Connect with us

COVID-19

CDC Chief Confirms Justice Sotomayor Greatly Exaggerated Pediatric COVID Hospitalization Numbers

Published

on

Screen Shot 2021 02 03 at 3.54.56 PM scaled

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention chief Dr. Rochelle Walensky on Sunday set the record straight against Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s false statement that 100,000 children are hospitalized in serious condition and “many” on ventilators, due to COVID-19.

“We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in…in serious condition and many on ventilators” Justice Sotomayor said Friday. Walensky appeared on “Fox News Sunday” where host Bret Baier asked her directly about the Justices comment, and asking her to clarify that numbers show there are fewer than 3,500 children currently being treated with COVID-19.

“Yeah” said Walensky. She quickly moved on to advocate for vaccination saying “but, you know, here’s what I can tell you about our pediatric hospitalizations now. First of all, the vast majority of children who are in the hospital are unvaccinated, and for those children who are not eligible for vaccination, we do know they are most likely to get sick with COVID if their family members aren’t vaccinated.”

Walensky’s statements closely follow the Biden administration’s rhetoric that it is the unvaccinated – of any age – that is “fueling” the pandemic. Baier asked Walensky if she felt responsibility to set the record straight on the exaggerated COVID-19 numbers being spread throughout the Biden administration, liberal media, and now a Supreme Court Justice.

Vehemently staying on message, Walensky responded, “Yeah, here’s what I’ll tell you. I’ll tell you that, right now, 17 — if you’re unvaccinated, you’re 17 times more likely to be in the hospital and 20 times more likely to die than if you’re boosted.”

“And so, what my responsibility is, is to provide guidance and recommendations to protect the American people. Those recommendations strongly recommend vaccination for our children above the age of 5 and boosting for everyone above the age of 18 if they’re eligible” she concluded.

Continue Reading
3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. Sandra McKeon

    January 11, 2022 at 9:54 am

    Not sure if the “yeah” was confirmation on Baier’s # of 3500 or if she just always starts her answers with a “yeah”

  2. Gennaro pupa

    January 11, 2022 at 10:01 am

    Does anyone believe that the FOUNDERS of our country would someday find a LIAR on the Supreme Court of the United States of America?
    Sotomajor……RESIGN NOW!

  3. KP1708

    January 12, 2022 at 9:21 am

    Why is a SCOTUS justice considering facts (right or wrong) NOT PRESENTED IN THE CASE?
    She is not being a judge, rather is acting like an activist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

COVID-19

Former Harvard medical professor says he was fired for opposing Covid lockdowns and vaccine mandates

Published

on

Covid

“My hope is that someday, Harvard will find its way back to academic freedom and independence.” That is the heartfelt message from Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a former Harvard University professor of medicine since 2003, who recently announced publicly he was fired for “clinging to the truth” in his opposition to Covid lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

Kulldorff posted the news on social media alongside an essay published in the City Journal last week. The epidemiologist and biostatistician also spoke with National Review about the incident. Kulldorff says he was fired by the Harvard-affiliated Mass General Brigham hospital system and put on a leave of absence by Harvard Medical School in November 2021 over his stance on Covid.

Nearly two years later, in October 2023, his leave of absence was terminated as a matter of policy, marking the end of his time at the university. Harvard severed ties with Kulldorff “all on their initiative,” he said.

The history of the medical professional’s public stance on Covid-19 vaccines and mandates is detailed by National Review:

Censorship and rejection led Kulldorff to co-author the Great Barrington Declaration in October 2020 alongside Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University. Together, the three public-health scientists argued for limited and targeted Covid-19 restrictions that “protect the elderly, while letting children and young adults live close to normal lives,” as Kulldorff put it in his essay.

“The declaration made clear that no scientific consensus existed for school closures and many other lockdown measures. In response, though, the attacks intensified—and even grew slanderous,” he wrote, naming former National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins as the one who ordered a “devastating published takedown” of the declaration.

Testifying before Congress in January, Collins reaffirmed his previous statements attacking the Great Barrington Declaration.

Despite the coordinated effort against it, the document has over 939,000 signatures in favor of age-based focused protection.

The Great Barrington Declaration’s authors, who advocated the quick reopening of schools, have been vindicated by recent studies that confirm pandemic-era school closures were, in fact, detrimental to student learning. The data show that students from third through eighth grade who spent most of the 2020–21 school year in remote learning fell more than half a grade behind in math scores on average, while those who attended school in person dropped a little over a third of a grade, according to a New York Times review of existing studies. In addition to learning losses, school closures did very little to stop the spread of Covid, studies show.

Continue Reading

Trending