Healthcare
WHO Backtracks From Asymptomatic Spread ‘Very Rare’ To It Was A ‘Misunderstanding’
A top virologist for the World Health Organization (WHO) backtracked Tuesday on a recent statement that the asymptomatic spread of the novel coronavirus is “very rare.” The statement was made several days ago by Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO’s technical lead on the virus.
Kerkhove’s statement was more than significant, it changed everything people have been told about the virus. In fact, it had everyone questioning everything that’s happened over the past three months. The story first published on CNBC and took off like wildfire around the globe.
Think about it, businesses have been shuddered, nearly 40 million Americans had applied for unemployment, schools across the nation were shut down, no summer camps in many states, six feet distance between everyone in public spaces and in many states masks are required in public spaces to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus, health officials told us.
In fact, many people who have questioned the regulations have been publicly shamed and accused of not caring for the elderly or for those with compromised immune systems. So Kerkhove’s statement that the spread of the virus from asymptomatic persons (that means those showing no symptoms) to others as being “rare,” would actually mean that the regulations and mask-wearing were extreme and unnecessary.
The WHO is now announcing that asymptomatic transfer of #COVID19 is rare.
This is a complete turnaround from their initial information.
So, the masks are unnecessary without symptoms?
The social distancing was unnecessary without symptoms?
Was this all a game?@GregKellyUSA pic.twitter.com/fjcVDv7eEN
— Dr. David Samadi (@drdavidsamadi) June 9, 2020
“We made everybody do something we called social distancing,” said Dr. David Samadi, Director of Men’s Health and Urologic Oncology at St. Francis Hospital in Roslyn, New York.
He told Newsmax that “we made everybody across the board to wear masks. At the beginning, if you had symptoms you wore a mask to protect others but then we gave in, because the CDC and everybody kept changing back and forth.”
Dr. Samadi also told this reporter that the studies Kerkhove referred to were from very significant places, like Singapore, where government agencies have done extensive contact tracing on the virus and said that the WHO is doing “damage control” to cover for its original misguidance.
However, by Tuesday, after the backlash from people around the globe, Kerkhove backtracked.
She said during a live Q & A that streamed on social media, “I was responding to a question at the press conference. I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that. I was just trying to articulate what we know. And in that, I used the phrase ‘very rare,’ and I think that that’s a misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare. I was referring to a small subset of studies.”
What? She knew what she was saying but then she was just trying to “articulate what we know” and that she was referring to a “small set of subset studies.” She said there was a “misunderstanding.” None of what she said really changed the fact that she actually believed, based on the testing, that asymptomatic transmission is “very rare.”
“We do know that some people who are asymptomatic or some people who don’t have symptoms can transmit the virus on,” she said. Then she added that she was relying on “two or three studies”, as well as unpublished reports from some countries to the WHO for her statement. Then she tried to explain that based on some models (mind you not studies), the virus could have a higher rate of infection transmission from asymptomatic persons to others.
“Some estimates of around 40 percent of transmission may be due to asymptomatic, but those are from models, and so I didn’t include that in my answer yesterday but wanted to make sure that I covered that here,” she said.
Folks, we should never be afraid to question the facts. The backtracking on Kerkhove’s original statement that transmission from asymptomatic persons is ‘very rare’ is deeply concerning.
If anything, impartial scientific studies and a commission to study the government’s response to this novel coronavirus must be done so that we understand the real impact of this virus and the decisions made by our leadership.
For those people that lost their lives and for those whose lives were turned upside down that’s the least we can do.
education
Republican Lawmakers Launch Investigation into Withholding of Data on Gender-Related Treatments for Minors
Republican lawmakers are opening an investigation into the withholding of data from a government-funded study on the effects of gender-related medical treatments for minors. This inquiry, as reported by National Review, centers on concerns over the politicization of science and the transparency of taxpayer-funded research.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R., Wash.), chairwoman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, strongly condemned the withholding of study findings. “This is a clear example of the politicization of science at the expense of children,” Rodgers said. “Research funded by taxpayer dollars through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) should be publicly disclosed regardless of the results, and Americans deserve access to the truth.” She added that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will investigate the matter.
At the heart of the investigation is a study led by Johanna Olson-Kennedy, medical director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles. The study, which began in 2015 and received $5.7 million in NIH funding, examines the effects of gender-affirming care in adolescents, focusing on 95 minors, averaging 11 years old, who were treated with puberty blockers. Over nine years, the study has reportedly received nearly $10 million in federal funding.
In a recent interview with The New York Times, Olson-Kennedy stated that puberty-blocking drugs had not resulted in significant mental health improvements for the children in the study. Instead, she argued that the children were already in good condition prior to the treatments. This claim appears to conflict with a 2020 paper by the same research team, which reported that nearly a quarter of the cohort had endorsed lifetime suicidal ideation prior to receiving puberty blockers.
Olson-Kennedy has been withholding the complete data, citing political concerns. According to The New York Times, she feared that the findings could be “weaponized” to support legal efforts to ban gender-related treatments for minors. She worried that the results might be used in court to argue against the use of puberty blockers.
Republican lawmakers were swift to condemn this action. Morgan Griffith (R., Va.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, criticized the withholding of the data, calling it “irresponsible and inappropriate.” He emphasized that the American public has the right to “follow the science” even when findings contradict certain political agendas.
Representative Diana Harshbarger (R., Tenn.) echoed these sentiments, calling it “outrageous” that taxpayer-funded research could be suppressed to align with a particular political viewpoint. “This is a glaring example of why NIH must be reformed with measures like those initiated by Chair Rodgers to ensure transparency, standards of objectivity, and the removal of conflicts of interest in federal taxpayer-funded scientific and medical research,” she told National Review.
Brett Guthrie (R., Ky.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, emphasized the need for transparency from public health institutions. He expressed frustration that the study’s findings were not being published, stating, “Not publishing the results of taxpayer-funded research in fear of political blowback… fundamentally undermines the very nature of scientific research.” He further called for the immediate suspension of NIH funding for the study until the results are made public.
According to the NIH, Olson-Kennedy’s team received more than $950,000 in government funding for 2023 alone. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.) highlighted that by receiving nearly $10 million in taxpayer dollars, Olson-Kennedy has an obligation to provide the public with the study’s results. He accused the left of hiding scientific data that doesn’t align with their agenda, adding, “When the science doesn’t back up their point of view, they will gladly try to hide it.”
Olson-Kennedy, who is also the president-elect of the United States Professional Association for Transgender Health, has been a vocal advocate for gender-affirming medical treatments for minors. In a previous study, she co-authored research that claimed chest reconstruction surgery (mastectomy) had a positive effect on transmasculine minors and young adults.
-
Israel5 days ago
Israel Scores Major Strategic Victory in Iran Strike
-
Elections5 days ago
Prosecutors in Key PA County Uncover ‘Large-Scale’ Voter Fraud Scheme
-
Israel3 days ago
Netanyahu Looks to Expand Peace Deals with Arab Nations Post-Conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah
-
Nation4 days ago
Jewish Man Shot on Way to Synagogue in Chicago by Man Yelling ‘Allahu Akbar’