Scientists Slam The Nice Barrington Declaration
While Trump’s administration is keen to create a “defense force” by deliberately allowing a coronavirus outbreak, major scientific organizations are criticizing a system that they say could be life-threatening and impossible.
The plan, drafted by three scientists in a controversial document called the “Great Barrington Declaration,” simply seeks to protect “unsafe” people and allows everyone to be infected with COVID-19. The authors discussed the process in a meeting with two White House officials last week.
This week, U.S. Head of State Heath Anthony Fauci, head of the World Health Organization, as well as more than a dozen groups representing thousands of infectious diseases and health experts have pushed back a number of cases.
“We need to look the stadium in the eye and say it’s nonsense,” Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told ABC News on Thursday.
“There has never been a time in the history of human health that has been used as a precautionary measure to prevent the spread of disease, let alone the epidemic. It’s a scientific and moral crisis, “WHO chief executive Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said Monday.
And on Wednesday, a team of 80 researchers described the hypothesis as “a dangerous heresy unrelated to scientific evidence” in a letter published in The Lancet, a leading medical journal.
The Great Barrington Declaration, published on a website sponsored by psychologists, states that coronavirus is not a threat to most people, and therefore “those at risk should be allowed to resume their normal lives.” Addressing “significant concerns about the physical and psychological damage to existing COVID-19 routes,” the letter advocates the restoration of personal training, the opening of restaurants and businesses, and the resumption of major conferences such as concerts and sporting events.
So far, the letter has been signed by more than 35,000 scientists and medical professionals – even some of the signatories, such as “Dr. A Johnny Bananas” and “Professor Cominic Dummings,” have been found to be liars.
The architects are three scientists from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford universities, some of whom have been telling developers for months that the virus will not kill you. Last week he met Alex Azar, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and Scott Atlas, a Stanford neuroradiologist on the White House coronavirus task.
All of them expressed their opinion. Later, Azar sent a message that he had heard “a significant boost to Trump’s policy of cracking down on those who are at risk of opening up schools and workplaces.” And in a call to the White House on Monday, unidentified officials mentioned the Great Barrington Declaration to reporters. “We do not accept the views,” said one official, according to the Washington Post. “The plan recognizes the principles that the president has been sitting on for several months.”
Great Barrington’s announcement sparked months of speculation over a pandemic that the federal government has failed to control. More than 216,000 Americans have died. Life has been improved in every way: Jobs have been lost on a large scale, meetings and conventions have been canceled, and businesses, schools, and restaurants have been closed. Evidence suggests that the epidemic is plagued by non-COVID-19 complications: People are delaying cancer screening and stroke treatment, and many older people have problems with mental health and drug use.
As the world anticipates a vaccine, “epidemic fatigue” is spreading in the US and elsewhere. In the UK, as the COVID-19 lawsuit returns, lawmakers are protesting against public outcry as they seek to establish a second curve.
But many scientists say that permanently stopping healthy people from becoming infected with the virus is not a viable option.
Up to 90% of the US population is still living with HIV, according to a recent CDC estimate. Health experts are concerned that allowing germs to spread unchecked in healthy people, in the absence of vaccinations, illnesses, hospitalizations, and many deaths, not to mention more medical ones. And even young people, who are healthy after death, are less likely to spread the virus in high-risk groups or join “long-term” people with chronic illness for months. It also does not guarantee that survivors will be protected forever: No one knows how long the self-defense will take, and there have been few reports.
Experts also say that it may not be possible to exclude millions of Americans who are “at risk” who are older, have problems that they had in the past, or live in multicultural families. The Great Barrington Declaration seeks to exclude these groups from other areas but does not provide a framework for how to do so.
“Promoting the idea of a ‘self-defense group’ as recently published as a response to the COVID-19 epidemic is inappropriate, careless and ill-informed,” said leaders of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and HIV Medicine Association, representing more than 12,000 infectious diseases and 6,000 HIV / AIDS experts, in a statement Wednesday.
In a joint statement Wednesday, well-known 14 health organizations have declared “the ideas offered by the Great Barrington Declaration NOT to be scientifically relevant” and “have given lives unnecessarily and unnecessarily.”
“Advertising is not a process, but a political one,” wrote the groups, which include the American Public Health Association, the Association of Public Health Laboratories, and the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Security. “It ignores medical expertise. It affects frustrated people. Instead of just selling false hope that will be restored, we need to focus on how to tackle the epidemic safely, carefully and equally.”
And a team of 80 researchers is opposed to the Great Barrington Declaration with an open letter: John Snow Memorandum, named after a 19th-century physician who researched London’s cholera epidemic and is known to be the author of modern medicine.
In the letter, the signatories acknowledged that there had been “a weakening and a decline in faith” in view of the ongoing protests in countries that have failed to receive “sufficient resources to address the epidemic and its public challenges.”
But people will not allow the spread to spread to large groups of people, said the letter, which was led by 30 researchers and signed by 50 others related to public health, epidemics, medicine, health policies, and more.
Measures such as testing and public consultation should be carried out, “and should be supported by financial programs and organizations that promote local responses and address the inequalities that have grown with the epidemic,” he wrote. He cited Japan, Vietnam, and New Zealand as countries that have shown that expansion can be managed.
“The evidence is clear: improving the expansion of the COVID-19 group is the best way to protect our institutions and the economy until a safe and effective vaccine arrives in the coming months,” he wrote.
“We can’t have distractions that dampen our positive response; it is important that we take immediate action based on the evidence. ”