people have a rebellious streak.
I think most people are ok with state laws for these things.

It was bizarre when Biden mandated everyone get the COVID vaccine, in addition to federal mask mandates. What a surreal time.
 
Tell us more about your beef with Trump/Fauci’s response to Covid and how, a priori, you would have done it perfectly?
Quarantine those at high risk (old, comorbidities), develop herd immunity by allowing very low mortality demographics to continue working and keep the world going. Modulate the lockdown severity based on local hospital bed occupancy on a week by week basis.

By month 6 into the pandemic we had enough data (for those with functioning brain cells who hadn't completely succumbed to hysteria, brainwashing, and tribalism) to unequivocally know this was the right solution - thank you, Sweden. Economies could have been saved, spiraling inflation avoided, pediatric mental health crisis and preventable suicides avoided, other unnecessary deaths caused by the lockdowns avoided.

Frankly, this is a no **** Sherlock solution, and it was literally published by the now NIH director, Jay Bhattacharya, as the "Great Barrington Declaration." Progressives went crazy. For this, he was censored from social media. He was ultimately correct.

You don't hear much from these liberals now a days...
 
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Quarantine those at high risk (old, comorbidities), develop herd immunity by allowing very low mortality demographics to continue working and keep the world going. Modulate the lockdown severity based on local hospital bed occupancy on a week by week basis.

By month 6 into the pandemic we had enough data (for those with functioning brain cells who hadn't completely succumbed to hysteria, brainwashing, and tribalism) to unequivocally know this was the right solution - thank you, Sweden. Economies could have been saved, spiraling inflation avoided, pediatric mental health crisis and preventable suicides avoided, other unnecessary deaths caused by the lockdowns avoided.

Frankly, this is a no **** Sherlock solution, and it was literally published by the now NIH director, Jay Bhattacharya, as the "Great Barrington Declaration." Progressives went crazy. For this, he was censored from social media. He was ultimately correct.

You don't hear much from these liberals now a days...
The amount of revisionist history is extraordinary. Not surprising though.

Pulling all protective measures 6 months in would have been a nightmare. Would have been just in time to maximize the spread of the delta variant. Hospitals were already over capacity that fall. Ventilator shortages. Bodies stacked in freezer trucks because the morgues were full.

Protect the frail people and let the young healthy people get sick? Who exactly is taking care of the old frail people?

Yes, some of the restrictions were excessive or went on too long. Schools probably should have reopened sooner. Once we hit omicron which was more contagious but less severe, and the vaccine was widely available, all restrictions should have been lifted.

Classic ignorant person’s response to a complicated situation. “The experts were partially wrong so we shouldn’t trust them about anything! Clearly this podcaster knows better!”
 
in Oct 2020, the death rate due to covid related disease was still 8% of all deaths, which is above pandemic level.

and then B.1.1.7 came out in December, which was more deadly than previous. then the delta.




1788868766778.png



imagine if the Great Barrington declaration had been followed. that spike in Jan-Feb would have been catastrophic.