Connect with us

Healthcare

FLASHBACK: WHO Senior Official Said ‘If I had COVID-19, I want to be treated in China’

Published

on

Senior Advisor to the World Health Organization’s Director-General Dr. Bruce Aylward said in February that if he was diagnosed with COVID-19, he would want to be treated in China.

“The first thing in the response is there has to be a shift in mindsets. Again, around the world, people are thinking oh gosh how do we live with this and manage this disaster instead of gosh this virus is gonna show up in our country, we’re gonna find it within the first week,” he said at the time.

Dr. Aylward led the WHO’s mission to China in February and praised the Chinese government’s response to the emerging epidemic and described their efforts to contain the virus as “ambitious, agile and aggressive” after he and his team returned.

“We’re going to find every case. We’re going to go after every contact. We are going to make sure that we isolate them and keep these people alive.” Dr. Aylward explained, “So they survive in the case. The rest of the world would access the expertise of China. They’ve done this at scale. They know what they’re doing and they’re really really good at it. And they’re really keen to help.”

He added, “If I had COVID-19, I would want to be treated in China.”

Dr. Aylward and the WHO are under intense scrutiny by the Trump administration after President Donald Trump announced this week that he’s pausing U.S. funding to the organization over its alleged “China-centric” nature.

Some of what the President was referring to comes from Dr. Aylward’s response to the pandemic. During a recent interview with a Hong Kong based-reporter Taiwan’s status with the WHO (it’s currently banned from membership), however, he responded that she had “already talked about China” and then hung up when pressed again to comment.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

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Your email address will not be published.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