The Great Barrington Declaration At Five Years

Jeffrey A. Tucker | Zero Hedge

It was 8:45 a.m. and the date was Aug. 23, 2020. We were five months into the pandemic panic. The isolation and strangeness had become unbearable not only to me personally but to vast numbers. The businesses and schools were closed. Anthony Fauci of NIAID and all his media cheerleaders seemed to be the only narrative around.

Everyone was waiting for something. One day rolled into the next, marked by unbearable repetition, each turn of the clock nearly indistinguishable from the last one and the next one. Everyone seemed to be waiting for something to happen but it was not clear what that was.

I had been writing about pandemic planning for 15 years and knew that what was going on was a grave error. Indeed, from January 2020 I had warned that some people imagined that the way to battle a virus was through an elaborate duck-and-cover ritual that contradicted the whole history of public health. By mid-March, 2020, the experiment was on, and the world economy was being strangled.

The usual proponents of free enterprise and civil liberties fell silent. This was mostly for reasons of career protection. It was obvious at the time what everyone was supposed to say: listen to the science, we are all in this together, wear your mask, don't do your own research, stop longing for your "freedumb." Most everyone in the professional classes went along, partially because so many people enjoyed working from home and receiving vast sums from the government dropped directly in their bank accounts.

Desperate for allies in this struggle, I happened to notice a professor at Harvard was posting some sensible things. Not sure why this particular post made it through the censors but it did and I read it. I was thrilled, and decided to try my luck. That early morning, I dropped him a note on Twitter direct messaging. I invited him for dinner. He accepted.

That was the beginning of a long friendship that continues to this day. But it was also the beginning of the hardest years of our lives. Martin Kulldorff and I visited each other and I learned from him: about public health principles, natural immunity, the normal course of respiratory infection waves, how to deal with the many features of such pathogens, and so on.

It was Martin's idea to broaden the discussion. What if we invite a group of top journalists in and offer some expert commentary? This would surely help improve their reporting. Maybe then they would stop simply echoing the crazy claims coming from the CDC and NIH. That struck me as a good idea, so I went to work on logistics. The deadline was tight: two weeks.

The problems began immediately. Not a single reporter responded to my invitation. I could not understand why. Three of the world's top epidemiologists — Martin plus Jay Bhattacharya (now directing the NIH) and Sunetra Gupta — were coming together for their benefit. Why were they not interested in learning more about the subject they were covering for TV and newspapers?

The gathering took place anyway.  

Read more