The Lancet Finally Discovers Public Health Is Politics
Here is a recent Lancet cover, which itself is an excellent argument that doctors, which is to say body mechanics, ought not to be put in charge of public health
My argument is that exaggeration this risible from purported guardians of public health destroys their authority to rule on the subject.
Now you can allow that Kennedy has caused damage to whatever your favorite branch of medicine is, but destruction is a mighty word and cannot be believed. Or countenanced.
Destruction is the complete and utter dismantling, the elimination in toto, of a thing. Is this true for any medical practice? It is not true. It is false.
The charge is scurrilous and indicates more about the bringers of the charge than the man accused.
Before the covid panic, hippy chicks in Brooklyn, mostly 40-something first-time moms (aided by science), were growing increasingly “anti-vax”. You could probably have worked out an inverse function of the number of minutes spent in food co-ops and vegan restaurants and whether the broods of these ladies had been “fully” vaxed.
During the covid panic, our nation’s highest medical authorities lied to us. Openly, brazenly, disgustingly, purposely and criminally about the powers of “the vax” and its capacity to harm.
Many lost jobs, and much more, for refusing to acquiesce to “the jab” (which I now understand is also being lied about).
For these crimes, our rulers paid no price. Not directly. But they are paying indirectly, in a way.
After the covid panic, we find the hippy chick attitude about vaccines has spread. Distrust, natural, well-earned and rational, distrust in authorities and their shrill cries of ‘Follow The Science!‘, their How-Dare-You-Question-Us attitude, their ruling many questions Off Limits, distrust in all these, I say, has only increased.
If some people are putting not measles vaccines into their kids, it is these ‘experts’ who must share the bulk of the responsibility.
The editorial which accompanied the hersterical (there is no misspelling; see, e,g. herstory) is aware of this distrust:
…Robert F Kennedy Jr laid out a plan to restore trust. The COVID-19 pandemic saw public faith in Federal health and science plummet—between April, 2020, and September, 2023, the percentage of polling respondents who trusted coronavirus and vaccine information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “a great deal” or “a fair amount”, fell from 83 to 63 percent…
But then they cry “Kennedy has summarily dismissed advisers and experts”. CDC Destroyed, ‘experts’ hardest hit. It was those (I resist the urge to cuss) ‘experts’ who caused the damage. Good riddance to them.
The Lancet writers groan that Kennedy cut government money to programs certain academics liked, and then those same writers whine that Kennedy gave government money to other academics.
Then they say:
Under Kennedy’s leadership, politicisation at the NIH, FDA, and CDC is imperilling the future of US science and innovation and throttling the public health enterprise that keeps the country safe today.
My dear Lancet, public health is politics, and always was so, by definition. The organizations you tout, and benefit from, were always political. They remain so.
You didn’t see it as politics when you were in charge. Now that you are, well, not out, but have slightly less power, you suddenly realize it’s all politics? Please. Where did you think the money came from?
Naturally, they thought it fell from the sky, and was their divine right as ‘scientists’. If I had my druthers, I’d cut funding for the lot, and leave those academics to fend for themselves. If academics had to prove their worth, we’d see a lot fewer of them.
And therefore less politics.
Despite these developments, Kennedy has continued to spread misinformation and push politicised agendas at the expense of the country’s most vulnerable. When called to account for his decisions by Congress, he has been evasive and combative.
The destruction that Kennedy has wrought in one year might take generations to repair, and there is little hope for US health and science while he remains at the helm.
Their “misinformation” merely means ideas they do not enjoy, which we have discussed many times. But now you finally see the justification for my use of hersterical.
That “he has been evasive and combative” reeks of effeminacy.
Combative is what politics is, my dears.
See more here substack.com
Header image: The Guardian