Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Full Video: W/ Dr. Justin Feldman & Director Jamie Seltzer (Patreon)

Published:
2022-10-10 14:43:00
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

Full video for patrons only! See you tonight on Callin. KTF - B

Files

Previews only

What Does It Mean to "TRUST The Science"?

After Briahna interviewed Dr. Vinay Prasad last month, some listeners, along with tweeters from further afield, recommended other COVID experts to offer a different view. This week, Briahna interviewed one of those people -- Dr. Justin Feldman, a social epidemiologist from Harvard's School of Public Health. She's also joined by Jamie Seltzer, Director of Scientific and Medical Research at #MeAction. I asked them about Prasad's central claim that advice around boosting requires more nuance as we learn more about the limitations of vaccines, how long covid factors into policy planning, and what it even means these days to "trust science" now that the CDC has gotten so much wrong.

Comments

Anonymous

Two big fears hanging over us: fear of disease, and a fear of dystopia. The Zombie Apocalypse is nigh!

Louis Waweru

This sounds like a better way to be thinking about things, not everything deserves equal weight. -- The mentioned drug available for immunocompromised people or those who can't take the vaccines: Evusheld (Tixagevimab/cilgavimab).

Anonymous

I think a lot of the controversy is around MRNA vaccines specifically. They are suspicious cause of the redacted studies, the 75 years of it being hidden, the weirdness with Fauci being involved in all of it. Then let's just drop the MRNA vaccines and start looking at different vaccines, like the Cuban ones for instance... Also, don't know if you picked up on Dr. Seltzer's shade that she threw at Dr. Jeffery Sachs being an "economist" that is speaking about epidemiology.

Anonymous

I would love an interview with RFK Jr, Dr. Peter McCullough, or Dr. Robert Malone.

Anonymous
>>93322526

I just listened to Dr. Jeffrey Sachs on the Grayzone! He's fantastic. He made some comparisons between NYT reporting during Vietnam (Seymour Hersch-era) and NYT up to & during Iraq war (Judith Miller). We don't have a reliable MSM anymore. They work for the Oligarchs. Same with the CDC & FDA. I believe it was by design to defund those agencies to the point where they are funded by Corporations "application fees" or legal bribes. Same as our politicians. And no, it wasn't a Republican secret plot. The Dems were/are willing participants. I am NOT anti-vax. My grown kids had all their shots as children. We had the Covid J&J vax when they first came out. But, the lack of transparency and the amount of excuses & flat-out denial of what our govt is doing now, is really strange. I would take the Cuban vaccine if it was offered here. It is NOT an MRNA type, and has been very effective. I'm also not against masks, but I don't believe mandates work. Apparently, that makes me a child-hating MAGA flat-earther to some.

Anonymous
>>93324925

Or Dr. Jeffrey Sachs on to talk about covid's origins. It was Made BY America, if not technically IN America. We funded the Wuhan Institute. Whoopsie-daisy!

Lionel Boyd Johnson

One angle that I haven't seen commented on is that - this is what science looks like in real- time. Look at how physicists argue, snipe, take shots at each other and their competing theories on quantum mechanics, etc., etc.. Unfortunately, infuriatingly, this issue is a critical public health issue that is going through "the scientific process" and there's a lot of crap to wade through. That said, would be great to have an objective body that acts as clearinghouse to just tally up the score and document the issues that have been indisputably determined, maybe your guests are working to do that.

Anonymous
>>93324925

Brie has to be one of the few people in any left media space who would have the courage and integrity to invite RFK Jr. or McCullough for a conversation--please do it! it would be instructive

Anonymous

The vaccines/boosters do not stop infection, transmission, or lessen the long-term side effects of COVID-19. The only argument in favor of the vaccines/boosters is that they will reduce the number of people who need to be hospitalized. That's it. Please have Jeffrey Sacks on to talk about the origins of COVID. If COVID did come from a lab, this might shed some light on why our political leaders were so quick to put COVID behind them. I teach high school in Chicago Public Schools, and I can say without a doubt the lockdowns caused more harm to my students than they would have experienced had the schools been kept open. The last time I checked the CDC's data, roughly 2,000 children ages 0 to 17 died from COVID over the course of the pandemic, which is less than deaths from pneumonia for that age group over the same period of time. Why are these deaths not receiving the same concern as COVID?

Anonymous

Please do the long Covid episode you promised--and invite Dr. Pierre Kory. He has treated hundreds of Covid patients in the ICU and is now treating those suffering from long Covid and the vaccine injured as his sole practice now; he and Paul Marik are the only prominent physicians I know of who are focusing their entire energies on treating both sets of conditions. So many pontificate about Covid authoritatively without ever having treated a Covid patient; Kory and Marik are front line heroes.

Anonymous
>>93324925

one of two with integrity, you got me! and Max Blumenthal has interviewed and been interviewed by RFK, Jr. too

Anonymous
>>93328816

How much does the vaccine/booster reduce damage to the heart from a COVID infection?

Anonymous

Hey, some good guests talking about COVID. A lot of misinformation and anti-vaxx talking points delve into false dichotomies so it's great to hear that being spotlighted here. Appreciate it!

Randy Hendrickson
>>93328816

Globally, the number is 16k or so, and the pandemic is not over. Monday morning quarterbacking sure is easy.

Anonymous
>>93328816

I live and teach in the US, which is why I chose the US figures. I was very supportive of the lockdowns at first, but as the data started to come in, I did what any reasonable person would do, I adjusted my opinion.

Anonymous

Appreciate the episode and generally fall somewhere in between your recent guests and Dr. Prasad, but one thing that is incredibly challenging with all those in the camp of this episodes guests, whether scientists or not, is they have a very hard time stating what they think behavior SHOULD look like at this moment. They acknowledge lockdowns aren’t still required, and sometimes acknowledge that school closings were harmful, but if that’s the case, what are they advocating for from a practical standpoint? What societal events and gatherings DO they want controlled? And for how long? And what if society decides it values those interactions above the risk of death among a certain population? Obviously this has happened often throughout history and not merely because of bad messaging from the government. While I agree it is anti-social to completely dismiss the danger to a certain population, it is also anti-social to ignore our species biological desire to congregate together. I don’t think the balancing of these two needs is as simple as just saying “if the government messaged better, people would be fine with it.”

Warm Machine
>>93434152

The problem with "should" is that you also have to contend with what's possible when you got a distrustful and often propagandized public. So even talking about certain measures, you get push-back or the other party outright stops listening. They're also not easy answers that you wanna ponder on publicly, or else you'll find yourself quoted in a rag news site that you want to oppress freedom.

Anonymous

What if society decides it values those interactions above the risk of death among a certain population? That certain population gets to stay in some indefinite purgatory of non-sociality and masking or accepting and experiencing the consequences of the higher risk, that's what. That population gets to suck it. We're in the shadows, not entirely out of lockdown and wondering when this will change. Maybe with the nasal spray being developed or when the other vaccines in the works become available. Not asking for sympathy just expressing the fact that we're out here, probably a lot more of us than people realize. IMO, most societies most of the time - if not all of the time - prioritize the least vulnerable over the most. Not just with Covid but the homeless problem, as an example. I'm really lucky that I have a nice home, work from home, love my hubby, and we seem to be getting through it. But it sucks. And I know as a individual, Bri is sensitive to this issue and I love her for it.

Anonymous
>>93328816

Consider Canadian results vs. US. Canada is strikingly better than the US, over a factor of 2 better than US, for per capita deaths. Canadians (in my experience) have higher vax rates and have been generally better with respect to lockdowns/masks etc.

Anonymous
>>93328816

Obesity: Canada 29.4%, US 36.2% Population Density: Canada 4 per square km, US 36 per square km Poverty Rate: Canada 6.4%, US 8.8% Health Insurance: Canada 100%, US 91% (30 million uninsured) I believe the statistics above probably have more to do with Canada's strikingly better response to COVID than what we saw in the US.